Colorado's ‘Marriage-Lite’ Bill

Focus on the Family Endorses 'Marriage-Lite'

To: National Desk

COLORADO SPRINGS, Co., Feb. 13/Covenant News Wire Service/ If passed, merely by signing a form with the county clerk, gay and lesbian partners would have property-sharing rights, decision-making powers over funerals and organ donations, and could be covered under one person’s health care policy. State law could force employers to cover gay partners — no matter how ill. Partners could cancel the form and the benefits sharing arrangment at any time.

Dr. Cameron said “the Mitchell bill is really ‘marriage-lite’ for gays. Focus on the Family’s support for this bill is madness.”

“Currently there is one voluntary relationship that immediately confers these benefits and more — that relationship is marriage between a man and a woman. Society gets tremendous value out of marriage, because married individuals are more economically productive, provide the best place to raise children, and are the least criminal. Homosexuals, on the other hand, are less economically productive, have few children, do not raise them well, are more criminal, and tend to spread disease. Society should not reward homosexual relationships with marriage-like benefits,” said Cameron.

According to Dr. Cameron, conferral of any part of marriage benefits to homosexuals is without precedent in the history of the Christian Church. “Moses and St. Paul put homosexuality among the worst of sins. As soon as the Church gained political power in the Roman Empire it outlawed homosexuality. Now Focus on the Family — an avowedly Christian organization — is telling society it is OK to give gays benefits similar to marriage, as long as it is not called ‘marriage.’”

Drs. Dobson and Cameron were both prominent in getting Amendment 2 passed in Colorado in 1992, and they have been active in the fight against gay rights since then. Just this year, the national gay magazine The Advocate listed Dobson #1 and Cameron #2 on its gay “enemies list” (1/31/06).

However, during the confirmation fight over Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, Dobson told his radio audience that he was in favor of certain ‘civil’ rights for gays. “Is the ‘marriage-lite’ bill an attempt by Dobson and Focus on the Family to compromise with homosexuals over the issue of gay marriage?” asked Cameron.

“When the Denver Post, one of the most anti-family, anti-traditional newspapers on the planet, says it is ‘pleasantly surprised’ by Dobson’s support for ‘expanded legal benefits for same-sex couples,’ you know that a betrayal has occurred.” Family Research Institute is a non-profit scientific and educational think-tank that has been dedicated to defending the family through scientific research since 1982. Chairman Dr. Paul Cameron has written numerous books and scientific articles on homosexuality, and is currently a reviewer on homosexual issues for the British Medical Journal. He is also among the top ten most published scientists in the world on this topic according to PubMed, the online compilation of research by the National Library of Medicine.

---

FRI is not afraid to tell the truth about any topic. Nor do we shy away from controversy when something of importance has occurred. In response to our press release, James Dobson made a special statement at the beginning of his radio broadcast (2/8/06) in which he strongly denounced our attack of Focus on the Family’s support for Sen. Mitchell’s bill on partnership benefits. He also claimed it was a “total fabrication” that Dobson had changed his position on the issue of gay marriage.

Whether or not Dr. Dobson has specifically changed his position on gay marriage, the fact of the matter is that Sen. Mitchell’s bill is a political compromise that would provide gay and lesbian couples with many of the benefits of marriage without having to be married. No Christian organization should be in the business of supporting such legislation.

FRI is also not “fabricating” James Dobson’s positions on gay ‘civil’ rights. The October 5, 2005 transcript of Dobson’s Focus on the Family radio broadcast concerning then Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers reads in part:

“but there are some questions that ought to be answered... in 1989, she [Miers] answered a poll done by a gay rights organization and asked if she believed in gay rights... well, you know what, I do... I don’t believe that homosexuals should be denied a job... I don’t believe that they should not be able to buy a house... I don’t believe that they should not have the same rights everybody else does... I just don’t believe that there should be special rights given to homosexuals that are not given to anybody else…”

FRI’s legal analyst, who works in an Attorney General’s office and has had decades of legal experience on civil rights issues at both the Federal and State level, said that Dobson’s statement was unequivocal in that only a few groups such as Blacks have the ‘right to buy any house’ or to claim ‘any job.’ He pointed out that a school district or Church would be well advised not to hire a homosexual; likewise, a home owner in a neighborhood swarming with kids might not want to sell to a homosexual out of concern for the children.

Of particular concern to FRI is the attempt by many conservatives to protect the word “marriage” but not the substance of the institution. Specifically, many of the measures being proposed to protect marriage — including one being proposed in Colorado — do not prevent the adoption of civil unions or domestic partnerships for homosexuals. The Mitchell bill is an attempt to propose a lesser alternative to “full” domestic partnerships, but it nevertheless heads along the same path.

Yet Focus on the Family flatly denies that the bill would at all advance the desires of gay rights activists. Not only did James Dobson characterize the Mitchell bill in his radio broadcast (2/8/06) as one based on “need” rather than sexual orientation, but other Focus spokesmen have done the same.

The Rocky Mountain News reported that “Mitchell said it doesn’t matter how long these partners have known each other. The bill does not, however, apply to couples who are eligible to marry.” If passed, merely by signing a form “with a county clerk, gay partners would have property-sharing rights, decision-making powers over funerals and organ donations and could be covered under one person’s health care policy. Partners could cancel the form at any point.” [Kim, M.O. New bill adds to gay marriage debate. Rocky Mountain News, 2/1/06, p. 5A].

The Denver Post reported that “Supporters of a proposal to legalize domestic partnerships are taking aim at a competing bill that one strategist called a “political ploy masquerading as a compromise” to benefits for same-sex couples.”

Mitchell himself indicated that his bill is a lesser version of a domestic partnership initiative also being proposed in Colorado. "They want to recreate marriage and call it civil unions and I want to solve, with this proposal, some practical problems not only for same-sex couples, but others living in long-term household situations," he said.

“Peter Brandt, senior public policy director for Focus… [said] Focus supports Mitchell’s bill because it includes all adults without the option to marry. The organization, he said, opposes the domestic partnerships because legislation based on how two people ‘define their sexuality is not fair.’” [Frates, C. Gay-marriage backer pans bill. Denver Post, 2/8/06, p. 1B]

Clearly, the fact that the Mitchell bill refuses to let cohabiting heterosexuals sign up for the benefits is a sign that the proposal is not strictly about economic “need.” By limiting it to “adults without the option to marry,” heterosexual couples that wanted ‘marriage lite’ would be denied, and only homosexual couples could benefit. Thus, whether or not the measure mentions sexual preference or sexual orientation is almost irrelevant. If passed, it will accomplish some of the very things that gay activists have been clamoring for — even if it does not give them the ‘whole enchilada’ — and this is why editors at the Denver Post are “pleasantly surprised” by Focus on the Family’s endorsement (see the accompanying reprint of the Denver Post lead editorial from 2/6/06).


CONTACT:
Family Research Institute
Dr. Paul Cameron, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 62640
Colorado Springs, CO. 80962-2640
Ph. 303-681-3113
Website: www.FamilyResearchInst.org



PRESS RELEASE FILE