Join or donate

Resources and Information

TIA-CO POSITION STATEMENT ON REF. I

The TIA-CO Board voted at the April 19th, 2006 Board Meeting to support the Domestic Partnership Referendum (Referendum I, formerly HB 06-1344) and to oppose the Colorado Marriage Amendment.   The following statement gives the rationale for this position.

Societies have a legitimate interest in promoting stable and healthy family units, because they are an important factor in a stable and healthy society.  Therefore, societies are justified in providing benefits and encouraging responsibility for people in familial relationships.   Part of the job of government is determining what constitutes a family as far as those benefits and responsibilities are concerned, as well as what those benefits and responsibilities should be.

Throughout history and across cultures, there have been many different ways of recognizing and acknowledging what constitutes a family.  The idea that there is one model of a family that has been universally recognized is simply untenable.  In modern Western society over the last few centuries, the model of marriage of one man and one woman has indeed become the norm.  However, we have learned in more recent years that this model does not adequately or justly include many people whose affectional preference or orientation is for another person of the same gender.  These people have been excluded and discriminated against by the laws and cultural norms of society.  We have also learned that this exclusion and discrimination is unjust and without merit, because such persons are every bit as capable of being a family and contributing to a stable and healthy society in every way as are heterosexual persons.

Yet, the impetus for this discrimination and exclusion persists, largely on religious grounds.  Religious conservatives insist that their religious texts and traditions prohibit homosexual relationships, and that society must therefore likewise prohibit them, or at least refrain from sanctioning them.  However, in the United States, which has religious freedom and separation of institutions of religion and government, laws which enshrine a particular religion’s doctrine into law simply on the basis of revealed religion are patently unconstitutional.  Arguments to prohibit sanctioning of same-gender relationships must be able to show that society possesses a compelling, rational reason to do so, and we remain unconvinced by such arguments as have been advanced along those lines. 

As people of faith, we acknowledge that religious communities, as well as government, do play a significant role in the nurturing of families; however, religious communities do not agree as to the basis or the nature of sacramental marriage.   We insist that religious communities need to retain their freedom to determine for themselves which familial relationships they choose to bless or solemnize according to their doctrine and traditions, without government involvement or interference. If marriage is indeed a sacred institution, then government has no business defining marriage, because it has no business determining what is sacred.  

For these reasons, the Interfaith Alliance of Colorado endorses the Domestic Partnership referred ballot measure, which extends to same-gender couples many of the same rights and privileges accorded to heterosexual couples, and opposes the initiated Colorado Marriage Amendment, which would define marriage in Colorado as the union of one man and one woman.  The Interfaith Alliance of Colorado further urges its members and the citizens of Colorado to vote accordingly in the Nov. 2006 state election.

What does Referendum I do?
Referendum I does NOT authorize gay marriage.  It simply creates a binding, legal contract for committed couples who are currently denied the protections that other couples enjoy. Referendum I provides the most basic legal rights and responsibilities, such as hospital visitation, freedom to make end-of-life decisions and the ability to transfer and inherit property.

Why is Referendum I needed?
Our laws are broken. Today, thousands of committed couples lack basic legal protections and responsibilities. These couples are not guaranteed the right to see each other in the hospital, direct nursing home care or make funeral arrangements for each other. And there is no provision in the law enforcing child support payments. Referendum I would bind these couples to their commitments and hold them accountable to one another and their children.

How is this different than marriage?
Colorado law already defines marriage as being between one man and one woman.  Referendum I simply creates a binding, legal contract that defines the responsibilities and protections for committed same sex couples - more like a will than a marriage. More than 1,100 rights guaranteed to married couples by federal law will remain off-limits to same-sex couples. Under Referendum I, same-sex couples will not receive any tax benefits or Social Security arrangements and the relationship will not be recognized by other states.

Does Referendum I undermine marriage?
No way. Referendum I is not marriage, it’s not similar to marriage, and it does not affect anyone who is married. Referendum I does not diminish the benefits granted to married couples nor does it discourage anyone from getting married.

Who is eligible for the benefits and protections granted by Referendum I?
Any couple in Colorado in a committed, same-sex relationship, where both partners are at least 18 years old and not married or in another Domestic Partnership.

Would other states recognize contracts created under Referendum I?
No. One of the major differences between marriage and Domestic Partnership is that other states would NOT be required to recognize couples who register in Colorado.

Would Referendum I affect my church in any way?
Absolutely not. Referendum I merely creates legal contracts that will be obtained at county courthouses. The referendum expressly protects religious freedom.

What if voters approve a constitutional ban on gay marriage?
Because Referendum I creates only civil contracts and not gay marriage, the ban does not affect the referendum.