The New York Times

Friday, February 25, 2000

Initiative on March 7 Ballot to Sanction Only 2-Sex Marriage Roils California

By EVELYN NIEVES

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 24 -- Its proponents call it the "California Protection of Marriage Initiative," a way to prevent gay and lesbian couples from marrying in another state, then moving to California and asking that their unions be ruled valid here.

Its opponents call it the most dangerously loaded 14-word sentence to find its way onto a state ballot: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

The initiative, Proposition 22, the most controversial and widely watched ballot measure California voters will decide on come March 7, has pitted Mormon and Roman Catholic groups who are campaigning for its passage against Protestant and Jewish leaders who have come out against it, evoked impassioned debates in both conservative Republican and Democratic Party ranks and raised one overriding question: Just what does it mean?

Proposition 22, also known as the Knight Initiative for its author, State Senator William J. Knight, a Republican from Palmdale (north of Los Angeles) who has tried unsuccessfully to pass laws against same-sex marriage in the state Legislature and whose own son is gay, assumes that one day, gay unions will be recognized somewhere in this country.

"This simply closes a loophole so that we don't have to recognize marriage from another state with a definition different from our own," said Robert Glazier, of the Yes on Knight campaign. (The "loophole" is this: Since 1872, California has followed a policy of recognizing all marriages, wherever contracted, even if the couple could not marry in California.) "It's a way we can protect the right to determine for ourselves how we will define the institution of marriage in our state, which we feel should be between men and women."

But opponents say Proposition 22 is a wolf in sheep's clothing. No other state is close to legalizing same-sex unions -- Vermont is considering "domestic partnership" rights -- and only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Thirty other states have passed definition-of-marriage laws, including Hawaii and Alaska, which did so through ballot initiatives. But California's measure is the first to ask voters to define marriage when no legislation or court case is pending that might alter the existing definition. That, opponents say, makes the measure suspect.

"At its best, Prop. 22 is unnecessary," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and a co-chairwoman of the No on Knight campaign, both based in San Francisco. "Given that there is no state in which lesbian or gay couples can marry and there's no imminent possibility of that happening, you have to ask yourself what's really going on here. Other states have used similar statutes as justification to roll back, block or repeal domestic partner protections or other civil rights for gay and lesbian families."

In Idaho, for example, a judge refused to allow a lesbian to adopt her partner's child strictly because of that state's enactment of a law similar to the Knight initiative.

Although Proposition 22 has not become a subject of much debate for the presidential contenders vying for votes in the March 7 primary, both sides expect the issue to receive a high profile in the next two weeks. Among the candidates, support is split along party lines. The initiative, which has been endorsed by the California Republican Party, was endorsed today by Senator John McCain of Arizona, and was previously endorsed by Alan Keyes.

A spokeswoman for the campaign of Gov. George W. Bush of Texas said Mr. Bush did not interfere with states' issues, but thought marriage should be between a man and a woman. Vice President Al Gore and Senator Bill Bradley join with the state's highest-ranking Democrat, Gov. Gray Davis, in opposing the proposition.

Some prominent Republicans also oppose the measure. Those include Ward Connerly, the former University of California regent who wrote California's Proposition 209, banning affirmative action, and Brian Perry, former head of the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay Republicans.

"What Republicans against 22 stand for is a true conservative ideology, which says government should stay out of my wallet, off my back and away from my bedroom," he Mr. Perry said. "I don't think the issue is playing out as a partisan issue. It's more of an individual issue and neither party is uniformly for or opposed to 22."

In a Field Poll conducted this month, voters favored Proposition 22 by 52 percent to 39 percent. The Yes on Knight campaign, which has placed advertisements on Spanish-language television that show a Mexican couple in a flowery wedding, said that Latino voters supported the measure by 70 percent.

"There are three reasons why Latinos will vote yes on 22," said Julio Calderon, co-chairman of the Yes on 22 campaign. "Tradition, tradition, tradition. The conservative streak has always been there in the Latino community, and the more conservative the initiative, the more support it enjoys."

"Although Latino leaders are against 22," Mr. Calderon said, "the rank and file are for it, and it crosses Democratic and Republican lines."

But Dr. Ignacio Castuera, pastor of the Community United Methodist Church in Pacific Palisades, and an opponent of Proposition 22, said that support was a "knee-jerk reaction."

"The fact that the Roman Catholic Church has supported 22 -- about 97 percent of the Latinos go, 'Yes, yes, whatever the church says,' " Dr. Castuera said.

Some opponents of Proposition 22 have suggested that Mr. Knight wrote the initiative in a raw public display of his private struggle with his son David's homosexuality. But David Knight, 38, a cabinetmaker in Baltimore who has become a reluctant campaigner for same-sex unions, said he believed that his father was acting out of personal conviction.

"He's got a view of what he thinks marriage and family and what's being taught in school should be," David Knight said on Wednesday in a telephone news conference. "He's doing what he really honestly believes."

Senator Knight, who has kept a low profile on the measure, released a statement on Wednesday condemning the anti-Proposition 22 forces "who should be ashamed of themselves for exploiting a private family matter for political gain."

David Knight said that his father did not understand that gay unions were indeed a personal, private matter. "I believe in gay marriage," said David Knight, who has been with the same person for six years.

Proposition 22 has galvanized disparate gay and lesbian groups and persuaded Rachel Pray, 34, and her partner, Laura Weinstock, 40, both writers, to open their home and lives to reporters for scrutiny. The San Francisco couple have been together for nine years (they were "married" in a symbolic Jewish ceremony six years ago) and are raising a 2 1/2-year-old daughter, Talia.

They say that although they own a house together, have joint bank accounts and are equally sharing the responsibilities of parenthood, they can not enjoy the benefits of society's most revered institution. "What I don't understand," Ms. Weinstock said, "is what are people scared of?"