Senate President: The Best Deliberation Is No Deliberation

We're on week two of Utah's nearly 7-week Legislative Session, and we may already have the quote of the session.  And, it comes from Senate President Wayne Niederhauser.

First, some background:

SB100 is the current bill number for a bill that has been floating around the Utah Legislature for 6 years.  It is currently sponsored by St George Republican Senator Steve Urquhart.  It adds sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of things that you can't be discriminated for in the state of Utah.  The list currently protects people from getting fired (among other things) on the basis of race, religion, sex, and family status.

It's similar to laws passed by several cities in the past several years, including one in Salt lake City that was supported by the LDS Church.

Oh, and it's an issue that a recent Salt Lake Tribune poll says that 60% of Utahns support.  The Deseret News has the number at 72%.

However, Urquhart can't get his bill heard.

On Friday, he held a press conference encouraging Utahns to let their Senators know they want the bill to be heard.  He encouraged people to come to the Capitol and post "blue notes" on the Senate Door.And, people came.And by the time the Senate reconvened on Monday, the door and doorway were covered in blue notes.

And, what did that mean to Niederhauser?  Well, it was further proof that the bill SHOULDN'T be heard.That's right.  If you want a bill heard by the Utah Senate, don't tell anyone.  Especially the Utah Senate.

From the Tribune:

Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, said Monday the notes are proof "there is a lot of emotion out there" over same-sex marriage and related issues.

But, he added, the Legislature should stick with plans to let the issue cool down and not deal with more changes until the courts consider Utah’s appeal to a federal ruling that struck down its ban on same-sex marriage.

"This is an emotional time," Niederhauser said. "Let’s stop and pull our faculties together and address other issues this session and wait for the process [in court] … to take place and we’ll come back at another time to address religious liberties and other types of discrimination."

Because the Utah Legislature never, ever acts based on emotion.

Wait, what court process is he talking about? Oh yeah, the gay marriage lawsuit.

You see, Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes told the Legislature that they shouldn't take up any bills relating to gay people because they don't want the state to show any animosity towards gay people, since the whole basis of the case hinges on "'The Utah Government is being mean to gay people.'  'No, we're not!'"Well, that's what it sounds like, at least.

And, what better way to prove that the state doesn't not like gay people than by keep the Legislature from talking about gay people.

Yeah.  That will work.

However, the killer quote from President Neiderhauser comes at the end of the Tribune article:

"It is most important for us right now to take some time," Niederhauser said. "Let’s not get too anxious. The best kind of policy is the policy that takes some time and has had a lot of deliberation."

Did you catch that?  We need to deliberate the bill, so we're not going to deliberate it.

It may just be me, but I would think that allowing the bill to be discussed over the remaining 37 days of the session would be a great way to deliberate it.

Especially a bill that's been around for 6 years.  How much deliberation will be enough?

Gay Marriage: Mark Shurtleff Said This Would Happen

Last week, my dad reminded me of something that I had forgotten about Amendment 3: Mark Shurtleff, who was the Attorney General in 2004 when the Amendment passed, was against the amendment.

 I looked it up, and dad was right.

 Deseret News, August 7, 2004:

All three candidates for Utah attorney general oppose a state constitutional amendment to prohibit gay marriage because of its potential negative effects on heterosexual marriage.
In a joint statement released Friday by the Don't Amend Alliance, Republican Mark Shurtleff, Democrat Greg Skordas and Libertarian Andrew McCullough announced their opposition to Amendment 3, on which residents will vote Nov. 2.

All of the candidates agreed that the second part of the proposed amendment, which forbids granting "the same or substantially equivalent legal effect" as marriage to other relationships, could also prevent heterosexual common law couples from having basic rights, such as inheritance, hospital visits or powers of attorney.

"This amendment goes too far," Shurtleff said in a statement. "It could forever deny to a group of citizens the right to approach its legislature to seek benefits and protections. This is a bad law and should be rejected."

Shurtleff did make clear that he opposes gay marriages, and supports the current state law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. His concerns center primarily around the second part of the amendment, and he urged voters to oppose the amendment so that he can work with legislators to draft a better one.

"Amend, yes; but not this amendment," he said.

 And this, from Deseret News, September 17, 2004:

Shurtleff said the arguments over the amendment ultimately won't matter.

"It will end up in the U.S. Supreme Court," he said. "The only amendment that's going to matter is the U.S. Constitution."

