FRI 20 FEB 2004
Questions arise over Idaho same-sex marriage amendment
By Sam TaylorArgonaut Staff
A week after the State House of Representatives passed a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriages, 53-17, many UI students and faculty members are wondering why state lawmakers are focusing on such issues.
ASUI President Isaac Myhrum said he thought it was sad the Legislature had to “muddy the waters” at a time when UI has increasing budget concerns.
“I think it’s a waste of time because there are much more important issues they could be focusing on right now, like higher education,” Myhrum said.
The amendment would make marriage legal only between one man and one woman, and no other legal equivalent from any other jurisdiction would be recognized in the state.
While the majority of North Idaho representatives voted for the amendment, Moscow Rep. Shirley Ringo, who spent many years as a local schoolteacher, said the amendment was created because some legislators feel Idaho courts may act as Massachusetts courts did and rule there is no legal basis for banning same-sex marriages.
Ringo said that as a teacher she worked with many gifted young gay students, some who have left the area, and some who remain in Moscow.
“I would be delighted to have these young folks stay in our community, or return,” Ringo said. “If these young folks wish to establish a home with someone of the same sex, they should have the legal protections and benefits that should come with it.”
Raul Sanchez, special assistant to the president for diversity and human rights, who also holds a law degree from Harvard Law School, said that under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Idaho may have to recognize other states’ laws, regardless.
“The courts will probably have the final word,” Sanchez said. “It’s also a question of whether [the amendment] is discriminatory.”
Sanchez cited a past legal case in which Colorado legislators passed a constitutional amendment that prevented cities and local jurisdictions from passing nondiscrimination laws on the basis of sexual orientation. The amendment eventually was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“A lot of legal analysis will have to be done in Idaho,” Sanchez said.
While Sanchez addressed the legalities of the possible amendment, several UI students said they believe lawmakers should not prohibit gay couples from marrying.
Senior Pat Chigbrow said it was ridiculous to pass the amendment when the state already has laws making same-sex marriage illegal.
“[The legislators] are opposing religious morals on the general population,” Chigbrow said. “I don’t understand why people care about what people do in their own houses.”
Graduate student Alexis Held said the legislators should be focusing on more important issues rather than a same-sex marriage ban.
“I believe that somebody should be able to do what they want; homosexuals have rights like heterosexuals have rights,” Held said.
Myhrum said if gay students came to ASUI with concerns, it would support them.
“ASUI has probably the most progressive clause of equal rights on campus, and that’s something we completely support and would back no matter what,” Myhrum said.
The amendment is now in the Idaho Senate and is being considered by the Senate State Affairs Committee. If passed by the Senate, it will be voted on by the citizens of Idaho in November.
TODAY
Human Resource Development workshopAdministration Building, Room 217
9 a.m.
Borah Blockbuster Series:
“Kill Bill Vol. I”
SUB Borah Theater
7 and 9:30 p.m.
ASUI senate meeting
UITV-8 programming
8 p.m.
SATURDAY
Flute studio recitalSchool of Music Recital Hall
2 p.m.
Ê Borah Blockbuster Series:
“Kill Bill Vol. I”
SUB Borah Theater
7 and 9:30 p.m.
SUNDAY
Shades of BlackDance, music and rap performances
SUB Ballroom
6 p.m.
Faculty recital
Chris Thompson
School of Music Recital Hall
8 p.m.
MONDAY
Art exhibitAlbum covers of the 1940s and ’50s
Prichard Art Gallery
8 a.m.
UI Argonaut, 301 Student Union, Moscow, ID 83844
Argonaut: 208.885.7845 Advertising: 208.885.5780