The Times from Shreveport, Louisiana • Page 91

1 UUJ CONTACT CRAIG DURRETT 459-3281 or cdurrettgannett.com SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2004 WW Don't write bigotry into Constitution I urge my fellow citizens to oppose any amendment that would write discrimination against gay and lesbian Americans into the U.S. Constitution. Marriage as we understand it voluntary, monogamous, legally egalitarian, based on love, involving adults only is Bobby Darrow lives In Shreveport. prohibit governmental recognition of same-sex relationships would take this power away from states who seek to expand civil rights for same-sex families. Further, the U.S.

Constitution should never be amended to limit the rights of a group of people. The amendment would do much more than define marriage as between a man and woman. Leading legal scholars agree that the amendment could forever invalidate civil unions or other legal protections for same-sex couples such as the right to visit a partner in the hospital or to receive partner health benefits even if state legislatures passed them and voters approved them. The rights and responsibilities of marriage, other forms of relationship recognition, and basic civil rights protections are essentia components that make all families, including families headed by same-sex couples, safer and more secure. Marriage licenses, which are granted by the state, and religious marriage, are two separate tilings.

Religious institutions will never be forced to bless relationships with which they disagree, just as today religious institutions can refuse to marry couples of different faiths or individuals who have been divorced. Please oppose any attempt to build discrimination into the very document that should protect everyone and please oppose any other legislation designed to prohibit civil, secular recognition of same-sex relationships. III- AP a pretty recent phenomenon. For much of human history, polygyny was the rule read your Old Testament and in much of Africa and the Muslim world, it still is. Arranged marriages, forced marriages, child marriages, marriages predicated on the subjugation of women gay marriage is like a fairy tale romance compared with most chapters of the history of wedlock.

The president plans to endorse such an amendment, but to use the Constitution to discriminate against any group of people is shameful. It is neither compassionate nor conservative. It is a radical position that would insert discrimination into the document that has guaranteed and expanded liberty and equality for more than 200 years. The power to regulate marriage and the granting of civil marriage licenses is a power that has historically been reserved to the states. A constitutional amendment to Rich Walker (center) kisses Brad Chilcoat after the couple was married by Deputy Marriage Commissioner D.J.

Dull (left) at City Hall in San Francisco on Sunday, Feb. 15. In a political challenge to California law, city authorities continue to issue more same-sex marriage licenses. Same-sex marriage must be opposed ram Though some may have missed it, this month has marked the culmination of the culture The Passion of the Christ may be headed for movie theaters, but there was plenty of passion romantic, political and legal scattered about the country in the past weeks over same-sex unions. TV footage of same sex weddings last week was as endless as the lines of homosexual couples waiting their turn for marriage licenses being issued in San Francisco.

In Massachusetts a week earlier, Massachusetts legislators were unable to reach an agreement on gay marriage after a marathon of impassioned speeches, behind-the-scenes political maneuvering and an llth-hour filibuster. Many lawmakers sought to counter a ruling by the state's highest court that said gays are entitled to nothing less than marriage and that Vermont-style civil unions will not suffice. Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives have filed a proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as between members of the opposite sex. Headed for Louisiana's Legislature is a campaign for a state ban on gay marriage and an outlaw of any state or local taxpayer dollars spent on domestic partner benefits, whether they are extended to straight or gay couples.

war's "perfect storm." While four extremist judges on the Massachusetts Supreme Court have demanded that their state law be changed to allow legally sanctioned same-sex marriage, San Francisco's mayor has engaged in outright anarchy by ignoring Cal Mike Johnson is an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund. He lives in Shreveport. anarchy that could doom even the strongest republic. To be "pro-traditional marriage" and conscientiously opposed to all deviations from it, is not to be anti-homosexual. Simply put, sex of any kind outside of the marriage of one man and one woman is ultimately destructive.

Social science is now confirming what the Bible has always said. Countless studies prove that traditional marriage is unquestionably the best, healthiest, and most satisfying relationship for everyone. Children in stable, traditional, two-parent homes have less physical and emotional problems, do better in school, and are less likely to live in poverty, get into trouble, or be the victims of physical or sexual abuse. The stakes are very high in the battle for marriage, and it is not "intolerance" to desire a healthy and prosperous community. On March 11, the legislatures of Massachusetts and California will convene for historic votes to either approve or block a Marriage Affirmation and Protection Amendment to their state constitutions.

Many are lobbying now for a similar bill in Louisiana. The amendments are the people's only way to prevent same-sex marriage as demanded by activist courts. These votes will be crucial for all Americans, because those obtaining same-sex marriages in one state will certainly seek legal recognition elsewhere. In the end, die family as we know it may hinge on the passage a federal marriage amendment Let us hope that lawmakers everywhere have the wisdom and courage to do what is right for us all. A constitutional ban on same-sex marriages in Louisiana is a waste of time and money.

Louisiana law already bans same-sex marriages. It's just politicians falling over each other to sound more conservative for election day. It's a shame, because it's discrimination the same as if it were against blacks or women or people with disabilities. And it sends a bad message about Louisiana, a message of intolerance, that I don 't think we should or can afford to send. As for domestic partner benefits, a lot of national companies are extending benefits to long term partners, homosexual and heterosexual alike.

If we ban that here, we are telling those companies not to come to Louisiana. Vie politicians should be figuring out how to bring more jobs to Louisiana, not scaring them away with intolerance. Clay Walker Is a Shreveport attorney ifornia's existing prohibitions and issuing counterfeit marriage licenses to homosexuals. The Alliance Defense Fund has challenged him in court, and the gauntlet has been thrown for a cataclysmic battle that will soon decide whether die sacred institutions of marriage and the traditional family are ultimately preserved or discarded by our increasingly secularized society. Tliis is the big one, folks.

