Dueling Rallies On Constitutional Convention
by Christine Stuart | September 29, 2008 12:26 AM
Posted to Election 2008
| State Capitol
On the south lawn of the state Capitol more than 50 people rallied against convening a Constitutional Convention, while thousands gathered on the north side of the Capitol in support of a convention, with the ultimate goal of banning gay marriage in the state.
More than 2,000 people traveled to Hartford Sunday to let lawmakers and judges know they are opposed to gay marriage.
“We are here today to send a message to the court to say, ‘Hands off marriage, let the people decide’,” Peter Wolfgang, executive director of The Family Institute of Connecticut, said.
The state Supreme Court heard arguments in a marriage equality lawsuit filed by eight same-sex couples 16 months ago and has yet to issue a decision. Lawmakers postponed voting on a marriage equality bill in 2007 because the court was expected to make a decision on the matter.
Wolfgang said while the delay is not unprecedented many suspect, “the court is deliberately delaying its ruling until after the election.” He said his supporters are not going to wait until after the election to take action. He said the question of whether or not the state should hold a Constitutional Convention comes every 20 years.
Wolfgang and his supporters see “this as our one shot to take back self-governance and let the people decide.”
The Family Institute of Connecticut is just one of the groups hoping to use the Constitutional Convention as a way to get ballot initiatives and referendums on issues like same-sex marriage onto future ballots as a way to let the masses decide public policy in the state.
The Connecticut Civil Rights Defense Coalition, which was formed two weeks ago, is urging voters not to convene a Constitutional Convention. The group sees ballot initiative and referendum, a possible outcome of the convention, as a tool for special interest groups to destroy civil rights currently protected by the constitution.
Jerimarie Liesegang said “We do need a way to directly petition our government, but this is not the vehicle.”
Frank O’Gorman, from the group People of Faith CT, said, “Human rights are not up for popular vote.” He said the group was gathered Sunday to say, “Hands off the constitution.”
LaResse Harvey, of A Better Way Foundation, said ballot initiative and referendum could take away hard fought civil liberties. While holding her grandson in her arms, she said he’s cute now, but by third or fourth grade they will fear him because he will be a Black man. “Today he has some rights, let’s make sure he keeps his rights,” Harvey said.
Harvey, who is training to become a minister, said her Bible teaches her that Jesus loves everybody and accepts everybody, which makes it hard to understand how ministers and people of faith could speak against a specific group of people.
Bishop Jeremiah Torres from the Restoration House in Hartford said “We need to bring America back to its true values.”
“We love every human being in the world, but we don’t approve of the lifestyles some have chosen,” he said. “Where are the rights for church folks?”
In an emailed statement Anne Stanback, executive director of Loves Makes a Family, a said, “A majority of Connecticut voters support marriage for gay and lesbian couples because they believe we should do everything we can to help these couples take care of each other.”
“The Family Institute of Connecticut is simply out of touch with what the average Connecticut citizen believes,” she said. “Fortunately, the intolerant message of today’s rally represents a minority view that is continually shrinking.”
Father Christopher Leighton from St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Darien said while it’s popular to say love makes a family, “it’s god that makes a family.”
“Marriage is a gift from God and it is God who makes a family,” he said.
Click the play arrow below to listen to Pastor George Chien from the Metropolitan Community Church in Hartford talk about religious freedom and why he doesn’t support a Constitutional Convention.
Comments (12)
Posted by: Ned | September 29, 2008 11:41 AM
"family" institute of Connecticut = scary bigots. Also, religion is stupid, religious people are superstitious idiots - get over it.
Posted by: Ned | September 29, 2008 11:44 AM
Is the fat queen, with the beard, in the blue dress, doing his rendition of "Devil with the blue dress on"?
Posted by: Evan Ravitz | September 29, 2008 2:00 PM
I'm sorry that gays have been targeted by intolerant abusers of the initiative process. But don't throw out the baby with the bathwater!
Here in Colorado, my gay friend Jared Polis won the Democratic primary forCongress (http://polisforcongress.com), and was the single greatest force turning Colorado from "red" to "blue" since 2000. He's used his wealth to fund Dem campaigns, but also to sponsor 2 very successful ballot initiatives, Colorado Amendments 23 (raising school funding) and 41 (preventing lobbyists from giving "gifts" to legislators). He joined in sponsoring 37, which mandates renewables for electric companies.
Ballot initiatives are the origin of most reforms, such as women's suffrage (passed in 13 states before Congress went along), direct election of Senators (in 4 states), publicly financed elections (passed by initiative in 6 of 7 states with them), medical marijuana (in 8 of 13 states) and increasing minimum wages (in all 6 states that tried in 2006). See http://Vote.org/initiatives for more examples and references. The media have seized on the problem initiatives. They generally kiss up to politicians.
