Michigan Democrats urged to rescind call to repeal Marriage Protection Amendment
Nearly 60 percent of voters approved measure in 2004
LANSING — A co-author of Michigan’s Marriage Protection Amendment — overwhelmingly approved by voters two years ago as Proposal 2 — Monday urged state Democratic Party officials to rescind a newly-adopted party platform provision expressly calling for repeal of the amendment.
Delegates to last month’s Michigan Democratic Party convention approved a platform which stated: “We call for the repeal of 2004 Proposal 2 which adds discrimination to our State Constitution.” http://www.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=20122
Gary Glenn, Midland, president of the American Family Association of Michigan, in a letter e-mailed Monday to Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer, said the party’s new call for repeal of the voter-approved amendment “puts Democratic Party officials demonstrably and dramatically at odds with the values not only of Michigan voters overall, but with major elements of the Democratic Party’s own base.”
“By calling for repeal of the constitutional protection of one-man, one-woman marriage overwhelmingly approved by Michigan voters,” Glenn wrote, “you have allowed a tiny but very loud special interest group of homosexual activists to put the party on record with a slap in the face to the traditional family values shared by most rank-and-file Democrats, particularly African-Americans and union households.”
“On behalf of Michigan voters of all parties, but especially African-American and union households who so strongly supported constitutional protection of marriage between one man and one woman, we urge Michigan Democrats to take their party back from homosexual activist pressure groups and their allies who are now obviously steering the party in the wrong direction,” Glenn wrote.
Proposal 2, the 2004 ballot measure that amended Michigan’s constitution to reaffirm the definition of marriage as only between one man and one woman, was approved by 59 percent of general election voters in November 2004.
The full text of the amendment stated: Ã¢â‚¬Å“To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.Ã¢â‚¬?
African-Americans supported amendment
Glenn pointed to the Marriage Protection Amendment’s approval in 2004 by voters in heavily African-American population centers; for example, by 51 percent of the vote in the city of Saginaw, 52 percent in the city limits of Detroit and Flint, 57 percent in Muskegon, and 67 percent in Benton Harbor.
He also cited a Detroit Free Press report the day after the November 2004 general election detailing an exit poll of 2,343 Michigan voters that found the amendment was supported by 59 percent of all black voters in the state. (“Gay marriage ban easily wins in state,” by Dawson Bell, Detroit Free Press, November 3, 2004)
Union households supported amendment
Glenn also pointed to a Detroit News poll in mid-October 2004 which found that “two-thirds of union households support Proposal 2, identical to the level of support in nonunion households,” according to a statewide survey of 600 likely voters conducted by Mitchell Research & Communications, Inc. of East Lansing. (“Same-sex marriage ban likely to pass,” by Charlie Cain and Mark Hornbeck, Detroit News Lansing Bureau, October 22, 2004)
Democrats overall supported amendment
The same Detroit News survey found that 51 percent of Democrats overall were planning to vote in favor of the amendment. (Detroit News, Oct. 22, 2004)
The Michigan Democratic Party in 2004 remained neutral on the issue, acknowledging strong support for protecting one-man, one-woman marriage among traditionally Democratic constituencies.
However, in this week’s issue of Between the Lines, a homosexual activist newsweekly in the Detroit area, activists praised an element of the Democratic Party’s new 2006 platform that had not previously been reported by the news media.
“Obviously, on the Proposal 2 issue, the party has much better hindsight than they did foresight; it’s regrettable that the party did not weigh in on Proposal 2 (in 2004), but I’m glad the party wants it gone,” said Sean Kosofsky, a member of both the Democratic Party and of Triangle Pride PAC’s elections committee. “Calling for the repeal of Proposal 2 is a bold move that we need to unify our state.”
Glenn disagreed. “Michigan voters have already spoken with a strong united voice, and they said they want one-man, one-woman marriage constitutionally protected from homosexual activists and their political agenda.”
Glenn first called for a Marriage Protection Amendment in June 2003 following an Ontario court ruling that legalized so-called homosexual “marriage” just across Michigan’s border. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/19/world/main559437.shtml
After falling short of receiving the required two-thirds vote in the Legislature, the amendment appeared on the 2004 ballot after supporters near-miraculously gathered nearly half a million signatures in less than three months with volunteer petition circulators.
In 2004, the Michigan Republican Party in convention overwhelmingly adopted a resolution endorsing the Marriage Protection Amendment, by a vote of 1,259 to 40.