U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
January 18, 2006 09:00 AM UTC

Gay Marriage Ban Weakens

  • 10 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Opponents of gay marriage have apparently reached agreement on a simpler version of language on a gay marriage ban, but the significance of this move cannot be overlooked. From The Denver Post:

A once-splintered coalition of conservative leaders has agreed to seek a constitutional ban on gay marriage in Colorado but does not plan to ask voters to outlaw domestic partnerships, according to those involved in the effort.

The group, calling itself Coloradans for Marriage, intends to back an amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman and go no further, said the Rev. Ted Haggard of Colorado Springs, president of the National Association of Evangelicals.

Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family, which first floated the idea of putting a gay-marriage ban on the November ballot, had pressed for a more sweeping measure that would also do away with domestic partnerships.

But Haggard said Tuesday that the main players have coalesced around the simpler language, which was supported by Haggard and the state’s Roman Catholic leadership.

“The amendment supports marriage but doesn’t stand against anything,” said Haggard, pastor of 12,000-member New Life Church, one of the state’s largest congregations. “We want to say marriage is something, and we also want to give the freedom for citizens or legislators if they want to give similar benefits to other people.”…

…Bob Loevy, a political-science professor at Colorado College, said supporters of the anti-gay- marriage amendment would be wise to keep it as basic as possible. He said he believes the measure will pass because Colorado’s electorate is much like the rest of the country and tilts Republican. “The simpler these things are, the more they can be sold on the basis of a simple, understandable phrase,” Loevy said.

Why is this important? Because Focus on the Family and other gay marriage opponents wanted to try to ban everything — not just gay marriage, but anything resembling domestic partnerships or same-sex couple benefits. What the decision to only go after gay marriage means is that they didn’t feel like they could pass something like that in Colorado…and it means that they think they will have a hard enough time passing a symbolic constitutional gay marriage ban (which is already illegal in Colorado anyway, under state statute). This concession that they cannot try to do an across-the-board ban is a victory for gay rights groups.

Tweet
Share

Comments

10 thoughts on “Gay Marriage Ban Weakens”

  1. These types of amendments around the country are hurtful to gay people, such as myself.  I think a lot of conservatives feel they are inappropriate as this is government overreaching into our personal lives and limited government includes limited government on social issues.  Liberals don’t want this either (for obvious reasons) and therefore you can end up with a coalition of libertarians and small-government conservatives teamed up with liberals against the religious right. 

    As everyone knows, gay marriage is not on the radar right now and isn’t legal both under state statute AND the Defense of Marraige Act signed by Bill Clinton.  Getting these referendums on the ballot is a ploy by republicans to galvanize their base and get them to the polls.  There was an article (can’t remember if it was here or somewhere else, you can slam me for not posting a link) that said that there is a push in Florida for a similar ballot measure and all the money funding that drive came from the state republican party.  I think it sucks when a group of people is pushing an issue just for political gain, and that is what the elites of the republican party (including Karl Rove) are doing here.

    Now, that being said, I must also say there has been some talk about the democrats having a minimum wage ballot initiative on the ballot this fall to bring out their base.  I’m not saying two wrongs make a right or to fight fire with fire, just trying to be ‘fair and balanced’ here.

  3. Thought that Sean Duffy’s comments were right on point in terms of the way Colorado views discrimination.  We hear Duffy is a nationally known conservative, and he’s probably cutting some big ties with longtime allies to do what’s right here.  He deserves a lot of credit for making this choice.

  5. “I think it sucks when a group of people is pushing an issue just for political gain, and that is what the elites of the republican party (including Karl Rove) are doing here.”

    ……….

    As opposed to Fitz Gerald & Plant, whose intentions aren’t at all political.

    Bridge for sale!  Bridge for sale!

    And Karl Rove is behind the Colorado legislature?  Wow, who knew?  The guy must NEVER sleep!

  7. Sure, Fitz-Gerald and Plant’s move is political; it’s specifically worded in a way that will split the anti-gay movement from libertarian conservatives even more than they already are.  This move won’t call out a significant number of additional voters (if you’re waiting for that kind of move from the Left, wait for the minimum wage issue to appear…).

    As opposed to the GOP use of gay rights and abortion issues, which surprisingly pop up in states where and when they think they need a bit of a boost to “the base”.

  8. Phoenix Rising – thanks for your post.  You seemed to articulate my point exactly how I wanted it said.  Great job – and right on the money!

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

67 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!