iPhone users: Click to watch

Let's break it down for Mr. Perkins, shall we?

The Florida Legislature wrote:

(The Amendment) adds a new prohibition for unions that are 'the substantial equivalent' of marriage. The amendment provides no definition for the phrase 'substantial equivalent thereof,' which lends to the ambiguity of the wording of the proposed amendment.

What does that mean for Floridians? It means domestic partnerships registries and benefits will be taken away. The ambiguous language leaves unmarried couples open to devastating repercussions.

This ambiguity is exactly what happened in Michigan. That state's amendment is the basis for dissolving domestic partnership registries used to provide health care benefits and pensions. The Michigan Supreme Court mandated that these benefits be taken away from public employees.

The same battle is being waged in Kentucky, where their marriage protection amendment is the focus of a battle brought by its supporters to take away benefits from public employees at the University of Kentucky and the University of Frankfort.

These dangerous amendments were even used to weaken domestic violence laws. Ohio's amendment was used as a defense against a domestic violence charge. The defendant used the amendment's strict definition of "marriage" to argue that his relationship with his longtime live-in girlfriend didn't meet the standard, and therefore no domestic violence charge was valid. A lower court upheld that defense, and for several years it was argued until a higher court dismissed it as a defense.

The far reaching impact of Amendment 2 in Florida is something Perkins and his ilk never mention. In fact, they continually lie about what the Amendment will do so they can rally their base to vote and legislate their narrow view of family- regardless of what the consequences are.

To help defeat Amendment 2, go to www.SayNo2.com and get involved!