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.

Can we please stop calling it Amendment 3?

There is no such thing in the Utah Constitution as Amendment 3.

It's not there.

Look it up.

Back in 2004, it was called Amendment 3 to differentiate it from the other two amendments being proposed that year. In 2008, the amendments were lettered, not numbered.

However, the numbering was just for the purposes of election day.

Now, it's Article I, Section 29 of the Utah State Constitution.

Let's start calling it that, OK?

-Bob

A lesson on separation of powers for Senator Buttars

Senator Buttars has decided that Salt Lake City Mayor Ralph Becker's domestic-partnership registry violates the Utah Constitution.

This has his garments in such a twist that he wants to be a judge from the legislative branch. He has proposed SB 267 that would ban such registries.

Because if Senator Buttars says it's unconstitutional, it must be.

Who cares that it isn't his job to declare such things.

It's the job of the Judicial Branch.

Only the Supreme Court has the ability to declare laws unconstitutional.

-Bob