Arizona gay-marriage foes push for amendment

Arizona Daily Star ^ | 11/27/04 | C.J. Karamargin

[SandRat]

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."

[greasepaint]

This issue should be 'saved' for use in 2008.

[SandRat]

That's a tough call --- we have to get rid of Jihadi Janet NapoletRENO.

[longtermmemmory]

We need to politically kill off the enemy now.

It further pushes democrats as the looney left.

[randog]

There is little indication that any Arizona judge would overturn the state's existing Defense of Marriage Act.

Yet.

[greasepaint]

I disagree.
This issue could be used to help stop
Hillary's 2008 Gay adgenda for the people of
Arizona, Ohio, and Florida.

[longtermmemmory]

The Federal Marriage Amendment can do that since each and every state legislator will have to answer who they will vote on the amendment.

The one thing we have learned about political capital by comparing GHWBush to GWBush, political capital saved is political capital lost.

Keep in mind in FL there is still a D senator up for re-election. He is in such trouble that he has jumped up and promised to support Boy Scouts.

The more we keep this issue up and running the less and less divided the nation becomes becase it marginalizes the left.

[EdReform]

BTTT

What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

Myth and Reality about Homosexuality--Sexual Orientation Section, Guide to Family Issues"

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping - More good news. Go for it, AZ! Add another layer of protection from activist leftist judges in thrall to the homo-agenda and their lawyer minions.

Any bets on what the percentages of for and against will be?

Let me and ItsOurTimeNow know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.

Note how one homo-promoter is still saying "civil rights". The best argument against this is that there are thousands of FORMER homosexuals. It is a chosen behavior, that can be changed. There is ZERO evidence of any genetic or biological cause of homosexuality. If there need be "civil rights" for practitioners of same sex sodomy, the floodgates are then open for similar rights for incest afficiandoes, child/adult sex, bestiality and polygamy.

[little jeremiah]

Still, the 11 states that voted to ban same-sex marriages four weeks ago sent a shudder through the gay and lesbian community.

YESSSS!