[Vision2020] Idaho Statesman: HJR 2

[Saundra Lund]

http://www.idahostatesman.com/101/story/57039.html
October 24, 2006
Amendment would put ban on same-sex marriage into constitution
By Bill Roberts


Boiseans Kim Beswick and Sarah Seidl say they are a family in every way but
marriage. 

They've exchanged vows of love. They are raising two children birthed by
Beswick: Nick, 3, and Kate, 9 months.

"She's my soul mate," Seidl said of Beswick, whom she's known for six years.


If Beswick and Seidl could marry, they would. But Idaho law prohibits
same-sex marriage.

Idahoans will vote Nov. 7 whether to adopt a constitutional amendment
reinforcing that law and at the same time banning domestic partnerships and
civil unions. A yes vote on HJR 2 supports the amendment; a no vote opposes
it. A simple majority is required for passage.

Allowing same-sex couples to marry would be the most "massive social
experiment ever tried in the history of civilization," said Bryan Fischer of
the Idaho Values Alliance, an amendment supporter. 

Same-sex marriage clashes with the religious and traditional view of
marriage between men and women that has been a common thread through
cultures for thousands of years.

But opponents say the amendment affects more than same-sex couples; it
affects men and women living together who are not married.

Advocates, including Fischer, want a constitutional amendment to protect the
traditional definition of marriage from the hands of Idaho judges, who could
interpret laws as they did in Massachusetts - the only state that now
permits same-sex marriages.

Amendment supporters also point to what they say are thousands of studies
showing children do best in a home with a mother and a father. 

Opponents cite statements from groups such as the American Academy of
Pediatrics, which in 2002 said children with "parents who are homosexual
have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment
and development as children whose parents are heterosexual."

Opponents say an amendment would shut down for years legislative debate on
expanding traditional marriage or exploring domestic partnerships and civil
unions.

An amendment would also help keep in place regulations governing rights,
such as hospital visitation, which opponents say are not automatically
extended to couples - same sex or opposite sex - who aren't married. 

Without an amendment, Beswick envisions spending the "next 20 years getting
just a few of the many rights we need, one at a time. Meanwhile, what if
something happens to our family?" 

Twenty other states already have passed amendments defining marriage as
being between a man and a woman. Amendments have passed across the country
with margins of 57 to 86 percent. Idaho is one of eight states that will
vote on amendments in November.

Idaho's amendment is among the most restrictive because it doesn't
acknowledge any union between people who aren't legally married.

QUESTIONS OF RIGHTS 

No law or constitutional amendment can take away the commitment Beswick and
Seidl express to each other, Beswick said. "That's the part Sarah and I
already have."

What Beswick and Seidl don't have are a body of rights automatically
conferred on husbands and wives as a means to strengthen and stabilize
marriage, Beswick and other amendment opponents say.

The proof is in the glove compartments of Seidl and Beswick's cars. They
carry legal documents wherever they go granting them the right to visit each
other in the hospital or to make medical decisions for each other and their
children just in case a hospital balks at letting them exercise the rights
these two non-married people have entrusted to each other. Even with
documents, Beswick and Seidl aren't sure they're protected in every
instance.

Amendment opponents worry about other issues:

. When a partner in an unmarried relationship dies, the surviving partner
may not be able to inherit joint property without a will. Among married
couples, much of a person's property may go to the surviving spouse if there
is no will.

. If a spouse dies in an automobile accident, the surviving spouse may be
able to file a wrongful death suit, said Sara Shepard, a Boise family law
attorney. But that right doesn't extend to unmarried couples, she said.

Idaho's laws have created a situation for unmarried people where "the most
important person in the world to you is a legal stranger," Shepard said.

Bob Aldridge, a Boise attorney who has helped write many of Idaho's laws
governing hospital visitation and medical-treatment issues, disagrees.

Idaho laws let unmarried people visit each other in the hospital, make
decisions about patient treatment and pass property on to each other in
wills, he said. Often the paperwork to accomplish these goals is easy to get
and not expensive, he said.

"These rights extend to all people," Aldridge said.

Those rights don't come automatically, Shepard said, and many people don't
know to get the necessary legal documents or can't afford to pay for them. 

WHAT ABOUT THE KIDS?

Same-sex marriage's effect on children has taken center stage in the debate
over Idaho's marriage amendment.

Amendment backers worry that kids who don't grow up in homes with both a
mother and a father will suffer for it.

"Children have a desperate need of what moms can give the kids and what dads
can give the kids," Fischer said. Mothers nurture; fathers are role models
for providing for families and how to treat women with respect, he said.

Amendment supporters can't point to a lot of studies on the effect of
same-sex parenting. But they are cautious about stepping into what they
consider uncertain territory.

In the Beswick-Seidl house, both provide for the family. Beswick is vice
president for marketing in a tech company and Seidl is part-owner of a home
building company. 

A nanny watches the kids while the couple works. At day's end, Beswick
usually cooks dinner for the family. Each takes turns bathing the kids or
reading them stories before bed. They finish the day by picking up the house
before the routine starts again the next morning.

"I don't think (people understand) how ordinary our lives are," Beswick
said.

Idaho's marriage amendment draws sharp lines among people, with little room
for agreement.

Supporters say marriage has always been between a man and woman, and that's
how it should remain or society risks devaluing an institution that has
brought so much stability. 

But the amendment is about more than marriage, Beswick said. It's about "how
we are going to treat a group in our society."

Contact reporter Bill Roberts at broberts at idahostatesman.com or 377-6408.