So, there you have it -- Mark Shurtleff knew that the amendment was a bad idea that would go all the way to the Supreme Court, and he was right.

The AG's Office Needs Help to do Their Job?

Imagine my shock when I read this from the Tribune:

The state of Utah has turned to outside counsel for help with its efforts to stop same-sex marriages, a move the office said Thursday would temporarily delay its application for a stay to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Outside help.  Which means one of two things:

1) There are no attorneys in the office that are willing to go pursue the case further.   I doubt it.

2) The AG's office is out of ideas.  Given their arguments to date, and how resoundingly they have been shot down already by lower courts, I find this highly likely.

Which makes you wonder: isn't part of the AG's job to defend the state in lawsuits?  I realize that Sean Reyes has only been on the job since Monday, but shouldn't he have hit the ground running?

The Attorney General’s Office planned to file a stay request Thursday but said the application would be made on Friday or Monday as it coordinates with the outside firm, which it has not yet identified. 

In other words,  the state of Utah is saying "This is such an emergency, we needed a few days to think this over.  But could you grant us the stay, anyway?"

The AG’s office also hasn't provided any information about how much it will spend or from where it is drawing the funds to pay the outside counsel.

But, I can guarantee that once we know who the outside counsel is, good government watchdogs, including myself, are going to be pouring over the Herbert Swallow and Reyes campaign donations.

-Bob

Utah's Gay Marriage HAS affected my marriage

Since Friday's ruling, I've written several versions of a post about the fact that people can get married in Utah whether they are gay or straight.

None have been quite right.

Most;y it was a rehash of this post from 18 months ago about my position on marriage.  Since then, I've learned that my Great Great Grandfather Aagard was also a polygamist.  That's him down front in black.  He was thrown in jail for practicing a "non-traditional" form of marriage.

However, I don't want to get into the past.  I want to look to the future.

I'm a straight single Mormon.  I'm also nearing my 35th Birthday, which puts me at least a decade into "menace to society" status.  While finding a nice woman and getting married has been a desire of mine, it's hasn't been a top priority.  That all changed last night with this picture from the Tribune of people camping out at the Salt Lake County Government Center:

That's right.  People were camping out to be the first in line to get a marriage license.  Have you ever seen anything like that?  It was 30 degrees and precipitating most of the night last night, and these people were so excited about getting married that they camped out like they were waiting for concert tickets or a really good Black Friday deal.

That's commitment to marriage.  I don't know too many heterosexual couples that would do that to get their license.  At one point, the line was reported to be 1000 COUPLES long.  Amazing.

People who didn't think they could ever get married 72 hours before are waiting overnight in the cold and standing in long lines just for the privilege, and I can't ever muster up the ability to get a date?  Things need to change for me.

So, a big thank you to the Gay Marriage Pioneers who got married last Friday and today.  You made me more committed to getting married.  Because if it's that important to you, it should really be more important to me.  And maybe I'll be headed down to the Clerk's office soon to get my own marriage license.  in the meantime, I'm really going to enjoy your wedding reception at the City and County Building tonight.

My View on Marriage

The gentleman on the left is my third-great-grandfather John R Winder.  Born in England in 1821, he became the manager of a shoe store in Liverpool.  After joining the LDS Church in Liverpool, he arrived in Utah on October 10, 1853, exactly 99 years before his great-great granddaughter (and my mother) was born.

While in Utah, he engaged in several business ventures, including Winder Dairy, which still exists today (as Winder Farms).  Winder led the Nauvoo Legion against Johnson's Army in the Utah War, and served as Chairman of the "People's Party" while seeking to establish a two-party system of politics in Utah.  He also served as a delegate to serveral state Constitutional Conventions.

Winder was called to be the Second Counselor of the Presiding Bishopric of the Church in 1887.  As Second Counselor, he oversaw the completion of the interior of the Salt Lake Temple.  He was called to be the First Counselor in the First Presidency in 1901, a position he held until his death in 1910.

John Winder married Ellen Walters in 1845 in England.  He Married Tilda Jensen (my Third-Great Grandmother) in the President's Office in Salt Lake City in 1855.  In 1857, he married Elizabeth Parker in the Endowment House in Salt Lake City.  In 1893, he married Maria Burnham.

