(2/7/2006)

Focus on the Family's Dr. James Dobson Supporting Domestic Partner Bill?

Colorado SB 166 would streamline rights primarily reserved for married couples

By Bob Ellis

Dakota Voice

Yesterday, Dr. Paul Cameron, Chairman of the Family Research Institute in Colorado, condemned Dr. James Dobson’s endorsement of Colorado SB 166, a bill sponsored by state Senator Shawn Mitchell.

SB 166, entitled “Concerning Reciprocal Beneficiary Agreements,” would extend the “rights and related responsibilities” of unmarried couples. The bill enumerates emergency and non-emergency medical care, decision making for terminal care and organ donation, funeral arrangements and property. The bill would grant many of the legal rights that are already available to unmarried people, but are automatic only for married partners.

A key aspect of SB 166 which Dr. Cameron finds troubling specifies that in order to be recognized as “reciprocal beneficiaries,” the couple “are excluded from marrying each other under the marriage laws” of Colorado. It also recognizes domestic partnerships formed in other states.

Dr. Cameron told Dakota Voice that this bill is intended primarily for homosexual relationships. “They have access to many of these rights already through other legal means. This bill is just saying, ‘We’re going to make it easy.’”

Cameron says SB 166 streamlines the legal benefits normally obtained through power of attorney and other legal measures, down to a simple form. “They just sign a piece of paper and it’s done. They can also undo this relationship simply by signing a piece of paper.” Cameron calls it the “gay marriage lite” bill.

Dr. Cameron says he has not talked with Dr. Dobson about this, and said while the two have frequently been on the same side of the issue of homosexuality, they don’t normally interact with each other.

Jim Pfaff, a state policy analyst for Focus on the Family, said that Dr. Dobson supports SB 166 because it is a sound alternative to a constitutional amendment the Colorado legislature is trying to pass, which would provide full-blown marital rights for homosexuals. He said 166 is definitely not designed specifically for homosexuals, instead providing the same benefits for everyone.

According to Pfaff, the Colorado legislature has attempted to pass special rights legislation for homosexuals in the past, but Republican Governor Bill Owens has always vetoed previous measures. The proposed amendment to Colorado’s constitution could bypass the governor and take the measure directly to the voters in November.

Pfaff said the amendment sought by the Democrat-controlled legislature is discriminatory because it seeks to provide special rights for one specific group of people. “Senator Mitchell’s bill is not premised on sexual behavior,” Pfaff said, but provides benefits for all people.

Pfaff provided the example of a widow who had her sister-in-law move in with her to help her raise her children, who were now fatherless. SB 166 would allow the widow to bestow rights and responsibilities upon the assisting sister-in-law who was now acting in a capacity which promoted the well-being of the family.

“There is no veiled language in the bill pertaining to homosexuals,” Pfaff said. Instead, the bill was created broadly to provide the same rights to everyone, rather than discriminating based on a certain behavior. “We believe this is good public policy. We look at the substance of a measure, and ask if it matches our principles.”

Pfaff strongly affirmed that Focus on the Family and Dr. James Dobson remain completely committed to the Federal Marriage Amendment. “We will never back down from the protection of marriage,” he told Dakota Voice.

Colorado Senator Mitchell, a Republican, did not answer two questions relating to homosexual issues in a 2004 Christian Coalition voter guide, but Pfaff said Mitchell has a strong pro-family record, “one of the best in the legislature.”

Robert Regier, Executive Director of the South Dakota Family Policy Council, gave his analysis of the Colorado bill.

“I prefer a public policy that recognizes that marriage and family are the bedrock of government,” Regier said. “As far as South Dakota goes, I like how our state places greater value on marital and familial relationships above others.”