as seen in ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
ann_arbor_ypsi
Feb. 8th, 2005 05:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
novapsycheSuit seeks to end same-sex benefits
As opponents of Proposal 2 predicted, the constitutional amendment approved by Michigan voters last November to define marriage is being used to challenge same-sex benefits provided to partners of gay public employees.
An existing lawsuit against Ann Arbor Public Schools is apparently going to be the test case.
The Ann Arbor-based Thomas More Law Center and 17 taxpayers are asking the Michigan Court of Appeals to stop the local school district from providing medical benefits to gay couples. In court papers, they cite the November constitutional amendment known as Proposal 2, which says the union between a man and a woman "shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose."
The lawsuit was filed in 2003, before Proposal 2 passed, but the Thomas More Law Center wants the constitutional amendment considered in its appeal.
Patrick Gillen, an attorney with the Ann Arbor-based Christian law group, said Proposal 2 prevents public employers from giving same-sex benefits because such a policy recognizes a relationship similar to marriage.
"It is akin to marriage," Gillen said Monday. "The Ann Arbor Public Schools can't recognize same-sex marriages by calling them domestic partnerships."
[...] "We continually come up against what we consider test cases filed by the Thomas More Law Center that take money away from our students," [Ann Arbor Public Schools' spokesperson Liz Margolis ] said. "I'm not sure what their objective is in this."
----
It's unfortunate that the language in the Proposal is so frickin' broad.
How this issue differs from the ethical considerations during the era of desegregation is beyond me. When African-American preachers deign "to speak for all Blacks" and say that Blacks don't support same-sex marriage or consider it a civil rights issue, they are being as irrational and short-sighted as the Dixiecrat whites of the '50s and '60s. It is the same issue with a different face. Bigotry is bigotry, no matter its specific incarnation.
As opponents of Proposal 2 predicted, the constitutional amendment approved by Michigan voters last November to define marriage is being used to challenge same-sex benefits provided to partners of gay public employees.
An existing lawsuit against Ann Arbor Public Schools is apparently going to be the test case.
The Ann Arbor-based Thomas More Law Center and 17 taxpayers are asking the Michigan Court of Appeals to stop the local school district from providing medical benefits to gay couples. In court papers, they cite the November constitutional amendment known as Proposal 2, which says the union between a man and a woman "shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose."
The lawsuit was filed in 2003, before Proposal 2 passed, but the Thomas More Law Center wants the constitutional amendment considered in its appeal.
Patrick Gillen, an attorney with the Ann Arbor-based Christian law group, said Proposal 2 prevents public employers from giving same-sex benefits because such a policy recognizes a relationship similar to marriage.
"It is akin to marriage," Gillen said Monday. "The Ann Arbor Public Schools can't recognize same-sex marriages by calling them domestic partnerships."
[...] "We continually come up against what we consider test cases filed by the Thomas More Law Center that take money away from our students," [Ann Arbor Public Schools' spokesperson Liz Margolis ] said. "I'm not sure what their objective is in this."
----
It's unfortunate that the language in the Proposal is so frickin' broad.
How this issue differs from the ethical considerations during the era of desegregation is beyond me. When African-American preachers deign "to speak for all Blacks" and say that Blacks don't support same-sex marriage or consider it a civil rights issue, they are being as irrational and short-sighted as the Dixiecrat whites of the '50s and '60s. It is the same issue with a different face. Bigotry is bigotry, no matter its specific incarnation.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-09 04:04 pm (UTC)