That's right, John R Winder practiced marriage that went beyond "one man one woman."  When the government banned plural marriage in 1887, they were in the wrong.  Any attempts since then to define marriage are equally as wrong.

I believe that marriage is a religious ordinance.  As a religious ordinance, it is between men and women.  Much like I believe that baptism, another religious ordinance, is to be done by immersion, and the baptism should only be performed on people older than 8.  Should the State of Utah pass a constitutional amendment banning the baptism of infants, so as to preserve the sanctity of traditional baptism?  Should Massachusetts ban immersion?

And, if we are to regulate marriage, how far do we go?  I'm just waiting for Alabama to pass a law further "protecting traditional marriage" by ensuring that marriage for eternity (as practiced by Mormons) is banned.  After all, the tradition is "til death do we part" is it not?

The "Sanctity" of Marriage

If my friend John has been in a committed relationship for 9 years.  There is a lot more "sanctity" in that relationship than in my friend Sam's 18 month marriage.  Or my friend Tim's 8 month marriage.  Newt Gingrich has married two people who previously held the title of "mistress" before they were his wife.  Sorry, but "marriage," as it stands now, really means nothing.

But, if Gay Marriage were legal, The Church would have to perform gay marriages.

Well, that part is a complete lie.  A Baptist marrying a Catholic is legal, but it doesn't mean they are legally allowed to be married in the Temple.  In fact, I have many good friends who are both LDS that were not allowed to get married in the Temple.  So, to say the Church would have to start performing Gay Marriages is, well, being dishonest.

I'm confused, what is your position?

Well, marriage should be a religious institution, unregulated by the Government.  However, it has also become a civil contract entered into by two people and endorsed  by government.  And, as a civil contract, it should be open to any two adults who want to enter into the contract.

Corroon and Herbert on "Social Issues"

The Tribune ran a feature yesterday talking about the similarities and few differences between the two candidates running for Governor. It is well worth the time and effort to read the piece. I agree with BYU political scientist Quinn Monson when he says that while Corroon and Herbert agree on many social issues,

Corroon ... needs to make the governor's race about fiscal responsibility and good government. "If it turns on social issues," he adds, "you activate the vote-Republican gene" in GOP-dominated Utah.

So, how does Peter Corroon feel on some of the Utah's hot-button social issues?

Gay Marriage/Civil Unions:

Corroon » "I believe traditional marriage is between a man and a woman. I also do support making sure all our citizens can work, live and support their loved ones without discrimination in our society.

"Our citizens have spoken on [civil unions] through a constitutional amendment so it wouldn't be something I would pursue."

Abortion:

"Based on my [Catholic] faith and upbringing, I am opposed to abortion except in limited circumstances: rape, incest and the life and health of the mother. ...

"I certainly understand that other people may have a different opinion. I respect that difference. As governor, my goal would be to unite everybody to see how we could reduce the number of abortions. ...

-Bob

Sen Buttars doesn't Want Gays Shoving it Down His Throat

This has been floating around for a while. I'm posting it mostly so I have it when I need it later on....

Best Marriage Speech Ever!

New York State Senator Diane Savino speaks on Marriage Equality Albany, NY December 2, 2009

Mero: Making up history to prove his point

This is from a couple of weeks ago. I have meant to post it, but with a death in the family and a few other things, blogging has taken a back seat.

However, I just wanted to point out how the Conservative Agenda will re-write history to prove their point. From Sutherland INstitute's Paul Mero, in a comment to this post:

Utah does have Amendment 3, thank goodness. But a constitutional amendment can be repealed. What would that process look like? Well, what did that similar process look like in CA? It looked like a court amassing mountains of state and local code and ordinances and concluding 1) that a constitutional amendment could very well be unconstitutional and 2) the track record throughout the state in regards to gay rights seemed clear enough for the Justices to wonder out loud why gays shouldn’t be afforded the status of legal marriage.

There was no logical fallacy of a “slippery slope” in play. The precedents were all very logical to the Justices, so much so they were baffled why the status of marriage shouldn’t be bestowed on same-sex couples.

First, for the love of Pete, can we stop calling it "Amendment 3?" That is not it's name. It's name is Article I Section 29 of the Utah Constitution.

Secondly, California did not have a Constitutional Amendment prohibiting marriage until November 2008. In 2000, California residents passes Proposition 22 (2000) which, in the same 14 words used in Proposition 8 (2008), prohibited California from recognizing same-sex marriages.

