What
percentage of a general vote is required for the passage
of a state constitutional amendment?
Only a simple majority 50% of the vote + 1 is required
for acceptance of an amendment into the state constitution. |
Is
same-sex marriage legal in Michigan?
No, Michigan already has two laws that prevent
same-sex couples from marrying. Same-sex marriage is against
the law in Michigan. |
How
would passage of the amendment to the state constitution
impact civil unions within Michigan? How would it impact
employers currently offering domestic partner benefits?
Passage of Proposal 2 would permanently BAN ALL
CIVIL UNIONS or domestic partnerships for unmarried Michigan
couples – gay OR straight.
The amendment would prohibit Michigan from having civil
unions between same-sex and opposite sex couples. It would
prevent local governments from providing domestic partner
benefits. Cities like Ann Arbor and Kalamazoo, which currently
provide such benefits to their employees could no longer
do so. The amendment would prevent school districts from
offering domestic partner benefits to its employees (both
Ann Arbor and Birmingham school districts currently provide
such benefits). State colleges and universities would also
be prohibited from recognizing domestic partners of both
employees and students. Recognition of domestic partners
by employers frequently includes health care coverage. Children
who live with a gay or lesbian family member will be at
risk for losing health care coverage. (pridesource.com)
|
How
could the passage of Proposal 2 affect Michigan laws regarding
discrimination based on marital status?
Michigan civil rights laws currently prohibit discrimination
based on marital status. This protection could be nullified
by the constitutional amendment, making it legal for landlords
to refuse to rent to unmarried couples, both gay and straight.
(pridesource.com)
to the top |
What,
Exactly, Is Marriage?
Marriage Is
• Ultimately, civil marriage is a basic civil right
as well as a private and public commitment of love and support
by adult couples.
• In personal terms, marriage is a celebration of
love and commitment.
• It means others can recognize the commitment the
couple has made to one another.
• The choice of whether or not to marry is a personal
decision.
Yet civil marriage also provides a gateway to over 1,000
federal protections, responsibilities and benefits as well
as many more provided by your state. It lets a spouse make
decisions about the medical care of a partner who is disabled.
It enables the couple to organize their financial affairs
as a single unit for economic, tax and insurance purposes.
Marriage Isn’t
• Marriage is not about procreation. Millions of couples
choose not to or are unable to have children.
•Marriage is not an institution chosen by every couple.
Marriage is not a religious institution, but a civil one.
Although churches and synagogues do perform religious ceremonies,
the government distinguishes the religious from the civil
by requiring the signing of a marriage certificate, if that
is what the couple chooses to do.
Religious and Civil Marriage: The Difference
In the U.S., a marriage is only legal with the signing of
a marriage license. That is why many couples can go to a
judge or any other public officiant and need not go to a
church, synagogue or mosque. However, our government has
made the process simpler by allowing priests, ministers,
rabbis and other religious folk, to perform a couple's desire
for a religious ceremony AND act as an officiant. This convenience
does not mean that a purely religious ceremony would be
legal. Each religious cleric must sign the license before
witnesses and the couple. (marriageequality.org)
to the top
|
Without
an amendment, will churches be forced to perform ceremonies
for same-sex couples?
Absolutely not. Churches retain the right to decide
for themselves whether to perform or recognize any marriage,
just as they already do for every couple. No court decision
or legislative enactment can change the basic tenets of
religious faith. For example, some religions will not marry
someone who has already been divorced, although the person
is free to marry civilly. (marriageequality.org)
|
If Proposal 2 passes and the amendment becomes a part of
the state constitution, it can easily be removed or altered
later, correct?
No. To get a sense of how difficult it can be to
strip out discrimination once it’s been written into
a state constitution, take a look at Alabama. Voters there
didn’t vote to take out their ban on interracial marriage
until 2000, 33 years after the U.S. Supreme Court had declared
such bans unconstitutional. (Deb Price/ Detroit News)
to the top
|
How many rights and benefits are related to civil marriage?
Legal marriage conveys upon the couple a wide variety
of rights and responsibilities. Because each state creates
its own set of marriage laws, the laws number between 170-to-350
depending on the state. Within the Federal system, more
than 1,049 laws are triggered by legal marriage.
In 1997, the General Accounting Office of the Federal Government
compiled a list of 1,049 rights and benefits, which were
related to civil marriage. This list encompasses thirteen
categories of rights and benefits, including:
•Social
Security and Related Programs, Housing, and Food Stamps |
•Veterans'
Benefits |
•Taxation |
•
Federal Civilian and Military Service Benefits |
•
Employment Benefits and Related Laws |
•
Immigration, Naturalization, and Aliens |
•
Trade, Commerce, and Intellectual Property |
•
Financial Disclosure and Conflict of Interest |
The following lists some of the typical rights conferred
by the state and federal governments.
