Following in the Wisconsin legislature's footsteps, Ohio lawmakers are using their power to take on labor unions, and yesterday the Buckeye State's Senate passed a bill that would strip workers of collective bargaining rights.

Supporters of the legislation are presenting it as a matter of economics, but that does nothing to explain why they felt the need to include superfluous anti-gay provision that again defines marriage as being between a man and a woman.

From Sec. 3101.01 of the bill, via ThinkProgress:

A marriage may only be entered into by one man and one woman. Any marriage between persons of the same sex is against the strong public policy of this state. Any marriage between persons of the same sex shall have no legal force or effect in this state and, if attempted to be entered into in this state, is void ab initio and shall not be recognized by this state. The recognition or extension by the state of the specific statutory benefits of a legal marriage to non-marital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is against the strong public policy of this state. Any public act, record or judicial proceeding of this state, as defined in section 9.82 of the Revised Code, that extends the specific statutory benefits of legal marriage to non-marital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is void.

As Zaid Jilani points out, Ohio has already banned marriage equality, which makes one wonder why the bill's authors felt the need to spell it out again. Perhaps they're just petty? That's got to be it, because I can't think of any other logical explanation. Not that those who fight against equality are known for their logic…