However, Prop 22 (2000) amended California Code, not the California Constitution. So, therefore, you are wrong, Mr Mero. It was not the Constitution that was found to be unconstitutional.

Furthermore, had it been the Constitution that was unconstitutional, what difference would Prop 8 (2008) had? It, too, would be struck down by the courts, pretty quickly,too.

-Bob

source:
wikipedia: California Proposition 22 (2000)

Chris Buttars Unfriends Marie Osmond

One of the things that we have to be careful of is that we don't create hate. Because people believe certain things and we can’t make everyone become homogenized.

Everybody has a right to believe what they believe. But I do think everyone has a right to have civil rights.

I believe everyone should have the right to share homes and finances with somebody that they care about. You know, on those types of things, I am very supportive. When it comes to marriage, you know, I think civil rights need to be for all.

-Marie Osmond, whose daughter may or may not be a lesbian.

Buttars: Gays "Biggest Threat to America"

ABC4:

SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - Utah state senator Chris Buttars is now comparing some in the gay community to radical Muslims.

Buttars makes this strong comment in an upcoming documentary about Prop 8.

[...]

And even though Buttars says in the documentary interview,..."the ACLU - bless their black hearts...," it’s his other comments which may get the strongest reaction.

Like this one which the documentary maker confirms is about gays.

"They're mean. They want to talk about being nice. They're the meanest buggers I have ever seen."

And just seconds later, Buttars draws a comparison between some gays and radical Muslims.

“It's just like the Muslims. Muslims are good people and their religion is anti-war. But it’s been taken over by the radical side.”

Buttars also claims he's "killed" every gay rights bill in the legislature for the last 8 years.

He also talks about gay marriage being the beginning of the end.

Buttars: "What is the morals of a gay person? You can't answer that because anything goes."

And finally, this is how senator Buttars refers to the "radical gay movement."

"They're probably the greatest threat to America going down I know of."

Now, in the interview, senator Buttars also talks about a certain type of reported gay sexual activity which he claims is taking place.

But ABC 4 does not consider that appropriate for its news content.

Listen to the audio here. You'll find it interesting.

Oh, and he says that Gays' goal is to recruit the youth.

-Bob

Huntsman Still More Popular Than Jesus

Even since Governor Huntsman's declaration last week that he supports the Common Ground bills in addition to Civil Unions, the right has been in a tizzy, saying that Huntsman doesn't side with 60% of Utahans on the issue.

I've been wondering about that one. It didn't seem completely right.

So, I've been anticipating this poll from Dan Jones for KSL/DesNews:

In a new Deseret News/KSL-TV poll, 67 percent of Utahns said the governor's recent announcement supporting civil unions either made no difference or gave them a more favorable opinion of him. Thirty-two percent said their opinions of the governor were negatively impacted by his announcement last week.

So, only 1/3 of his constituents think less of him because of this.

Probably the third that didn't know he was a moderate.

Overall, however, with 80 percent of Utahns still approving of the job Huntsman is doing, the governor's "political bombshell" seems to have created minimal fallout away from Capitol Hill.

Sure, that number was 90% last month, but 80% is pretty dang good. I'd bet that Jesus wouldn't even get 80% approval ratings in Utah.

Now, here comes the question of civil unions:

Forty-seven percent of those polled supported civil unions compared to 42 percent who did not, according to the survey.

OK, the difference is within the margin of error, but it looks like more people in this state favor civil unions than oppose them.

-Bob

"It's on the web site"

I haven't been blogging much as of late because I have been looking for two things: 1) Motivation and 2) a job.

#2 is the most important, of course.

However, I wanted to post this, mostly because I am preparing remarks on the subject and wanted it in a handy place for future reference. (Tribune, Jan 22 2009)
\

Also discussed by GOP legislators and LDS Church officials Wednesday were the following:

City Creek » The church said it has no plans to postpone work on its City Creek development, the largest construction project in the state.

Same-sex couples » Officials did not specifically address a series of proposed "Common Ground" bills that would extend some rights to same-sex couples, except to refer lawmakers to their previous statements on the topic.

Immigration » The LDS leaders reiterated their concern that the state enact a "compassionate" immigration policy.

Jon Stewart vs Mike Huckabee on Gay Marriage

Prop 8 (the musical)

In case you missed it (like I did):

"Prop 8 - The Musical" starring Jack Black, John C. Reilly, and many more... by Jack Black

So wrong, and only funny because it's true.

