Dear friends,

Many of you have expressed an interest in the issues related to the protection of marriage in California, Utah, nationally, and internationally. Please read the following information on a series of proposed bills hitting the legislature at this time.

If you agree that these are to be opposed, to protect the existing Utah amendment on marriage and to prevent a very slippery slope, please sign the petition at the bottom and forward this to people you know who are concerned about preserving the legal recognition of marriage and family in Utah. 

Also, our legislators need backing from their constituents.  They cannot represent you if you do not tell them how you feel! There is a link at the bottom to contact them. Just call or email and let them know your thoughts.

Thank you so much! Karen Merkley, Director of Public Policy for United Families Utah

January 7, 2009

Equality Utah Works to Overturn Constitutional Protection of Marriage

At the beginning of a new year, January 2009 brings renewed goals, and hope for prosperity and peace, but it also brings with it five new bills designed by Equality Utah, a group actively pursuing political support in “securing rights and equality for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community” to create public confusion while usurping Utah’s Constitutional Amendment 3 that passed in 2004 – with the hope of a powerful ally.

The Common Ground Initiative is a political attack on the family and the constitution, rather than an initiative based on our mutual agreements about rights and legal status due married couples only.

To better understand why, let’s review Utah Constitutional Amendment 3, and compare it to the bills proposed by gay advocates to see how the bills undermine traditional marriage and families. Utah Constitutional Amendment 3 states:

1. Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman.
2. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

Here is a summary of Equality Utah’s proposed bills:

1.  Hospitalization and medical care — This bill will mandate that insurance plans, which extend benefits to an employee’s spouse, also cover an employee’s partner.

2.  Fair housing and employment — The Fair Housing and Workplace bills will add sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of characteristics employers and landlords may not consider when making employment or housing decisions.

3.  Probate rights – wrongful death amendments — This bill removes barriers to inheritance and insurance. (It allows same sex partners the same financial benefits as married couples in the case of a wrongful death)

4.  Domestic partner rights and responsibilities act — This bill creates a statewide domestic partner registry as exists in California and attaches rights of inheritance, insurance and fair housing.

5.  Repeal of part two of Utah’s Amendment 3 — A registry that covers inheritance, housing and insurance is not the legal equivalent of marriage. This bill will repeal the portion of Amendment 3 which states “no other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as marriage or be given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.”

Amendment 3 was created as a safeguard to protect the sacred union of marriage between a man and a woman.  It purposely does not include same sex partners in the definition of marriage, and it purposely gives traditional marriage special legal privileges that the second part of Amendment 3 enforces.

Each of these five proposed bills puts a disclaimer on the second part of Amendment 3, changing this definition to read in effect, “some other domestic unions may be recognized as marriage or be given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.”  The first four bills basically allow same sex partners to have one or more of the same legal privileges as traditional married spouses, and the fifth bill blatantly changes the Amendment 3 definition of marriage.  This would break down the legal, political, and social strength society has given to traditional marriage, in recognition of how it has held society together for thousands of years.

Those in opposition to traditional marriage and family use diverse means to persuade others to support their agenda, including extending benefits to others who are not in same-sex relationships, such as a grandmother living with a grandchild.  But this is just a smokescreen to hide the real focus explained by Equality Utah executive director Mike Thompson.  “Proposition 8 has created a great divide. Now is the time to look for opportunities to bridge that divide and create the needed protections, rights and responsibilities for Utah’s gay and transgender people. This will be Equality Utah’s focus and we ask the LDS Church to support these efforts.”

Mr. Thompson was referring to statements from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which have been repeatedly misquoted and misinterpreted, as a tactic to win the support of LDS members.  These statements were made in light of Proposition 8, stating that the Church would not pursue overturning laws already existing in California.  In the Washington Post LDS Church spokesman Michael Otterson clarified that “the church’s statement was based on civil unions in California and that no decision has been made regarding similar rights in Utah. I don’t want to give the impression that the church is saying civil unions in all cases are OK.”

The complete statement from the LDS Church reads, “The Church does not object to rights (already established in California) regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the family or the constitutional rights of churches and their adherents to administer and practice their religion free from government interference.”

United Families Utah believes the passage of the bills proposed by Equality Utah will “infringe on the integrity of the family”, and based on the evidence in other states, will infringe upon “the constitutional rights of churches”.

As Representative Lorie Fowlke said at the Nov 19 Legislative Judiciary Interim Committee meeting, “it is the beginning of a recognition of some other type of relationship that has the same kind of validity that a marriage was created for.”

The passage of even one of these bills would give governmental endorsement, approval, and recognition of same sex and non-marital cohabiting relationships.  It would also give them statutory rights of “substantially legal equivalent effect” as married couples, conflicting with Utah Amendment 3.

The legislative battle begins January 26.  The stakes are high, and the eyes of the nation will be upon Utah. Openly gay legislators are openly adamant about these bills. They didn’t succeed last year in passing gay rights legislation, however, “That could change this January,” said Senator Scott McCoy.

That which seemed unlikely in California came to a close call, and that which seemed unheard of in Utah has already begun.  An intentional wave of corruption to the definition of traditional marriage and family is emerging here in our state and must be stopped.

Your help is urgently needed!