State-Granted Legal Marriage Rights
•
Assumption of Spouse’s Pension |
•
Automatic Inheritance |
•
Automatic Housing Lease Transfer |
•
Bereavement Leave |
•
Burial Determination |
•
Child Custody |
•
Crime Victim’s Recovery Benefits |
•
Divorce Protections |
•
Domestic Violence Protection |
•
Exemption from Property Tax on Partner’s Death |
•
Immunity from Testifying Against Spouse |
•
Insurance Breaks |
•
Joint Adoption and Foster Care |
•
Joint Bankruptcy |
•
Joint Parenting (Insurance Coverage, School Records) |
•
Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner |
•
Certain Property Rights |
•
Reduced Rate Memberships |
•
Sick Leave to Care for Partner |
•
Visitation of Partner’s Children |
•
Visitation of Partner in Hospital or Prison |
•
Wrongful Death (Loss of Consort) Benefits |
A couple married by a state government is automatically
granted a broad range of rights at the federal level. In
addition, marriage partners of federal employees, such as
civil servants and members of the military, enjoy a broad
range of benefits.
Federally-Granted Legal Marriage Rights
•
Access to Military Stores |
•
Assumption of Spouse’s Pension |
•
Bereavement Leave |
•
Immigration |
•
Insurance Breaks |
•
Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner |
•
Sick Leave to Care for Partner |
•
Social Security Survivor Benefits |
•
Sick Leave to Care for Partner |
•
Tax Breaks |
•
Veteran’s Discounts |
•
Visitation of Partner in Hospital or Prison |
(Partners
Task Force)
to
the top |
Why
Should Society Allow Same-Sex Couples to Marry?
• If society cares about all its children,
gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to protect them
in a way that ONLY civil marriage allows.
• September 11th proved that the inability to enter
into a civil marriage could cause greater grief in a time
of tragedy. More than one year later, grieving partners
are still battling for property and insurance claims just
because they could not marry.
• The marriage of two adults of the same sex who seek
to make a lifetime commitment to one another takes nothing
away from the marriages of anyone else.
• Legal marriage strengthens commitment—commitment
is what makes a marriage
• Supported couples make better contributions to society.
• The movement for marriage equality of same-sex couples
is actually a recognition of the importance and power of
marriage (marriageequality.org)
|
Wouldn’t
same-sex civil marriages be psychologically unsound for
the country?
No. The position adopted by the American Psychological
Association Council of Representatives deploring discrimination
and supporting marriage rights can be viewed here:
http://www.hrc.org/Content/ContentGroups/FamilyNet/Professional_opinion/American_Psychological_Association.htm
to the top
|
What
other impact could passage of Proposal 2 have on Michigan?
The proposed amendment will cost the state money
and jobs.
Michigan ranks number 2, as having the most young people
move out of the state following graduation from high school
and college. Michigan's unemployment rate, currently at
7.2%, is higher than the national average (6.2%). Our state
currently has a billion dollar deficit, coupled with decreasing
tax revenues. Governor Granholm's recent "Creating
Cool Conference" concluded that Michigan must embrace
diversity and show tolerances towards gays, immigrants,
and artists in order to revitalize Michigan's urban areas
and to attract talent, creativity, and jobs. According to
Richard Florida, author of The Rise of the Creative Class,
"Gay families are important and the fact is that we
can't afford to discriminate against anybody. It hurts employment,
which hurts development and all other civic progress."
(pridesource.com)
|
Who
is the primary financial backer of Proposal 2 and the push
for the amendment?
A number of churches and religious groups support
the gay marriage amendment. The Catholic Church has donated
about half of the $1 million raised by the Citizens for
the Protection of Marriage campaign, which supports Proposal
2. All Catholic dioceses in Michigan have contributed, ranging
from $270,000 from the Archdiocese of Detroit to $20,000
from the Diocese of Marquette. (Associated Press) Checkout
the full article on the INJUSTICE
page.
to the top
|
Why should gays be allowed to marry?
George Washington was speaking directly to the
issue of civil rights when, in 1790, he said, "As Mankind
becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that
all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the
community are equally entitled to the protections of civil
government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost
nations of justice and liberality." (Thom Hartmann/commondreams.org)
|
Would
Same Sex Marriage Lead to Polygamy?
Banning Gay Marriage 'Would Help Polygamists'
by 365Gay.com
Newscenter Staff
Posted: October 13, 2004 12:01 am ET
(Salt lake City, Utah) Same-sex couples got some unexpected
support Tuesday from a group that fights polygamy.
One of the arguments used by conservative groups which support
amending the Utah constitution to ban same-sex unions has
been that allowing gay marriage would open the floodgates
of polygamy.
The issue of multiple spouses is an area of concern in predominantly
Mormon Utah. Small breakaway Mormon sects still practice
polygamy despite efforts by the state to break up the practice.