-Bob

Senator Scott McCoy: Of Book Burnings and Boycotts

From Utah Senate Democrats:

n the wake of the passage of Prop 8 in California, emotions and tempers have flared in the LGBT community. I understand the anger, disappointment, and sadness that many in the gay and transgendered community are feeling as a result of having the right to marry stripped away. I have felt those same emotions and had those same reactions myself. I understand the desire and the need to express those feelings. In fact, you have a First Amendment right to do so.

Having said that, I implore my fellow citizens to engage in civil and peaceful expressions and conduct. There is no room for violence, vandalism, or intimidation in this continuing debate for marriage equality. Resort to such methods is simply unacceptable. We are better than that.

Furthermore, I urge people not to boycott Utah. There are many good and sympathetic people, Mormons and non-Mormons alike, who call Utah home. Boycotting Utah ultimately hurts those of us who are working for a more fair and just Utah. Rather than staying away from Utah, come and visit and show our detractors that we are fine and decent people deserving of equal treatment and protection under the law.

Well done, Senator!

Equality Utah Taking LDS Church at Their Word, to Press for Gay Rights in Utah

I got this email a little while ago, and I thought I'd share:

Dear Robert,

Throughout the recent election cycle, the LDS Church has demonstrated its willingness to participate in political issues by asking its members to do all they can do, including donating their means and their time, to support California’s Proposition 8, which amended the state constitution and eliminated gay couples right to marry by defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

The LDS Church has articulated it is not “anti-gay” but rather pro-marriage and it “does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights.” On November 5th, Elder L. Whitney Clayton stated the LDS Church does not oppose “civil unions or domestic partnerships.” In response to these statements, Equality Utah is drafting legislation for the 2009 General Session of the Utah Legislature to address each of the issues mentioned by the LDS Church.

At a noon Press Conference today, Equality Utah is asking the LDS Church to keep its word and to demonstrate its conviction on these issues. Will you join us in this effort and be part of our work for a fair & just Utah?

Read today's Press Release

Read the full transcript from today's Press Conference

You can be a part of this effort by:

1. Talking to your LDS family and friends. Encourage them to ask their church leaders to support rights for gay and transgender people regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, probate rights and domestic partnerships.

2. Sign our petition and join the growing number of people working for a fair & just Utah.

For those who wish to support this effort and who understand the important role these rights play in the lives of gay and transgender people - rights that do not threaten traditional marriage - they may sign Equality Utah’s petition of support at www.equalityutah.org

Please forward this message to your friends and family – let’s build a statewide coalition of support!

Working for a fair & just Utah ,

Mike Thompson
Executive Director

Annother Viewpoint on Marriage

Marriage has been on my mind a lot lately.

No, not mine. I'm still looking for someone.

But, marriage, and the institution of it has been.

You see, I see marriage as a sacred institution. And as a sacred institution, I don't want my government poking it's head into who I will marry. Much like I don't them coming in and telling me I have to wheat bread and grape juice for the Sacrament.

Furthermore, if someone's religious beliefs allow them to marry 10 wives, their cousin, or someone of the same gender, then so be it.

Because having government get involved only serves to cheapen marriage, not strengthen it. Imagine if they performed baptisms at the County Clerk's office.

So, there's my view on the subject. I decided to write this, because of another post I read From the Mind of Murph:

There has been something on my mind for the last few months and it has to do with my cousin, (who… incidentally… lives in California) and her marriage to a lovely young lady, a marriage for which I am very happy for them both. Yes, gentle reader; I did say HER marriage to a young LADY, and that I am HAPPY.
Now most of you who have read my blog before know that I am LDS (a Mormon) and …somewhat… of a conservative Christian. But, my cousin’s marriage hasn’t bothered me at all… going against all stereotypes of what the Christian right is supposed to think about the topic of gay marriage. Guess you can’t trust stereotypes of any kind… hu.
This bothered me for some reason, it shouldn’t have, but it did. And I thought that… well, maybe I wasn’t living my religion. Or maybe… I needed to go confess something to my bishop, I’m not sure what, but something. I mean, as a (somewhat) conservative Christian, I should be condemning the marriage… right?
Well, I found out why I’m not bugged about her marriage, and why I shouldn’t be bugged…

Continue reading here.

-Bob