LETTER: Amendment 3 helps abusers

Editor,

I just wanted to send out a hearty thank you for everyone out there who voted for Amendment 3 last November. I am so happy that we have finally protected the sanctity of the family and saved all those poor children who might have been raised in an openly homosexual home. But most of all, I am happy that my ability to protect myself from domestic violence has possibly been destroyed. Thank you.

On Page 17 of the Feb. 4 issue of the Utah Statesman, there was an interesting article entitled “Domestic violence challenge affected by gay marriage ban in Ohio.” Not one, but 11 (yes, 11) cases in Ohio are being challenged by men who hit or otherwise abused thei girlfriends. They say that because they were unmarried, this does not fall under domestic violence because it would conflict with the Ohio state definition of marriage amendment. There is a clause in there prohibiting any law that “creates or recognizes a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals.” That includes domestic violence.

Yes, I suppose I could go marry my boyfriend right now. But that would be rushing things, in my opinion. I guess if he hits me I will just have to deal with that. I certainly wouldn’t want to assume any sort of legal status in our relationship by protecting myself. That would be endangering the sanctity of the family.

The legal implications discussed by opponents of Amendment 3 before the election were not something we made up because we felt like arguing. They are real, and they are happening right now in Ohio. It won’t be long before it happens here, too.

I hope those men in Ohio win their cases. Not because I want the women to suffer more than they have already, but because maybe they will be martyrs. Maybe those who voted to add such discriminatory amendments will finally see the lower status they have forced upon those who are unmarried or different. More importantly, maybe someday all of my friends will enjoy equal legal status.

Brandy Trygstad