From Deseret News archives:

Marriage measure dividing Utah race

Matheson opposes amendment, and Huntsman backs it

Published: Monday, Aug. 23, 2004 11:46 p.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
Utah gubernatorial candidate Jon Huntsman Jr., a Republican, says he will vote for a "traditional marriage" amendment to the Utah Constitution this November and hopes it will pass.

Democratic candidate Scott Matheson Jr. says he stands with GOP Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and his own Democratic Party attorney general candidate Greg Skordas in opposing Amendment 3, adding that the issue is best solved through statutes, not a constitutional amendment.

In supporting the controversial amendment, Huntsman turns his back on legal advice given by his own party's sitting attorney general. Shurtleff and Skordas say the proposed amendment's language is flawed and Utahns should vote it down.

Huntsman told the Deseret Morning News Monday that should Utahns approve Amendment 3, as it is officially called on the ballot, he will work to pass complementary new laws that would allow "life partners" to have legal rights short of actually being married.

Huntsman calls this "reciprocal beneficiary" legislation — meaning that partners could enter into contracts, attend to the medical needs of their loved ones and so on. "Two people with mutual economic interests should have rights and privileges, such as visitation rights, medical decision-making."

Story continues below
Such legislation is needed, Huntsman said, even if Amendment 3 fails at the polls. "If I'm lucky enough to be elected governor, I'll be working with (the 2005) Legislature to see such laws enacted," he added.

Huntsman said in recent weeks — after Shurtleff, Skordas and Libertarian attorney general candidate Andrew McCullough all publicly opposed passage of Amendment 3 — he has talked with both backers and opponents of the measure, "legislators, those loosely affiliated with the issue and legal experts" to come up with what he believes is a reasonable approach: Pass the amendment now and then adopt new laws defining how the amendment is to be implemented.

Huntsman said that among others, he's personally talked with legal experts at Brigham Young University and the conservative Sutherland Institute in coming up with his "traditional marriage" strategy.

While opponents say the second part of Amendment 3 is a costly lawsuit waiting to happen — a lawsuit Utah may well lose in the federal courts — Huntsman says he's convinced that "we can have both — the amendment and new laws" that can stand up to court challenges.

"Nevada and Hawaii are working through this process now," Huntsman said. "And I believe we can do the same."

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

previousnext

Latest comments

Letters: Liberal because LDS

It's so absurd to say that taxes are the same as stealing. And you want...

What a bunch of crap. Why do you think that only Christian people shop...

George lost in rivalry hatefest

Why, because he spoke his heat? Because he told the truth? I take it when...

I don't get it. Permit and tag fees seem to always go up, but hunting days...

Do you really think foreign travel will be a thing of the past? Are you...

Blessed are the conservatives?

Liberal or byassed translations is why I took Biblical Greek courses. I have...

Jazz outrun Pacers

"Legend" thats you John....That would be a great trade better than any I can...

Higher school math requirements?

If you(r)kid is so smart, do you realize that any math class taken before the...

Jazz outrun Pacers

My first reaction to the uniforms was that the Jazz front office went nuts...

Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing

After reading a dozen or more of these comments the parable of the "Wheat and...

Advertisements