Pro-family advocates are often asked these days, "Why should you care? Why is same-sex marriage a threat?" The answer is simple: because we tamper with God's created order at our peril. If activist judges can reject thousands of years of liistory and legitimize homosexual marriage, then transsexual and group "marriages" of every sort must logically follow. If you were shocked by the moral lapses at the Super Bowl you ain't seen notliin' yet Experts project that homosexual marriage is the dark harbinger of chaos and sexual The deep emotions on both sides of the issue were on display at the Massachusetts Statehouse, On Feb. 11, an estimated 3,700 people crammed inside the graceful 18th Century Capitol, chanting and waving banners as legislators opened debate on amending the state constitution, the oldest in the country, to prohibit same-sex marriage. Gay-marriage opponents say a constitutional amendment is necessary to override a ruling by the state's Supreme Judicial Court allowing same-sex couples to marry beginning in May.

But two days of marathon speech making and late-night political maneuvering failed to yield any agreement Legislative leaders opposed to homosexual marriage vowed to try again next month, but the soonest a constitutional amendment could become effective is November 200(5, making it all but inevitable that Massachusetts will become the first state See GAYS 81 By Stevenson Swanson Knight Ridder Tribune News From coast to coast, dramatic developments involving same-sex marriage are propelling this highly emotional and divisive issue to the forefront of national politics and tliis year's presidential campaign. National controversy over the vexing cultural impasse could prove especially difficult for Democratic front-runner Sen. John Kerry, political analysts say. With the likelihood that his home state will become the first in the nation to offer legal marriages to same-sex couples this spring, Republicans will be poised to portray him as a "Massachusetts liberal," especially given his strong support for equal rights for gays and lesbians. But experts say the issue is not a simple short putt for President George W.

Bush, either. The prospect of seeing pictures of two men kissing at the conclusion of their nuptials or of two women standing next to each other in satin wedding gowns is bringing new energy to the Christian moderate voters. Conservative religious groups "are all in unison on this being the No. 1 issue this year and the most important moral issue we've faced in a long time." said Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association, a conservative Christian "family values" advocacy group. right, which lost its prime target when President Bill Clinton left office three years ago.

That's likely to result in a higher turnout of Bush's core constituency. But the Republican right may pressure Bush to take a harder stand on the issue than he would like, running the risk of alienating Parting party, Terrell style: Let others clean up the mess After deposing an incumbent under indictment to become ostensibly the last elected elec- Dan Turner tions commissioner, Suzanne Terrell rode along on a wave of good feeling. No more deals involving voting machine suppliers and tions workers rack up a lot of overtime hours because, frankly. Louisiana is die charter member of die Election-of-the-Montii Club. If the state isn't conducting an election, it's scheduling another one.

Also, despite the rhetoric to the contrary for the past two decades, government does not operate like a business. No sane small business owner would allow employees to chalk up uncompensated overtime in the hundreds of hours, if not for wage-and-hour law concerns, for the practical matter of avoiding having an employee take off six weeks in comp time. Among elections officials, however, massive amounts of unused comp time is standard on. and someone else was in charge of cleaning up the morning-after mess. Hey.

anybody want a raise? Here you go. Two thousand hours of overtime, most of it for four people? Sure, well pay that Terrell passed out pay raises to 153 election workers totaling nearly $280,000. She wont have to live with the consequences; the Secretary of State wul She also paid out overtime to her top aides-At first glance, it sounds OK. If they worked the hours, they ought to be paid for it But that flies in the face of past practices of the elections commissioner. To understand the background, first you have to comprehend that full-time ek-c- you must alkw them to use the time in order tliat their balances will be reduced OK, it's a different year and a different budget but die point remains valid.

Most of the $84,819 worth of overtime paid out as Terrell's parting shot went to people in her inner circle. Overtime for elections workers across die state was left hanging. What Terrell did in her final day's in office may have been legal, but it certainly wasn't right Dan Turner is a columnist and a member of The Times editorial board. Reach him at 459-3279 or by tax at 459-3301. Address e-mail to dturnergannett.com.

operating procedure. In February 2001. the following memo was sent to all parish registrars of voters from Pat Bergeron, Terrell's chief of staff. "We have been that time and onc4ialj 'compensatory leave will automatically be paid once a person reaches 239 hours time and one4ialf compensatory leave. Since we do not have monies in tlte budget to pay overtime, you must request approval far your classified employees to work overtime hows.

We will be monitoring these balances very carefully in order to keep from reaching the point of having to pay the overtime hours. 'If you have any classified employees nearing239 hours. Louisiana bought a boat load of new voting machines in a convoluted process involving two committees and tests of the equipment that did not go well for the eventual bid winner. Then, it surfaces that Terrell received campaign contributions from the winning bidder she said she returned the money or gave it to charity and then, a large percentage of the machines didn't work. Had that been the sole gaffe of the Terrell term of office, it might have been easier to swallow.

Even the down-and-dirty U.S. Senate campaign pitting Terrell against incumbent Democrat Mary Land-rieu was somewhat excusable, if for no other reason than the fact that virtually anyone the Republicans pitted against Landrieu would have k'd to a mud-filled affair. But Terrell apparently saved her best for last There was momentum to change the political post she held from an ekxted to an appointed position under the Secretary of State even before she took office. Once the Legislature approved it voters backed it and Terrell failed on two separate occasions to find another elected political post in which to land, she was unchecked in her elections commissioner swan song. From a financial standpoint Terrell left office like a renter who knew there was no chance of returning.

The party was Opinion questionable spare parts that lined the pockets of the elections commissioner. This was a new era, or maybe, just a new person making different errors..