East Valley Tribune - Metro Phoenix's East Valley region

Metro Phoenix's East Valley region

Friday, Jul 3, 2009| 5:15 pm

Publish your Stuff

Log in| Become a member| Help

Search:

102 would have constitution protect marriage

Mary K. Reinhart, Tribune

October 18, 2008 - 6:56PM , updated: October 18, 2008 - 10:20PM

Digg| Save| License| Print| E-mail| Decrease text size Reset text size Increase text size

The message is simple - perhaps as straightforward a ballot proposition as Arizona voters have seen in years.

Marriage definition heads to ballot

That hasn't stopped supporters of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage from contributing more than $7 million to get it passed, $6.2 million of which was raised in a recent six-week span and much of it from the East Valley.

"Marriage is under attack by those who are creating substitutes to marriage," said Rep. Warde Nichols, R-Gilbert. "I think when this passes it's going to put to bed this debate once and for all."

Opponents of Proposition 102, however, say voters have already had their say and it's an insult to put it on the ballot again.

Two years ago, they narrowly defeated a gay-marriage amendment, becoming the first state to do so. Twenty-seven states have constitutional bans on gay marriage.

"They chose not to change the constitution," said Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix. "One of the reasons why they said no is because we already have a law."

The law prohibiting same-sex marriage, passed in 2004, has been challenged, and upheld, by the Arizona Court of Appeals.

But the 2006 measure that voters rejected was different: It would have banned employee benefits for unmarried couples, regardless of their sexual orientation. That complicated the issue for some voters.

Sinema and Proposition 102 opponents say a constitutional amendment is unnecessary because of the state law and the court ruling. Beyond that, the constitution should not be tinkered with, she said, to address narrow issues.

"Nothing changes either way," she said, if Proposition 102 passes. "Except that you put more junk into the constitution."

Supporters, however, say an amendment would protect marriage from politicians and judges who could undo the state law.

"Yes, we do have a law in Arizona," said YesForMarriage.com spokeswoman Kelly Molique. "But judges can change that at anytime."

Molique, a Scottsdale mother of two, said the measure doesn't discriminate against gays, or even mention sexuality. But she acknowledged it would keep gays from receiving the benefits of marriage.

"We're not addressing homosexuality," she said. "We're just addressing marriage."

Proposition 102 has been heavily pushed by religious groups, primarily evangelical Christians and Mormons.

Last month, more than 800 pastors gathered at the Arizona Biltmore for a strategy session on how to get the amendment passed. Pastors took home "Yes on 102" street and yard signs, T-shirts and voter registration packets.

And the long list of contributors to Yes for Marriage includes prominent East Valley Mormon families, who gave from $10,000 to $100,000 apiece for the effort.

Sinema and former Republican lawmaker Steve May, both former Mormons, held a news conference in front of the Mesa Arizona Temple last month to criticize Mormons for bankrolling the campaign.

"What the Mormon church did was tell its members to give," Sinema said Friday. "And they have, as is customary in the church, done exactly what they were told."

Supporters say the amendment takes politics out of the matter.

But it came to the ballot in a highly political way, and even prompted an ethics complaint against a state senator.

Beaten back several times in committee and on the House floor during the legislative session, SCR1024 finally cleared the Senate in the waning hours of the session without a vote to spare - and only then through a parliamentary move to have it reconsidered.

Sinema said lawmakers spent more than 100 hours debating same-sex marriage, but didn't call one committee hearing on the mortgage meltdown.

"They are wasting time on this issue instead of focusing on the real issues facing the state," Sinema said. "Do we really want to do this again? And don't we have more important things to worry about?"

Text from Proposition 102

"Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state."

A yes vote: Amends the Arizona Constitution so that only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized in Arizona.

A no vote: Keeps current law that prohibits marriage between people of the same sex, but does not amend the state constitution.

Comments

Reader comments: This site does not necessarily agree with comments posted below. Responsibility lies solely with the comment author.

Please add your comments, but follow these guidelines to keep this a safe, credible place for discussing the news:

  • Stay on topic.
  • No personal attacks, racial slurs or insults; no vulgar, lewd or threatening comments.
  • Report abusive comments.

More blogs

Publish your photos

Phoenix Light Rail Debut Phoenix Light Rail Debut
By Desertdawg from Ahwatukee

Vigilantes Kill 5 Vigilantes Kill 5
By BigAve from Gilbert AZ

Dinosaur Tracks Dinosaur Tracks
By BigAve from Gilbert AZ

Abby comes home Abby comes home
By Desertdawg from Ahwatukee

Publish your videos

More forums

Here's your chance to brag about an achievement for you or someone you know.

Publish your honors

Read the latest print edition

The e-Trib is an interactive online representation of the printed paper. Editions can be searched back to 2002.

Launch the e-Trib viewer

Already a member? Sign in here
Publish your stuff
Welcome, Please Log In
To login please enter your username and password in the form below and click on the login button.
Remember me
Retrieve Password
Resend Email
Enter the username and email address for your account to resend you your confirmation email: