DENNIS DURBAND
Conservatives Debate Federal Marriage
Amendment With Homosexual Activists
Homosexual
activists enjoyed the home field advantage, but traditional marriage
advocates scored major points during a Jan. 13th KTAR Radio debate on the
proposed federal marriage amendment.
Len Munsil and Benjamin Bull, attorneys with conservative organizations
in Maricopa County, squared off against Bo Shuff, field organizer for
the homosexual activist organization, Human Rights Campaign, and Steve
May, a homosexual and former state legislator.
The forum was the David Leibowitz Show on KTAR Radio of Phoenix.
One microphone was not enough for the combatants during the hour-long
debate. There were times when each participant succeeded in making
coherent points, but there were numerous minutes in which five people
argued at the same time, creating the garble that has come to be
associated with conservative-liberal debates over the airwaves.
Leibowitz struggled to maintain control of the program, at times gave
up, and at other times regained the microphone when the combatants made
their points and ran out of wind.
Bull, chief counsel and constitutional law expert for the Alliance
Defense Fund, for the most part squared off with Shuff on points of
disagreement. Munsil, president of the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP),
did most of his verbal sparring with May, an old adversary from the
years when May served in the legislature and opposed CAP's
overtures for family-friendly policy. A liberal Republican, an
overconfident May lost his bid for re-election to the State House in the
2002 GOP primary. Just prior to and including election day, May left the
country, only to return to learn he'd become a former legislator.
Leibowitz leans left and had done past shows sympathetic to homosexual
causes.
Munsil led off with the argument that thousands of years of teaching has
conclusively demonstrated that marriage between a man and a woman is the
fundamental unit of society. The burden of proof, he said, is on the
other side to suggest it is not. "Marriage presents a better way to
raise children," Munsil said. "It's only been in the last few years that
there has there been an effort to re-define marriage. By
definition, it's between two genders. Gay marriage is about to be
imposed on us by the courts, and there has not been an uprising for this
from the people. We don't have any confidence in the courts that DOMAs
won't be overturned."
Shuff's counter argument was that marriage is a sacred institution; why
wouldn't we want to increase it by opening it up to homosexuals.
One of the big arguments coming from the leftists in this debate was the
fact that some conservatives oppose a federal marriage amendment. Shuff
pointed to former Cong. Bob Barr and former U.S. Sen. Alan Simpson as
examples. Hardly a conservative, Simpson serves on a
committee to mainstream homosexuality in the Republican Party. Barr is a
conservative who argues for states rights and who opposes the FMA.
Bull tore into Shuff's arguments and pointed to Utah, where
pro-polygamists are using the same arguments that homosexuals are now
repeating in support of homosexual marriage. "It's a slippery slope,"
Bull said. "Marriage is the bedrock of every successful society. Why not
marriage between a man and a dog? Marriage has always been and
must be between man and woman because it is necessary to produce
children. You don't want to tear down the institution of marriage.
You're deceiving people with a Trojan horse argument. You just need one
state to legalize it, and you're forcing all 50 states to accept it."
Bull said that homosexuals will be able to use the full faith and credit
clause to force states to recognize their Massachusetts
marriages.
Shuff denied that, and said that visitors to Massachusetts cannot get
marriage licenses in other states. But, he did admit, "it's the goal of
our organization to provide full marriage equality in all 50 states. Our
goal to create full marriage rights for homosexuals."
Bull shot back: "You're going to take this Massachusetts decision and
bring it to Arizona and all the states. You're saying 'don't mess with
the Constitution,' but you would say 'mess with the Constitution if it
meant homosexual marriage.' You're going to let a judge for
Massachusetts dictate what we have in Arizona?"
