One side urged voters to use the ballot box to rein in “activist judges.”
The other warned against sanctioning discrimination in the state constitution.
The two sides in the same- sex-relationship debate traded familiar talking points Tuesday at an issues forum on the University of Denver campus.
Supporters and opponents addressed gay marriage, domestic partnerships and other measures on a jam-packed Nov. 7 ballot.
Amendment 43, which would cement a one-man, one-woman definition of marriage into the state constitution, would keep “activist judges” from tinkering with a crucial institution, argued Jeff Crank of Coloradans for Marriage.
The Rev. Phil Campbell of Colorado Clergy for Equality in Marriage countered that such discriminatory language doesn’t belong in the constitution and called the measure “a swipe against the judiciary.”
Crank and Campbell shared the stage at the Gates Concert Hall with advocates for and against Referendum I – the domestic partnership ballot measure that would grant some legal rights and responsibilities to registered same-sex couples.
Currently, those couples lack basic protections – such as hospital visitation and inheritance rights – already accorded married people, said Sean Duffy of Coloradans for Fairness.
The referendum is not on gay marriage, he said, but would fix state law to “deal with mundane but very important stuff that is denied to same-sex couples.”
Carrie Gordon Earll of Focus on the Family said Referendum I “sets up the legal equivalent of gay marriage.”
“It inserts into Colorado law that a spouse is equivalent to a domestic partner,” she said. “This is a major overhaul.”
But while the volatile same- sex issues kicked off the event, other ballot measures also produced both polite and combative debate.
Amendment 39, which some call the “65 percent solution” to education funding, would mandate that 65 cents of every education dollar be put into the classroom – as would Referendum J, which has a broader definition of instructional expenses.
In a civil, even friendly exchange, proponent Lee Kunz stressed the need to improve Colorado’s 47th-place national ranking on classroom funding, while opponent Adele Bravo, a Colorado teacher of the year from Louisville Elementary School, countered that such a plan could eliminate critical support staff and take away local control of funding.
The closest thing to fireworks came during the face-off over Amendment 44, which would legalize adult possession of up to an ounce of marijuana.
Supporter Mason Tvert of Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation repeatedly accused Colorado Attorney General John Suthers of misstating facts about marijuana use, employing scare tactics and opposing legalization of the drug to maintain federal funding.
Suthers chastised Tvert for “impugning my motives.” He said a marked decline in drug use over the past three decades proved the value of the drug war.
