E-NEWSLETTER
Enter your e-mail address to receive Log Cabin’s e-newsletter Inclusion Wins.
Content
Lorence Wenke's Speech Against MI Constitutional Amendment
| In March 2004, Michigan State Representative Lorence Wenke voted against a discriminatory state constitutional amendment. The proposal aimed to prohibit civil marriage equality, civil unions and domestic partner benefits. Wenke voted against the proposal and gave this speech on the state house floor. |  |
'I am grateful for this opportunity to clarify my position on the proposed marriage protection amendment. Some individuals who have made no attempt to speak with me have misrepresented my stance. For more than 30 years I have been a husband and father and a business owner. I have spent eight years as a Kalamazoo county commissioner and have completed one year as a state representative. None of these experiences, either singularly or collectively, has received as much examination as my position on the marriage protection amendment.
"I do not support gay marriage. I do not endorse using the word marriage to define a relationship between members of the same sex. I do, however, support the creation and recognition of a legal arrangement between same sex couples. I am not alone in my conclusion as Governor Granholm and about half of all Americans favor civil unions for homosexuals. I cannot support the marriage protection amendment because the clear intent of this amendment is to discriminate against a specific segment of our population — that being gay men and women. This amendment will prevent same sex couples from forming a legal union and therefore deny them the same benefits granted to their heterosexual counterparts. I will not vote to discriminate against any group of citizens. The Constitution of Michigan should not be amended for the purpose of limiting access to equal rights.
"Proponents of this amendment sincerely believe they are protecting marriage from its current rapid decline as an integral element of our society. I respect their position. It has never been my intention to antagonize or preach to others on this issue. In fact, my focus in the legislature, as Chair of the House Tax Policy Committee, has been equitable taxation, employment and the economy. My position on this amendment, while unpopular with some, is a matter of conscience, research and a thorough examination of issues regarding homosexuality. I have also gleaned much information from acquaintances and friends who are gay — including my best childhood friend. Many families have homosexual members — most extended families do. Are we to believe these family members are less valued? Do they pose a threat to the family institution?
"I believe that homosexuality is a state that generally we do not choose. Same sex attraction is based in human biology. This is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church as well as the Christian Reformed Church in which I was raised. We do not choose our sexual preference when we attain the age of puberty. I ask, "Why would anyone choose to be gay when, in our society, that choice usually brings great heartache to the individual and his or her family?"
"People who have a religiously based position against homosexuality will have a difficult time acknowledging gay men and women as deserving of equal rights. The Constitution is not the place to implement discrimination against those with whom we have a religious difference. With good reason, our country has embraced the concept of separation of church and state. I will not remove a single brick from the wall that separates the church from the state.
"As a state representative, I have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the State of Michigan. That oath requires me to protect the rights of all citizens, including homosexuals. I believe homosexual partners are entitled to health benefits, social security benefits, and the protections afforded by estate planning. Amending the Constitution for the purpose of excluding specific groups of individuals is unacceptable. Prominent conservatives, including George Will, oppose gay marriage but still do not support amending the Constitution to deal with this issue. The Constitution should advance, preserve and protect the rights we cherish and not be used an instrument to withhold rights.
"I represent all the citizens of my district including homosexuals, and it is my responsibility to ensure justice and equality for all. I cannot walk out of the Capitol Building — where the American flag, a symbol of American freedom and justice waves overhead — having voted for an amendment that is clearly discriminatory."
|
|
