DES MOINES - If Iowa voters got the chance to weigh in on the marriage issue and decided to let stand a court decision legalizing same-sex marriage in Iowa, that outcome would not be the end of the issue, traditional marriage proponents said Tuesday.
Bryan English, spokesman for Iowa Family Policy Center Action, said, if given the chance, he is "quite convinced" the decision of Iowa voters on a proposed constitutional amendment would be similar to 31 other states that have affirmed marriage as only between one man and one woman.
However, he said, traditional marriage forces would look to other options in the event that Iowa voters rejected an effort to amend the state Constitution because the moral principles at play are "immovable."
"As a Christian organization, regardless of what happens, we would continue to articulate that homosexual activity is immoral behavior," English said in an interview. "Our calling is to clearly proclaim the truth in the public arena and, if the marriage amendment came to the people and failed, that would not change the foundational nature of the immorality of homosexual activity, so we would still be obligated to articulate that in the public arena."
State Rep. Rod Roberts, a five-term Carroll Republican seeking the 2010 GOP gubernatorial nomination, said he would take the same view. Although a vote of the people to let stand a controversial 2009 Iowa Supreme Court decision that legalized civil marriages for couples of the same gender would have a moral basis of law, he and others would continue to view it as an immoral premise and work to overturn it.
"The assumption is, and I agree with it, (the Iowa people) are going to vote to approve one-man, one-woman," Roberts said. "If they didn't, I, as governor, then would re-examine what could we do to address this issue again."
The issue surfaced Tuesday when English's group took Roberts to task for a statement he made to the Des Moines Register editorial board last week in which he said that a decision by Iowans to vote down a marriage amendment to the Iowa Constitution would carry the moral weight of law in the governmental arena.
"If the people of Iowa, with that opportunity, expressed themselves and expressed their will with a majority no vote, that's it," Roberts said during the newspaper meeting. He said Tuesday he was talking about process rather than the morality of the issue, adding that "all law has some moral basis for it. People will view it as acceptable or unacceptable. I would consider it immoral."
On Tuesday, Chuck Hurley, president of Iowa Family Policy Center Action, issued a statement calling on Roberts to publicly clarify his "clearly inaccurate" remarks, saying morality cannot be measured on a "sliding scale" that is redefined by political agenda, legislative actions or a vote of the people.
"Representative Roberts' viewpoint came across as one of surrender," Hurley said in his news release, adding that the Carroll Republican's statements "could be construed as a reflection of a seriously flawed worldview."
In a telephone interview, Roberts said he explained what he meant to Hurley's group when contacted and believed that the group's officials understood what he meant, but they chose later to send out a news release anyway. He said that he could not speak to the group's motives but that its affiliated political action committee has endorsed GOP gubernatorial rival Bob Vander Plaats of Sioux City.
"I certainly wouldn't be someone who just surrenders," said Roberts, in the event a fought-for public vote on a marriage amendment to the state constitution fell short at the ballot box.
"You'd acknowledge at that point that's the status quo, but it doesn't mean that you just give up or surrender," he added. "I don't think they would vote it down but, if they did, then you have to reassess what's the next step."
For a proposed constitutional amendment to come before voters, a resolution seeking the ballot issue would have to be approved in the exact same form by two consecutive Iowa general assemblies. The 84th General Assembly will be selected in the upcoming November election - all but 25 Senate seats will be contested in this fall's general election.
The earliest a marriage amendment could come before voters would be in 2013 by special election or as part of the 2014 general election ballot.
No comments:
Post a Comment