1.  Contact your Senator and Representative Let them know where you stand.  They are under tremendous pressure to approve these bills, and they need to hear from you!

2.  Sign the petition to let our legislators know that they represent your vote and that they must uphold Utah’s Amendment 3.

3.  Alert your friends.  Forward this email to others who are concerned about preserving the definition of marriage and family in the state of Utah.

United Families Utah

Laura B.  Utah Chapter Director

Karen M. Director of Public Policy

The following is a letter from United Families, outlining the proposed legislation underway in Utah, propelled largely by Equality Utah. If you would like to have input into your own state’s direction on what is and isn’t passed and normalized, you can do so, by reading this and contacting your legislators.

In the wake of California’s proposition 8, Equality Utah has the ear of some of Utah’s most influential policy makers.  According to the Deseret news, “A group of Utah lawmakers unveiled five pieces of proposed legislation aimed at securing rights for gay couples”. If you thought this could only happen in California or on the East Coast, think again.

The first of these five bills, the Wrongful Death Amendments Bill, passed the Joint Judiciary Interim Committee on Nov. 19 with flying colors. The vote was (10-4).  Although the committee membership includes two of three openly gay state legislators, the amount of support on this committee calls for great concern. The bill is now eligible to be heard during the regular legislative session that begins on Jan 26, 2009.

Equality Utah, Utah’s gay rights organization is the impetus behind this bill. Senator Scott McCoy, one of the three openly gay Utah legislators, is the sponsor of the seemingly harmless bill. It appears harmless because it makes no explicit mention of marriage in the bill, and appeals to those living together who have no sexual relationship worthy of wrongful death benefits to make the bill palatable.

Nip It In The Bud

If we act quickly we can stifle the efforts of the anti-family groups who have persuaded our normally conservative legislature to approve this bill.  Please contact your Senator and Representative, asking them to oppose the Wrongful Death Amendment Bill and the other legislation being proposed by Equality Utah.

United Families Utah Speaks to Committee

Along with several other pro-family groups in Utah, United Families opposed the Wrongful Death Amendments Bill in the Judiciary Interim Committee meeting, stating:

“While this may seem an innocuous request, we don’t believe it is. Extending through the Wrongful Death Amendments Bill benefits and provisions designed for and due married couples and their children to non-marital, cohabiting partnerships is commensurate with elevating homosexual or consensual cohabiting relationships to legally recognized status. Once sanctioned legally, through affording benefits reserved for married couples, a precedent is set for the acquisition of additional and ultimately all benefits due married couples.”

(see UFU Complete Statement)

Many of the Judiciary Interim committee members insisted that “this bill has nothing to do with marriage” or that “marriage is not even an issue in this bill”.  But one legislator who voted in favor of the bill clarified in his closing comments, “To me, we’re talking about the benefits of two people that are living together, and for them to be able to have the same kind of benefits as those that are married.”

Wrongful Death Amendments Bill is Just Plain Wrong

Utah’s current Wrongful Death Law has been in existence for many years, allowing a surviving spouse, child, or parent to sue for compensation (above and beyond the estate or inheritance) if their family member is killed through negligence.  This bill would amend the law to give an additional heir standing before the court as well-someone who “had a mutually supportive and dependant relationship” with the decedent.

The Wrongful Death Amendments Bill chips away at the integrity of the traditional family in the following ways:

1. It gives the same benefits to two people living together, as those that are married, providing government encouragement of cohabitation. History and research confirm that “Cohabiting relationships do not provide the same intrinsic value to society that marriage offers. Governments that extend such benefits, and thus approval, are in effect subsidizing the formation of fragile family forms.”

2. It redefines “heir” to include a ‘wrongful death designee”, raising unsettling concerns such as those expressed by Representatives Curt Webb and Jim Bird. Representative Webb asked, “Now we have another person in the picture sitting at the table, how do we explain to these children, that their piece of the pie is going to be less because of this individual?”  Representative Bird noted, “If the husband leaves the wife for another woman, under the current law, the old wife has no standing because of the divorce, and the new live-in has no standing because there is no marriage.  I’m not sure I want to change that.”

3. It extends legally recognized status to cohabiting and same-sex relationships in Utah, setting a precedent for further recognition in additional laws. We agree with Representative Lori Fowlke’s observation that, “it is the beginning of a recognition of some other type of relationship that has the same kind of validity that a marriage was created for.”

Representative Fowlke continued,

“I am not unsympathetic to the issues that you raise, and I do recognize that there are significant losses by people in these types of family arrangements, and I know that those do exist, and I’ve met with those people.  However, we as a society-and this is very much a policy decision-and we as the policy makers in this state have decided that we want to do everything that we can to protect traditional marriage.  And that’s not to say we don’t recognize that other relationships exist, that we don’t recognize that sometimes there’s pain in those other relationships as well, and loss, but it’s simply to say that we believe that marriage does have a significance far beyond what you say in the courthouse or wherever you get married.” (Listen to the recording of the entire Committee meeting, including public comment.)

Some have expressed concern about opposing these issues that seem to help others.  In the Provo Herald, Senator Valentine is quoted as saying, “There is already a process in place to allow a person to grant certain powers and resources to someone outside a traditional family. Whether power of attorney or using a will, those documents trump blood relations”.