LOCAL NEWS
Attorney General Candidates Oppose Amendment 3 by JoSelle Vanderhooft
Editor Brandon Burt Events Editor Greg Harrison Sports Editor David Nelson Contributing Writers Scott Abbott, Brandie Balken, Lee Beckstead, Xenia Cherkaev, Janice Eberhardt, Jace Garfield, Beau Jarvis, Lynette Malmstrom, Laurie Mecham, LaDonna Moore, Rob Orton, William T. Park, Scott Perry, Nicholas Rupp, Mandy Q. Racer, Ruby Ridge, Joel Shoemaker, Jim Struve, Darren Tucker, JoSelle Vanderhooft, Ben Williams Photographers Lucy Juarez, William H. Munk, Shauna Sanchez Proofreader Nicholas Rupp Art Director Michael Aaron Graphic Designer Kris Kramer Marketing and Public Relations Director Chad Keller Sales Director and Office Manager Steven Peterson Sales Executives 801-323-9500 | 877-870-0727 Jill Brooks | jill@slmetro.com Sebastian Cruz | sebastian@slmetro.com Distribution Chad Keller, Director Courtney Moser, Northern Utah Copyright © 2004 Salt Lake Metro.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner, including electronic retrieval systems, without the prior written permission of the publisher. One copy of this publication is free of charge to any individual. Additional copies may be purchased for $1. Anyone taking or destroying multiple copies may be prosecuted for theft at the sole discretion of the publisher. Reward offered for information that leads to the arrest of any individual willfully stealing, destroying or trashing multiple copies. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the publishers or staff. Salt Lake Metro is published bi-weekly on alternating Thursdays by
Metro Publishing, Inc.
SALT LAKE METRO
352 S. Denver Street, Suite 350 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 323-9500 Fax: (801) 323-9986
■ ■
5
homes without a warrant. What I do in my home is none of your business. If you’re in the government, leave me alone. That’s what we fought the Revolution for. “What [the legislature] seems to be attempting to do here is cut back on contractual powers. People form partnerships all the time for common good and they may own property together, or have common goals and so on. If they add into that partnership agreement that they love each other and want the world to know, I’m hard pressed to explain what harm society is done by it.” While Skordas says that he has no problem “philosophically” with defining marriage as the union between a man and a woman, he does take issue at changing the state constitution, particularly as Utah already has “a statute that forbids gay marriage.” “I just don’t think this is a constitutional issue,” he said. “Every time we pass some new law or amendment it gives us lots of issues to resolve or argue, but this one is going to be a waste of tax dollars down the road. In the next 20 years, if the amendment Greg Skordas passes, we will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to decide what it means and having the Supreme Court define and outline. There’s no reason to do that. There are so many things we can do with our tax dollars besides that.” Although he would not amend the constitution, Skordas said that he was “not in favor of gay marriage.” However, he does support a type of civil union that would give gay and lesbian couples “rights of survivorship, rights to inheritance and [rights] to care for one another during sick times.” “I guess I think that some sort of civil union is certainly appropriate, whether we call that marriage or not, I don’t know. It seems to me that religion and society has defined marriage as the union between a man and a woman, and I don’t have any problem with that,” Skordas said. Shurtleff addressed his concerns about Amendment 3 in a separate statement which can be found on the Don’t Amend Alliance’s website. In this statement, the Attorney General said he opposes same-sex marriage and supports an “amendment which forever defines marriage as only between one man and one woman”. However, in his opinion, Amendment 3 is “bad law” that “goes too far” because it could “forever deny to a group of citizens the right to approach its legislature to seek benefits and protections.” “One of the basic rights we have as citizens regardless of sex orientation, nationality, sex or anything else is the right to participate in the political process by going to the legislature,” said Shurtleff in a Salt Lake Metro interview. “It basically disenfranchises everybody, not just gays and lesbians, but also hetero-
Publisher Michael Aaron
AUGUST 19, 2004
