|
Monday, 28 January 2008 21:54
|
 Effects of Florida Marriage Protection Amendment
Anything But Straight
Wayne Besen
Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized. - Florida Marriage Protection Amendment.
Are you a heterosexual Floridian who is, as some might describe it, “living in sin”?
 If you and your other half are a gay or non-married straight couple and receive domestic partnership benefits either through a local registry or through your employer, those benefits might disappear if the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment is placed on the ballot this November and Floridians vote for it.
The constitutional amendment is supposedly designed to prevent any of Florida’s non-existent, pro-gay marriage activist judges from ruling against state law that already prohibits same-sex marriages or legal recognition of same-sex relationships “treated as marriage.”
However, the amendment goes much further than state law, since it was also designed to prohibit any relationship Florida courts may decide in the future is “the substantial equivalent” of marriage. Of course this phrase was added specifically to challenge the only “substantial equivalent” of marriage offered by a few cities and counties in Florida - domestic partnership registries.
The amendment’s backers claim they aren’t interested in challenging domestic partnerships, and they even used a Stetson University family law professor to opine that civil unions and domestic partnerships are not substantially equivalent to marriage. But then, what “substantial equivalent” of marriage are they trying to prohibit?
When Broward County’s domestic partnership registry was challenged several years ago, Florida’s 4th District Court of Appeals determined that domestic partnerships didn’t violate state law because they aren’t “relationships treated as marriages,” a ruling the Florida Supreme Court let stand.
But if the amendment passes, could Florida courts determine that domestic partnerships are the “substantial equivalent” of marriage? That’s certainly the hope of the amendment’s designers, who’d like to kill two birds with one amendment that reinforces Florida’s ban on same-sex marriages and can also be used to challenge domestic partnership registries, to prevent those “living in sin” from receiving any benefit for it.
What they’d like to see happen here is a reoccurrence of what happened in Michigan, which passed a constitutional amendment in 2004 banning same-sex marriages and “similar unions.”
Earlier this year, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that recognizing domestic partnerships “give same-sex domestic couples similar status to that of married couples,” so such couples were not entitled to health benefits from local and state governments or universities. Since the ruling, several public employers in Michigan have rescinded their domestic partner benefits.
Currently, conservatives are seeking signatures to challenge California’s domestic partnership law that gives all unmarried couples basic rights such as hospital visitation and making health care decisions. They got a judge to halt Oregon’s domestic partnership law from taking effect Jan. 1, which offers hospital visitation and inheritance rights. They oppose Arizona’s governor’s plan to provide domestic partnership benefits for state employees and retirees. And they’re pushing a bill in Kentucky that would prevent state agencies from offering unmarried couples domestic partnership benefits.
So, if the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment passes, will conservatives challenge domestic partnership registries and employer domestic partner benefits here in the Sunshine State? You can count on it.
If you’re “living in sin,” Florida’s moralists hope to place an amendment on November’s ballot that will challenge your rights. Don’t let them. Reject the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment.
|
Advertisements
