| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Sat Nov 27, 2004 1:45 pm Arizona gay-marriage foes push for amendment |
|
| Quote: | The Arizona Daily Star
Published: 11.27.2004
Arizona gay-marriage foes push for amendment
By C.J. Karamargin
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
The issue, briefly
● Arizona's existing Defense of Marriage Act limits marriage to one man and one woman.
● Supporters of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage say it will make it harder to change Arizona's existing law.
● Their goal is to have Arizona follow in the footsteps of the 11 states that voted on Nov. 2 to make it illegal for same-sex couples to marry.
Supporters of a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage are promising quick action on the contentious issue when the Legislature convenes in January.
Their goal is to have Arizona follow in the footsteps of the 11 states that voted on Nov. 2 to make it illegal for same-sex couples to marry.
If the measure passes muster with state lawmakers, voters will get the final say in 2006.
Although Arizona already is among 38 states with laws limiting marriage to one man and one woman, backers of a constitutional amendment say more must be done.
"It is necessary because what you have are activist judges who want to redefine marriage, and they're using the court system to do it," said Mark Anderson of Mesa, a Republican state senator who plans to introduce amendment legislation in the House when he joins that body in five weeks.
There is little indication that any Arizona judge would overturn the state's existing Defense of Marriage Act. Indeed, a state appellate court ruled unanimously recently that same-sex couples cannot marry here. But Anderson and others maintain that a constitutional amendment would add another layer of protection.
"A constitutional amendment is stronger than a law," he said. "The Legislature cannot just come in and change a constitutional amendment."
Amendment opponents charge that politics, not marriage, is driving the issue.
The "real motive" behind the amendment, said Keith Susman of the Arizona Human Rights Fund, is to put an issue on the ballot that is almost guaranteed to boost turnout among conservatives.
"It is really unnecessary," said Susman, chairman of the fund's political and legislative committee. "It's strictly a political move to drive conservatives to the polls on Election Day in order to affect other races on the ballot."
With the governor's job and a U.S. Senate seat among the higher-profile posts on the line, there's no question that the stakes two years from now will be high. Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, has indicated she will seek a second term. It is unclear if U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl, a Republican, will vie for a third term.
How best to fight the amendment proposal has not yet been determined, but Susman concedes it will be an uphill battle.
"Their position seems pretty strong in the Legislature," he said. "We know what we're facing."
If a recent poll is accurate, the issue is also resonating with Arizona voters. Forty-nine percent of 372 registered voters surveyed earlier this month support amending the constitution, while 43 percent do not, according to a poll by KAET-TV, the Phoenix PBS affiliate, and the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University. The poll had a margin of error of 5.1 percentage points.
Support for the issue split along various lines, said pollster Bruce Merrill, with Republicans, people over 60 and those with less than a college education more likely to support the constitutional amendment than Democrats, younger Arizonans and college graduates.
But the relatively even split, Merrill said, is not surprising. "The religious right and the extreme left get so much attention that people forget that most people in America are pretty moderate," he said.
Still, the 11 states that voted to ban same-sex marriages four weeks ago sent a shudder through the gay and lesbian community. It passed by clear margins in most places, including relatively liberal Oregon. The other states were Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Utah.
"To be blunt," Arizona Human Rights Fund leaders wrote on the group's Web site, "Election Day was a tragedy."
It was anything but that for Ron Johnson, executive director of the Arizona Catholic Conference, a group that deals with public policy issues for the Dioceses of Tucson, Phoenix and Gallup, N.M. As a way to "promote the traditional definition of marriage," Johnson backs the amendment and said his organization would work to make sure it becomes law.
"The importance of marriage needs to be discussed," he said. "It's the foundation of the family, and family is the basic unit of society."
Like Anderson, Johnson expects the amendment to get a green light from the Legislature and Arizona voters.
But it is that very process that concerns Cathy Busha, director for programs at Wingspan, Tucson's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community resource center.
"You just can't put civil rights protections up for a vote," she said. "You're talking about a minority population."
● Capitol Media Services contributed to this story. Contact reporter C.J. Karamargin at 573-4243 or at [email protected].
All content copyright � 1999-2004 AzStarNet, Arizona Daily Star and its wire services and suppliers and may not be republished without permission. All rights reserved. Any copying, redistribution, or retransmission of any of the contents of this service without the expressed written consent of Arizona Daily Star or AzStarNet is prohibited.
|
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Sat Nov 27, 2004 8:55 pm |
|
We have been having gay marriages for years here in Holland.....Hell we made it up and where the first country too allow it.
Fine by me. I don't really understand why they don't want gays too marry...It doesn't mean anything.
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
Republican_Man2
Ensign
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 61
|
| Sat Nov 27, 2004 10:16 pm |
|
Good...Another state 
-------signature-------
Star Wars: Episode III: Revenge of the Sith May 19th!
Go see it!
|
|
|
TrekkieMage
Office Junkie
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5335
Location: Hiding
|
| Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:48 am |
|
^ GOOD?
That's just really really frustrating. It seems like America is backsliding. We've spent years working on giving people rights. Womens rights, the civil rights movement, stuff like that. And then here comes another issue. Homosexuallity. And suddenly it's unacceptable.
Why? Why are we denying people rights? This is America! The "Land of Opportunity", the "Melting Pot", so why are we trying to push Gay Americans away?
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Sun Nov 28, 2004 2:10 pm |
|
One could say, that gays don't have the same rights because they are not allowed to marry the same sex. Well technically, straight people aren't allowed to marry the same sex either. So does that mean that gays are denied the same rights as others? Technically no: homosexuals, bisexuals, and everyone else have the same "right", since no one even those who are not homosexual are allowed to marry the same sex.
That was an interesting argument that I came across the other day. I do realize the flaws one could see in it, and it isn't my personal belief, but just thought it was interesting. I personallyl am for a civil union or something that would allow same sex couples to have the same rights as other couples, just don't call it marriage. Marriage is something between two humans of the opposite sex.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