But, Tuesday a group called Tapestry Against Polygamy which
helps in the prosecution of polygamists, said that the proposed
amendment would actually give people who practice it a legal
loophole to avoid going to court.
The amendment says: ''Marriage consists only of the legal
union between a man and a woman. No other domestic union,
however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or
given the same or substantially equivalent effect.''
Tapestry Against Polygamy Executive Director Vicky Prunty
said the language is too vague, especially the second part
of the proposed amendment because it could invalidate domestic
unions for heterosexuals.
Polygamists usually only get marriage certificates for their
first marriage, any additional marriage is considered a
domestic union. The state then prosecutes claiming that
the domestic unions are de facto marriages and therefore
polygamy.
Prunty said that if the proposed amendment passes polygamists
would have a constitutional argument. Since the state could
not recognize those domestic unions as marriages it could
not prosecute them under laws disavowing multiple marriages.
Each of the three men vying to become Utah's attorney general
have also called on voters to reject the proposed amendment.
The three have differing views on whether or not gays should
be allowed to marry, but they do agree on one thing: The
proposed amendment goes too far.
to the top
|
What
is the history of the Pledge of Allegiance?
The convoluted history of the Pledge of Allegiance
reveals a great deal about the nation's fears, strengths
and prejudices.
Twenty-six states now require the pledge of allegiance to
be recited in public schools. Some states require schools
to reflect on the history and meaning of that pledge. Reflection
would be instructive, since the story of the pledge reveals
the fears and strengths of this nation.
At the end of the 19th century, millions of immigrants poured
into a country beset with social unrest. Many people believed
America needed some symbol to tie the nation's peoples together.
The first widely used pledge of allegiance was written by
a Colonel Balch of New York. It was a simple pledge of fealty
and devotion: "I give my heart and my hand to my country
-- one country, one language, one flag."
In 1892, Francis Bellamy, an ordained Baptist minister who
had been booted out of his Boston church because of his
fiery socialist sermons, composed a pledge that expressed
loyalty not only to a nation but to an idea: "Liberty
and justice for all."
"I pledge Allegiance to my Flag, the Republic for which
it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all." (Bellamy added the word "to" before
"the Republic" a few days after the Pledge's first
publication in Youth's Companion in September 1892.)
According to John W. Baer, author of "The Pledge of
Allegiance: A Centennial History, 1892-1992," Bellamy
wanted to add the word "equality" to the Pledge
but was "mindful of the social climate regarding women
and minorities."
In 1892, President Benjamin Harrison urged all schools to
adopt the Pledge. Many did.
After World War I, millions of immigrants who had been unable
to travel to the U.S. during the conflict again landed on
our shores, sparking a xenophobic reaction that resulted
in, for the first time, sharp limits on immigration. Organizations
like the American Legion and the Daughters of the American
Revolution lobbied to change the phrase "my flag"
to "the flag of the United States of America."
"They were afraid that some of these little kids with
anarchist or Communist parents, when they said 'My flag'
would be thinking of the black flag of anarchy or the red
flag of communism," says Whitney Smith, director of
the Flag Research Center in Winchester Massachusetts.
In 1940, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that school boards
could compel students to recite the pledge. "National
unity is the basis of national security," wrote Justice
Felix Frankfurter. "The flag is a symbol of our national
unity."
Three years later, the Court reversed itself. Why? Perhaps
the Court realized that at the height of a war against totalitarian
regimes, a central feature of which was a slavish devotion
to national symbols, compelling devotion to our flag was
inappropriate. It contradicted the very spirit of the pledge,
"With liberty and justice for all."
During that war the nation made other changes. The stiff-armed,
arms-out flag salute fell out of favor because of its resemblance
to the Nazi salute. In 1942, to prevent the cheapening of
the flag, the American Flag Code prohibited its use in advertising
or on any disposable item.
A decade later, the pledge was altered once more. The change
was spurred by a sermon delivered on Feb. 7, 1954 by George
M. Docherty, pastor of the New York Avenue Presbyterian
Church in Washington D.C. With President Eisenhower sitting
in the front pew the Reverend declared, "Apart from
the mention of the phrase 'the United States of America'
it could be the pledge of any republic. I could hear little
Muscovites repeat a similar pledge to their hammer-and-sickle
flag in Moscow. Russia is also a republic that claims to
have overthrown the tyranny of kingship. Russia also claims
to be indivisible."
Three days later a bill was introduced in Congress to add
the words "under God." Baer recalls that "Congressmen
said Communists would feel very uncomfortable saying the
pledge, because they were atheists." Eisenhower signed
the bill into law on Flag Day, June 14.
Bellamy's 22-word pledge had now grown to 31 words. Yet
six of his original words still best express its central
sentiment: "With liberty and justice for all."
David Morris is Co-founder and Vice President of the Institute
for Local Self Reliance in Minneapolis, Minnesota. )
to the top
|
|