Colorado
to Define Marriage
Voters face 4 Different Measures on Ballot
Originally Published by the Rocky Mountain News
Another gay-rights-related measure could join three others proposed
for the November ballot, setting up an emotional election-year
debate over how the law should treat same-sex couples.
The latest entry is by the gay- rights group Coloradans for
Fairness and Equality. It has filed paperwork for a November
ballot initiative that says "domestic partnerships" between gay couples
are not similar to marriage.
s That's an effort to counter another ballot measure, which would
prohibit the state from creating any legal status similar to
marriage for same-sex couples. That language is backed by Will
Perkins, author of ill-fated Amendment 2 in 1992, and Rep. Kevin
Lundberg, R-Berthoud.
Both measures have to attract about 68,000 valid voter signatures
to make the ballot, as does a proposed state constitutional amendment
defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, effectively
banning gay marriage.
A proposal establishing domestic partnerships for gay couples
is working its way through the legislature. If it passes, it
also would be on the ballot.
The gay-rights group opposes the marriage amendment. But it
is the Perkins-Lundberg proposal that has inspired the
countermove.
"We are very concerned that Will Perkins' aim is to re-enact
his denial of civil rights to same-sex couples," said Sean Duffy,
spokesman for Coloradans for Fairness and Equality. "We would
hotly dispute the notion that domestic partnerships are the same
as marriage."
It looks very much like something a court would have
to decide - should both measures pass.
"You have a legal issue there," said Perkins, who was in
Denver Tuesday for a meeting with Lundberg and the Colorado Legislative
Council, which assists groups in wording ballot measures. "You
can't have two things pass that say different things.
"People are going to have a choice to make, and we'll just have
to wait and see."
Coloradans for Fairness and Equality isn't waiting
long. It jumped into the statewide television market
Tuesday when it began a seven-week, $1.2-million advertising
campaign.
It has two ads. One shows a man pacing in a hospital corridor
after a door is shut.
"You have a responsibility to take care of those you love," says
the female narrator. "But what if you were denied that right?
What if, at a time of need, you weren't allowed to be at your partner's
side? What if the doors were shut simply because you were gay?
"No matter who you are, commitment is commitment. Learn more
about domestic partnerships."
The
second ad zeroes in on the "nature versus nurture" debate
over homosexuality. The camera slowly
zooms in on a diapered infant while the narrator says, "We're
all created equal, right? Well maybe not so equal."
She then lists some rights that this
baby might be denied in the future.
"Why?
Because some of us were born gay. Until domestic partnerships
are a reality, your voice needs to
be heard."
The ads are meant to promote House
Bill 1344, the domestic partnership
measure that would extend to same-sex
couples many of the rights and responsibilities
of married couples.
That bill, in part, is what led Lundberg and Perkins to draft
their broader-reaching amendment - which in turn
led the gay-rights advocates to come up with its countermeasure.
Focus on the Family in Colorado Springs, one of the groups
backing the marriage amendment, said the gay-rights group is
muddying the water.
"It's obvious those opposed to traditional marriage are trying
to confuse voters," said Jim Pfaff, a state policy analyst at
Focus.
In the past, if voters have
approved two amendments that
are in direct conflict with
one another, the one with the
greater number of votes has
taken precedence.
But it's not clear that the Coloradans for Fairness and Equality
proposal contradicts the Perkins amendment.
Rather, it attempts to exempt domestic
partnerships from the reach of Perkins'
measure by simply declaring that they are
not similar to marriage and therefore not
prohibited.
Perkins,
a retired Colorado Springs auto dealer, spearheaded the campaign
to pass Amendment 2, which prohibited laws that would protect
gays from discrimination. That amendment never took effect and
was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1996, but not before
it prompted a nationwide boycott of Colorado by groups sympathetic
to gay rights.
GLBT
Rights Measures on the Colorado Ballot
Four measures
that would affect gay rights are working their way toward the
November ballot. Three are proposed constitutional amendments,
and one is a statute under consideration in the legislature.
A brief description of each:
- House
Bill 1344: Would allow domestic partnerships to
be registered by the state. The effect would be to extend
certain benefits, protections and responsibilities to same-sex
couples. That would include the right to inherit property
from a partner, family leave benefits, medical decision-making
and others.
Sponsor: Rep. Tom Plant, D-Nederland.
For more information: www.leg.state.co.us and www.fairnessandequality.org
- Colorado
Marriage Amendment: A constitutional amendment that
says, "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be
valid or recognized as a marriage in this state." The
amendment wouldn't prohibit same-sex couples from receiving
benefits allowed by law, but it would prohibit same-sex relationships
from being officially sanctioned as marriages.
Sponsor: Coloradans
for Marriage, a coalition of 10
religious and family-values groups.
For more information: www.marriageforcolorado.com
- No
Legal Status Amendment: A constitutional amendment
that would prohibit the state from creating any legal status
similar to marriage for a same-sex couple. The amendment
is an attempt to trump the domestic partnership measure in
HB 1344.
Sponsors: Rep. Kevin Lundberg, R-Berthoud,
and Will Perkins of Colorado Springs, backer of 1992's Amendment
2 prohibition on gay rights laws that was struck down by the
U.S. Supreme Court. For more information: www.protectingcoloradochildren.org
- Domestic
Partnership Amendment: A constitutional amendment
that would make same-sex domestic partnerships "a unique
and valued relationship" that is not similar to marriage.
The intent is to allow voters to say domestic partnerships
don't violate the one-man, one-woman marriage definition.
It is meant to counter the No Legal Status Amendment.
Sponsor: Coloradans
for Fairness
and Equality,
which
is supporting
voter
approval
of HB
1344.
For more
information: www.fairnessandequality.org
|