Ruzicka, others defend marriage amendment

Backers of a proposed state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage say it's a good measure, on solid legal ground, despite concerns raised last week by all three candidates for attorney general.

The candidates' statement opposed to the amendment, which will be on the ballot Nov. 2, centered on its second part, which would prevent granting any relationship besides marriage the "same or substantially equivalent legal effect as a marriage."

Utah Eagle Forum president Gayle Ruzicka on Monday called the arguments "flimsy" by Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, a Republican, and challengers Democrat Greg Skordas and Libertarian Andrew McCullough, that the amendment could deny basic rights to unmarried couples such as hospital visitation or inheritance.

"This is all just bogus," said Ruzicka, director of a still forming pro-amendment campaign. "Without the second part of the amendment, the first part would be compromised. You have to make sure we don't have any sort of same-sex marriage."

In defending his stand Monday, Shurtleff, who opposes same-sex marriage, said the amendment "will be challenged."

He pointed to Nebraska, where a constitutional amendment, passed in 2002, bans the recognition of same-sex marriage, civil union, domestic partnership or any "other similar same-sex relationship." It is under challenge in federal court by the American Civil Liberties Union, Citizens for Equal Protection Inc. and Nebraska Advocates for Justice and Equality.

Shurtleff said Nebraska's amendment is the only one of five such state amendments enacted so far that goes beyond defining marriage.

Tamara Lange, staff attorney with the ACLU's Lesbian and Gay Rights Project, said the Nebraska marriage amendment "took off the table every type of protection" for gay and lesbian couples, by denying them the right to participating in the political process.

She referred to a state attorney general's opinion that proposed legislation that would have given a domestic partner the same rights as a surviving spouse to coordinate funeral and burial arrangements was not constitutional. The legislation was never introduced.

Nebraska Chief Deputy Attorney General Matt McNair said that legislation likely wouldn't pass muster because "they wanted the people to get benefits based on the status as same-sex couples. They can get all those benefits, just not as same-sex couples."

In Utah, Shurtleff said it's unclear how a state or federal judge would rule on the legality of such contracts.