|
RUTLAND HERALD
Same-sex marriage
debate off to low-key start
By Daniel Barlow,
rutlandherald.com from the Web, August 27, 2007
MONTPELIER, Aug. 26 –- There
is a quote from an 1855 Senate report carved into a plaque at the Statehouse
that seems prophetic given the nature of the work that began there last
Thursday.
"Born of a resistance to arbitrary power -– her first voice a declaration of
equal rights of man –- how could her people be other than haters of slavery -–
how can they do less than sympathize with every human being and every community
which asserts the rights of all men to blessings like their own?"
Shortly after 10 a.m. on Aug. 23, eight members of the new Vermont Commission on
Family Recognition and Protection -– a legislative group formed to gauge the
public's reaction to the extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples -– met
in the room the quote is just outside of to begin its work.
But if the legislative discussions that led to Vermont's first-in-the-nation
civil union law in 2000 were a maelstrom of political energy, divisive dialogue
and heated debates, Thursday's session was a study in contrast.
Tom Little, the Shelburne Republican who meticulously shepherded the civil
unions law through the House seven years ago, convened the group's first meeting
with no grand statements on the topic and instead focused on the nuts and bolts
of organizing and chairing the committee.
Where there were crowds of opponents and supporters in the Statehouse in 2000,
on Thursday it was practically empty except for a small representation of the
state's press corps and a few tourists exploring Vermont's historic capitol.
"The thing that struck me was that if you removed the media, you would have left
a not quite full commission and about a half-dozen other people there," said
Allen Gilbert, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of
Vermont, who attended Thursday's meeting.
Gilbert said he expected the room -– the largest meeting area in the building
outside of the House chambers or cafeteria –- to be nearly full. But he
said, it was a summer day, and the committee was convening for organizational
purposes, not to deliberate on the issue.
In general though, there are reasons to think the debate could take a different
overall tone this time around. Gilbert said he remembered listening to
"heart-wrenching" legislative testimony on the radio during the civil union
debates in 2000 and being moved to tears.
So, while the first debate was spiked with "deep-seated emotions," this time
disputes over same sex marriage will raise constitutional issues. Gilbert
said questions will likely revolve around whether the protections of the 14th
Amendment -– the post-Civil War provision that requires states to provide equal
protection to all people under the law -– extends to same-sex couples.
"It was moving to listen to gay and lesbian Vermonters talk about feeling
invisible in our society," he said. "They had lived with their
invisibility all these years. But this will be a different kind of debate,
I think."
The low-key start this week is partly reflective of the man who is leading the
commission, according to Eric Davis, a political science professor at Middlebury
College and a close observer of Vermont politics.
Little, who stepped down as a state representative two years after the civil
union law passed, is known in political circles to be careful, methodical and
cordial, Davis said. His main profession as an attorney also lends to that
temperament, he added.
"This is Tom Little's style, and this is how he does things," Davis said.
"I wouldn't have expected anything else."
Beth Robinson, the chair of the Vermont Freedom to Marry Taskforce and an
attorney who argued the landmark 1999 court case that led to the civil union
legislation, wasn't surprised by the prevailing calm on Thursday.
Only a vocal minority strongly oppose the move, she said, while others either
support it or are ambivalent about the issue. "I think most Vermonters
don't have a problem with the two men or two women living next door to them
getting married and starting a family," Robinson said.
Robert Appel, the executive director of the Vermont Human Rights Commission who
attended Thursday's meeting, agreed that it is now "a different landscape than
it was seven years ago."
With other states allowing civil unions, and the state of Massachusetts
recognizing same-sex marriage, the attitudes of people have changed, Appel said.
Ever since the civil union law passed, the Human Rights Commission rarely
receives complaints from gays and lesbians regarding how they are treated.
"School harassment has been something we hear a lot about," he said. "But
we almost never receive complaints regarding the recognition of a civil union."
But that doesn't mean the upcoming public hearings the commission is slated to
hold across the state won't generate heat.
Two main groups opposing the committee –- Vermont Renewal and Take It To the
People –- held a press conference near the front doors of the Statehouse 30
minutes before the committee was scheduled to meet Thursday.
Stephen Cable, the president of Vermont Renewal, and Craig Bensen, the founder
of Take It To the People, outlined their opposition to the commission.
They pointed out that most of the commission members have publicly supported gay
marriage.
Instead of rallying like-minded Vermonters to testify before the committee,
Cable and Benson said they would boycott the public hearings because they
believe the members have already decided to endorse gay marriage.
Still, the two men said they would bring their supporters out if necessary.
"We are prepared to rally the troops," Cable said.
Davis said it is essential for the commission to hear from Vermonters who don't
hold strong opinions on gay marriage. Instead of relying on statewide
polls, Davis suggested that they ask a random sampling of Vermonters to talk
about the issue.
He also urged the commission to visit parts of the state where support for gay
marriage is marginal before they visit friendlier places such as Burlington or
Brattleboro.
Vocal gay marriage supporters and opponents will likely be the Vermonters
participating in the public hearings, said Appel, echoing comments during
Thursday's hearings. The difficulty will be getting the people in the
middle of the spectrum to speak out, he said.
"Two minutes of the pro and two minutes of the con will be real limiting at
these hearings," Appel said. "They need to hear from a broad spectrum of
people. And it's going to be hard to reach those people. But it's
always hard to reach those people."
Contact Daniel Barlow at
Daniel.Barlow@rutlandherald.com
|