May and Munsil have done battle many times. May had written emails to
his legislative constituents accusing Munsil of spreading hate toward
him in the name of Christianity. I have personally seen some of these
emails. May has been the subject of CAP elerts since he often stood in
the way of conservative, pro-family legislation. One of the major points
of contention between them was the 2001 "archaic laws" debate in the
Arizona legislature in 2001. The legislature passed a law repealing a
state ban on cohabitation, bestiality and homosexuality. Despite
tremendous opposition from the public, liberal Gov. Jane
Hull signed it into law.
"Steve, during the "archaic laws" discussions we had, you told me you
opposed gay marriage," Munsil recalled. "Here we are today discussing
gay marriage."
May had at first insisted, "We're talking about (an Constitutional
amendment for) a word (marriage), and it's silly. Can I protect my
partner, pass along benefits, visit him in the hospital? What we have
here is a modern-day Taliban dictating what marriage is. A far-right
policy ploy, Len Munsil is using this issue to raise money for and
get candidates elected. You're hurting the children of gay parents. Most
people think it goes too far. All citizens should have the same rights."
Actually, most people do not think the FMA goes too far. Every national
poll conducted indicates opposition to same-sex marriage. The Center for
Arizona Policy is a 501c3 organization and does not endorse or support
candidates. It merely produces voter guides showing how candidates voted
or stand on social issues. As a legislator, May was often outside the
mainstream on social issues. All citizens do have the same rights: they
are all allowed to get married ... to
persons of the opposite gender, which is what marriage is.
Regarding the alleged hurting of children living in homes with same-sex
adults, research indicates that such boys and girls get into more
trouble in school, engage more frequently in drug and alcohol abuse,
suffer from depression at a higher rate and are more confused
about their own sexuality. The average homosexual relationship lasts 18
months, and infidelity is the norm in homosexual relationships. These
realities are hardly beneficial to children. Arizona organizations, such
as CAP and United Families International, which advocate for traditional
marriage on these grounds are only promoting
common sense policy that benefits governmental bodies, society and
children.
As Munsil said during the debate, "The social norm is a man and a woman.
What will stop it from being between a father and a daughter? Marriage
between a man and a woman provides benefits to society that homosexual
relationships can't."
Leibowitz took only one call during the debate, from Todd, a homosexual.
Apparently, that's fairness, according to Leibowitz.
"Hi, Bo, it's good to have you back in town again," Todd started off.
"It's time to repeal the Defense Of Marriage Act. Children of gay
families are being punished. We can't get joint custody."
Bull refuted the caller. "This is false," he said. "Estranged gays have
no obligation to children after a (relational) break-up."
Shuff was given the last word. Apparently, that's fairness, according to
Leibowitz. Most debates offer an equal amount of time for the participants.
Arizonans should be on the lookout. The Human Rights Campaign has begun
to air radio ads urging conservatives not to support the federal
marriage amendment. Nothing could make homosexual marriage advocates
happier than to see conservatives divide over the defense of traditional
marriage. Constitutional law expert Richard Wilkins says the Federal
Marriage Amendment (HJR 56) now before Congress will protect marriage.
Dennis Durband is publisher and editor
of The Arizona Conservative, and is also a freelance writer and
webmaster. The longtime newspaper editor serves as media watchdog for
The Arizona Conservative. He welcomes
reader submissions about
examples of liberal media bias among Arizona's media.
Dennis Durband's Archives:
A Glimpse of the Far
Left 'Suppressives'
Our Liberal
Brethren Find Religion
A Question for
Armchair Political Quarterbacks
Ten Big
Conservative Victories in 2004
Humanism,
Debauchery Bad in Iraq, A-OK in USA
Feel-Good
Diversity Group Recommends Matricula Cards for Gilbert
Humanist
Education, Your Tax Dollars and Instruction in Oral Sex
No, Sen.
Allen; Informed Consent Not About Your Re-Election Chances
Pssst ...
Conservatives Apparently Had a Bad Year
Arizona
Republic Nervous About Success of PAN
All Five
Major Daily Papers in Arizona Support Illegal Aliens, Border Invasion