Jared also supports NATIONAL ballot initiatives, with which we could stop the Feds from abridging medical marijuana rights, stop illegal wars, torture, etc., and get national health care, which Congress has dithered over since the '40s, while all other 1st world countries got it.
Voters on initiatives need what legislators get: public hearings, expert testimony, amendments, reports, etc. The best project for better and national initiatives is the National Initiative for Democracy, led by former Sen. Mike Gravel: http://Vote.org.
Posted by: frank o'gorman | September 29, 2008 8:51 PM
The Rights of Women, African-Americans, Latinos, Immigrants, People Living in Poverty, Public Employees, Ex-Offenders, Transgender, Bisexual, Lesbian, and Gay people would likely All be Under Attack if Ballot Initiatives come to Connecticut.
A Partial List of What's At Stake Under Ballot Initiatives:
Abortion Rights
Emergency Contraception for Rape Victims
Affirmative Action
Anti-Poverty Programs
Judicial Discretion in Sentencing
Public Education Funding
Comprehensive Sex Education
Human Rights to Housing & Employment for Transgender & Gender Non-conforming People
Healthcare, Social Services, & College Assistance for Immigrants
Collective Bargaining
Binding Arbitration
Healthcare & Retirement Benefits of Public Servants
Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions
Euthanasia
Posted by: Walt![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/nav-commenters.gif)
| September 30, 2008 7:16 AM
My guess is that I would disagree in whole or in part with O'Gorman on at least 3/4 of the issues in his list above,
Isn't it odd that, as in this case, the far out liberals who tout free speech usually also avidly fight against allowing free speech by those who disagree with them and against permitting them to comment or vote?
Seems hypocritical to me.
Posted by: Ned | September 30, 2008 7:59 AM
Walt, When do I get to approve your marriage? Are you a closet case? Why is your superstition privileged above all others? Why is it that the American version of the Taliban insist on having their version of Sharia law rammed down everyone's throats? Oh that's right, "god hates fags" yeah, now I get it.
Posted by: Walt![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/nav-commenters.gif)
| September 30, 2008 7:00 PM
Ned
You need some help, but I am not a psychiatrist.
There is not one word in my post about either marriage,closets,, privileges, the Taliban, superstition ,God, fags, or even Sharia law (whatever the hell that is), yet you seem mad at me about each.
Posted by: Ned | September 30, 2008 8:10 PM
Walt, thanks for your (non-professional) personality assessment. I don't see anyone limiting anyone's free speech - witness the hordes of christian jihadis, religious zealots and Ted Haggard wannabees massed at the capitol building, what an uninspiring crowd - really I'm surprised they weren't carrying torches and pitchforks... I would like to see a citizens' initiative become law in CT; however, it is disturbing and threatening to me, that, the only thing that some people apparently can get worked up about is persecuting their fellow citizens in the name of some lame, make believe sky daddy. It bears repeating that securely heterosexual men are not obsessed with, gay marriage, gay men or gay sex.
Posted by: Walt![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/nav-commenters.gif)
| October 1, 2008 11:56 AM
Ned
Really weird!!
You are the only one hooked on gay topics here including your really odd "fat queen" post above.
None of that stuff is mentioned in my posts.
You are hallucinating.. Get help.
Posted by: Fedupwithliberals | October 2, 2008 5:43 AM
WALT
Ned's not weird, he's just gay. As you know from previous postings, he can be rather insightful and witty on a whole range of topics, except this. My guess is that there are some personal issues with the Catholic faith at work.
NED
These ad hominem attacks on good people of faith will not further your cause in the least. Christians come in denominations other than Roman Catholic. While getting applause from the pink mafia with these outbursts, it offends people like me who tend to agree with your general position, but chafe at the inability to engage in meaningful argument without stooping to emotional hurtful attacks to shut down discourse. Same thing as playing the race card when you start losing an argument on the merits.
Like most people of the baby boom generation, I am torn by the recent push to create God in man's image and toss out thousands of year's worth of teachings and guidance just so that a small minority can be accomodated. Why bother going to church if the Bible is constantly corrupted? As in most recent social changes, I am tired of having the voice of the people overruled by activist judges who think they are smarter than us and know better. This is our way of righting a sinking ship and should not be dismissed.
Come back to the NHI where we understand you!
Posted by: Walt![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/nav-commenters.gif)
| October 2, 2008 7:19 AM
FEDUP
Well said.
Posted by: Kevin Routhier | November 4, 2008 2:46 AM
I am a college educated white male. I consider myself a Republican, but do not pay as much attention to politics as I probably should. I have read up on this issue, and in theory , it sounds like a good idea. Unfortunately, we do not live in theory and feel this this would predominately be used as a tool for special interest groups to enforce their beliefs on others. I am all for this idea of a const. convention, but I feel a vast majority of people that are interested in it's application to government are missing the true nature of its democratic meaning. Thoughts back are very welcome!!!