While their political stances may differ drastically, Utah’s three attorney general candidates agree on one thing: The constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in Utah goes too far. In a statement issued Aug. 6, Republican Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, and challengers Greg Skordas (Democrat) and Andrew McCullough (Libertarian) said they opposed Amendment 3’s second sentence, which reads, “No other domestic union [besides that between a man and a woman], however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.” The statement, which the Don’t Amend campaign helped draft after learning each candidate objected to the Amendment’s second part, called the sentence’s language “overly broad.” Additionally, it noted the amendment would prevent the government “from ever extending even the most basic partnership rights to an unmarried couple” including rights to hospital visitation, emergency medical decision-making, and inheritance. It also said the amendment’s second part could lead private employers in the state to question the legality of their desire to extend certain benefits such as healthcare to unmarried partners of employees. “When you have Mr. Shurtleff and Mr. Skordas and I all agreeing that this has gone too far then you’ve got a broad view from the legal community,” said McCullough, a lobbyist for the adult entertainment industry, who added that their combined opposition surprised and delighted him. A heterosexual who doesn’t “have any problem” with gay marriage, McCullough said that Amendment 3 personally offends Andrew McCullough him because it seeks to favor one religious definition of marriage over another. “It seems to me that if the dominant religion doesn’t want to perform ceremonies they shouldn’t do it, and everybody should agree that’s within their boundaries of religious freedom and support that,” he said. “But there are more liberal denominations that will. And it seems to me that somewhere along the line the conservative religious people in this community are saying that liberal churches don’t have the same kind of religious freedom they do, and that really offends me.” “As a Libertarian, I just don’t understand efforts to put the government into our personal lives no matter what,” he continued. “First, there’s the war on drugs, then it’s the war on terrorists, so to speak. There’s always an excuse to cut back on civil liberties. There’s always an excuse to allow police into your
sexual couples who are living in common-law marriages and other forms of non-traditional marriage. The bottom line is we’ve got to say, but we believe in allowing people the right to go to the legislature and participate.” Additionally, Shurtleff said he was concerned that the Amendment could be used to take away “many fundamental rights for parents and their children in common-law marriages and other relationships” including such things as power of attorney, inheritance rights, hospital visitation and “health insurance benefits from private employers.” He also said he was concerned that the proposed amendment would limit the ability of unmarried couples and partners to seek legal protection in situations involving domestic violence. “Going down the list of the things that Don’t Amend has listed, one that I focus on because I’m the chief law enforcement officer is the cohabitant abuse act,” Shurtleff continued. “I believe part two will basically take away the right of same-sex partners and heterosexual couples living together outside marriage to ever get Mark Shurtleff a protective order if their partner becomes abusive. There again it doesn’t matter how you feel or what you’re personal or religious beliefs are about homosexuality or about people living together outside of wedlock. We need to protect and give people the tools to protect themselves.” Although Shurtleff said that some of his advisors cautioned against speaking out about the amendment due to the potential damage such a statement could do with his voter base, Shurtleff said he thought this issue was too important to back down. Indeed, since issuing his statement Eagle Forum president Gayle Ruzicka and other Amendment 3 supporters have “demanded that I debate them” — a demand that Shurtleff has declined. “I’ve even heard some Republicans say people should vote for Skordas or McCullough because they say, ‘see, Shurtleff pretends to be a conservative Republican but he’s really a wolf in sheep’s clothing. So, better to vote for somebody who doesn’t pretend to be something he’s not.’” Shurtleff said. “But I expected that, frankly. That’s why my political advisor said there’s only a downside to this. They think the GLBT community will vote for Skordas or McCullough because they’ve said they don’t want any amendment and I’m going to lose votes because of the right-wing wackos.” “And that’s fine,” he continued. “I don’t want their vote anyway. I feel a little chagrined at that but it’s the right thing to do. I flat-out told my political advisors that I don’t want to be attorney general by making decisions based on whether or not I lose votes. I’m going to do what’s right, and this is right, so let’s go with it.” “Hopefully, my position as a Republican will help the cause,” he added. “Because it really needs to be defeated and go through the proper procedures and debate in the constitutional revision commission which they bypassed. I want to have the voters of Utah vote for something they support, like traditional marriage, and not vote against something, which is what they’re doing now. If we’re going to amend our constitution let’s not do it because we’re voting against some practice or somebody, let’s do it because we want to vote for something we believe in, and do it right so we don’t create any of these additional problems for members of our community.”