|
(Boise, Idaho) Tony Edmondson is a private
person who sticks close to home. He never expected to stand up and describe his
personal life to dozens of strangers.
But Edmondson traveled to the Idaho Statehouse
from his home in Weiser Thursday to speak out against HJR002, a proposed
constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage in Idaho. He wanted members
of the House State Affairs Committee to know what kind of people their vote
would effect.
“I’m not a TV character or pedophile,” said
Edmondson, a medical office manager who has been with his male partner — a
Vietnam War combat veteran — for 35 years.
“I am, in fact, more like you,” he said.
“Frankly, I’d rather visit with you about our collection of old cars or
simply complain about our property taxes. Instead, I’m compelled to focus on
matters of character.”
The committee heard testimony from 38 people
before voting 13-4 in favor of the proposal. The measure must win approval from
two-thirds of the full House and Senate before it can go before voters on the
ballot next fall. It’s the third try for the amendment. Last year it was
defeated by the Senate and in 2004 it failed to make it out of committee.
Most of those who testified today said they
opposed the amendment, which would “provide that a marriage between a man and
a woman in the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in
this state.”
Donna Yule of Boise told the panel she has three
sons — two married, and one gay and in a committed relationship.
“The dumbest argument I’ve heard is from
those people who seem to think that somehow his loving relationship poses some
kind of threat to their own marriages,” Yule said.
But there were also plenty of people who told the
committee that approving the measure was vitally important to Idaho’s future.
While opponents say the measure’s not necessary
because state law already defines marriage as being between a man and a woman,
supporters say the amendment would prevent judges’ overturning that law.
“Amending the state constitution is necessary
because, unfortunately, judges in a few other states have shown a willingness to
redefine marriage as suits their whims,” said Clayton Cramer, a Boise software
engineer and writer. “Please make sure that the power to define marriage stays
where it belongs — with the people and their legislators.”
Many speakers said the Bible affirmed their views
against gay marriage.
“Normalcy is a man and a woman; God made us
that way,” said Katherine Frazier of Boise. “Now we’re seeing that
normalcy is supposed to include anything.”
Idaho is one of many states considering the
issue. According to the New York-based Lambda Legal, a gay rights organization,
18 of the 50 states have amended their constitutions to limit marriage to
male-female unions.
Washington state, where the Legislature recently
banned discrimination against gays, is awaiting a state Supreme Court decision
challenging its 1998 ban on gay marriage.
Massachusetts allows gays to marry; Vermont
allows gays to enter civil unions that give the partners most of the rights and
benefits of marriage.
But activists in many states are trying to impose
or strengthen gay marriage bans.
Idaho fits into that pattern, said Edmondson, a
first-time activist.
“It’s taken on a momentum,” he said of the
anti-gay-marriage movement. “It’s probably the right time for me to a be a
little more vocal, and to put a face on this issue.”
Edmondson, 54, a former city councilman and
county commissioner, thinks lawmakers will be more likely to vote against such a
ban if they know who it effects. He told the panel that when he confided to a
pastor 20 years ago that he was gay, the pastor recommended to Edmondson’s
employer that Edmondson be fired.
Edmondson’s still at that job.
“It really tested their view of God and what
God’s love was, and they rose to the challenge,” he said. “I’ll be
forever grateful.”
Rep. Steve Smylie, R-Boise, voted for the
proposed amendment.
“Things that were never discussed 20 years ago
are now the subject of a television series,” Smylie said in a prepared
statement. “Anyone who expresses discomfort is branded as ’closed minded’
or worse, a ’bigot.”’
Rep. Bob Ring, R-Caldwell, voted against it.
“Ten years ago I would have voted yes,” said
Ring, who is 70. “I’ve changed in my views of what the constitution is
about. I personally think the constitution should not be used for religious
prejudice.”
©365Gay.com 2006
|
Entertainment
