Momentum gathering for same-sex marriage ban
Posted: Saturday, May 14, 2005
LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) -- A ruling striking down Nebraska's ban on gay marriage appears to be galvanizing conservatives nationwide in calling for a federal law banning such unions.
"The U.S. Senate should act promptly to adopt an amendment to the Constitution ... to protect the traditional institution of marriage," said former Nebraska Attorney General Don Stenberg, who is seeking the 2006 Republican Senate nomination.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon of Omaha ruled Thursday that the Nebraska ban "imposes significant burdens on both the expressive and intimate associational rights" of gays "and creates a significant barrier to the plaintiffs' right to petition or to participate in the political process."
Those who challenged the law said it prevented gays and lesbians from lobbying the Legislature for rights for same-sex couples.
Sen. John Cornyn,R-Texas, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also said the ruling underscored the need for a federal ban on gay marriage.
"The traditional institution of marriage now is clearly in need of federal protection, now more than ever," he said. "This ruling is a vivid reminder that opponents of traditional marriage have not given up their effort to overturn the will of the people."
The challenge was filed by the gay rights organization Lambda Legal and the ACLU's Lesbian and Gay Project.
Lambda Legal attorney David Buckel noted that Bataillon's ruling was the first to strike down a ban against the marriage of same-sex couples.
"And that only makes sense, because it was the most extreme," he said.
He said people calling for a national gay marriage ban because of Bataillon's ruling are using scare tactics.
"Why are you afraid of the democratic process working again?" he said. "These folks didn't get marriage, they didn't even get domestic partnerships benefits. All they got was the right to go to their own elected officials and ask for domestic partnership benefits.
"What this judge did was to ensure access to the democratic process, but he did not guarantee success," he said.
The constitutional amendment, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, was passed overwhelmingly by the voters in November 2000. It also banned government recognition of "uniting of two persons of the same sex in a civil union, domestic partnership or other same-sex relationship."
The judge said those "broad proscriptions could also interfere with or prevent arrangements between potential adoptive or foster parents and children, related persons living together, and people sharing custody of children as well as gay individuals."
Forty states bar same-sex marriages, but Nebraska's ban went further, prohibiting same-sex couples from enjoying many of the legal protections that heterosexual couples enjoy. Gays and lesbians who work for the state or the University of Nebraska system, for example, were banned from sharing health insurance and other benefits with their partners.
Bataillon's ruling also renews the call by many conservatives to rein in so-called "activist judges."
"This decision is ... a powerful reminder that there is a more fundamental problem that needs to be addressed -- that is the problem of federal judges who impose their personal, often liberal, ideology on what is supposed to be a democratic nation," Stenberg said.
Buckel said he was disturbed by such statements.
"If what this decision means is that we've restored the Democratic process ... why is that scary?" he said.
"The U.S. Senate should act promptly to adopt an amendment to the Constitution ... to protect the traditional institution of marriage," said former Nebraska Attorney General Don Stenberg, who is seeking the 2006 Republican Senate nomination.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon of Omaha ruled Thursday that the Nebraska ban "imposes significant burdens on both the expressive and intimate associational rights" of gays "and creates a significant barrier to the plaintiffs' right to petition or to participate in the political process."
Those who challenged the law said it prevented gays and lesbians from lobbying the Legislature for rights for same-sex couples.
Sen. John Cornyn,R-Texas, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also said the ruling underscored the need for a federal ban on gay marriage.
"The traditional institution of marriage now is clearly in need of federal protection, now more than ever," he said. "This ruling is a vivid reminder that opponents of traditional marriage have not given up their effort to overturn the will of the people."
The challenge was filed by the gay rights organization Lambda Legal and the ACLU's Lesbian and Gay Project.
Lambda Legal attorney David Buckel noted that Bataillon's ruling was the first to strike down a ban against the marriage of same-sex couples.
"And that only makes sense, because it was the most extreme," he said.
He said people calling for a national gay marriage ban because of Bataillon's ruling are using scare tactics.
"Why are you afraid of the democratic process working again?" he said. "These folks didn't get marriage, they didn't even get domestic partnerships benefits. All they got was the right to go to their own elected officials and ask for domestic partnership benefits.
"What this judge did was to ensure access to the democratic process, but he did not guarantee success," he said.
The constitutional amendment, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, was passed overwhelmingly by the voters in November 2000. It also banned government recognition of "uniting of two persons of the same sex in a civil union, domestic partnership or other same-sex relationship."
The judge said those "broad proscriptions could also interfere with or prevent arrangements between potential adoptive or foster parents and children, related persons living together, and people sharing custody of children as well as gay individuals."
Forty states bar same-sex marriages, but Nebraska's ban went further, prohibiting same-sex couples from enjoying many of the legal protections that heterosexual couples enjoy. Gays and lesbians who work for the state or the University of Nebraska system, for example, were banned from sharing health insurance and other benefits with their partners.
Bataillon's ruling also renews the call by many conservatives to rein in so-called "activist judges."
"This decision is ... a powerful reminder that there is a more fundamental problem that needs to be addressed -- that is the problem of federal judges who impose their personal, often liberal, ideology on what is supposed to be a democratic nation," Stenberg said.
Buckel said he was disturbed by such statements.
"If what this decision means is that we've restored the Democratic process ... why is that scary?" he said.
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 0 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
