Kansans set to vote on gay marriage

OVERLAND PARK, Kan. -- In a state known for moderate politics and politicians, such as Dwight D. Eisenhower and Bob Dole, moderation has not defined the debate leading up to tomorrow's vote by Kansans on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

Many pastors in the state, who have pushed for the ban along with conservatives in the Legislature, have attached a sense of doomsday urgency to the referendum. Gay-rights activists say the proposal has exposed broad prejudice in Kansas, and legal analysts say the amendment would be among the most restrictive in the nation.

''I don't believe gays are interested in marriage," said Jerry Johnston, senior pastor at the First Family Church in this Kansas City suburb. ''I believe they are interested in advancing their agenda and using marriage to do that."

That ''agenda," Johnston said in an interview, includes increased political recognition and clout, promotion of homosexual lifestyles in the schools, and ''intimidation of the pulpit."

The amendment, which is expected to pass easily, would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman, but also deny ''the rights and incidents" of marriage to any other relationship, such as civil unions and domestic partnerships.

That wording, similar to language that was dropped last year from a failed congressional move to amend the US Constitution, worries same-sex couples who say they could lose health benefits, hospital-visitation rights, and the ability to enter contracts.

''This amendment is among the worst in the country," said David Smith, vice president for policy for the Human Rights Campaign, the largest gay-advocacy organization in the United States. ''Sadly, it has been driven by a deeply rooted, antigay prejudice. It's not a simple dispute about policy."

William Rich, a constitutional scholar at Washburn University in Topeka, agreed that the amendment is sweeping. ''We're putting ourselves at the extreme end of the spectrum," said Rich, who included Ohio, Michigan, and Nebraska in that group. Amendments adopted in those states ban civil unions as well as gay marriages.

The Kansas proposal has passed the state House and Senate by the required two-thirds majority and does not need the signature of Governor Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat who has questioned the need to amend the state constitution.

If the ban is approved, Kansas would become the 14th state to pass a constitutional ban against same-sex marriages since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's decision in 2003 that legalized such marriages.

Last week, before Motown legend Smokey Robinson spoke to First Family Church about his Christian conversion, Johnston described the amendment as nothing less than a means to preserve the nation's Christian destiny and ''send a message to the other nations of the Earth."

The amendment's supporters have found allies in many black churches. The Rev. William Owens, president of the national Coalition of African-American Pastors, told the First Family congregation last week that ''this world is upside-down. And with same-sex marriage, we're going to destroy this society that God gave us."

In a home near First Family Church, such talk alarms LeAnne Stowe and Karen Eskilson, who have been lesbian partners for 22 years and are raising two children. ''It's a little bit crazy to read the paper around here," said Stowe, 40, who left her job three years ago as marketing director for a software company to care for their children, a 7-year-old girl and 4-year-old boy.

''This has become an extremely divisive issue," Stowe said. ''If this were really about the people of Kansas saying they don't want to see two men or two women getting married, I don't have an issue with people having a different opinion."

Kansas has had a law since 1996 that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman. In addition, a pending legislative proposal to ban discrimination against gays and lesbians in the workplace, housing, and restaurants has drawn withering criticism from the coalition pushing to ban same-sex marriages.

The Rev. Bob Hanson, a Southern Baptist pastor in Topeka, said discrimination against homosexuals has never been ''proven" in Kansas. ''What I'm seeing is a knee-jerk reaction by a group who just wants legal recognition," said Hanson, executive director of One Voice of Kansas, a group opposing same-sex marriage.

Voter turnout is expected to be heavy tomorrow, following campaign spending that has been lopsided in favor of the amendment. According to Bruce Ney, a gay Republican lawyer who is state chairman for Kansans for Fairness, a group fighting the amendment, the proposal's backers have raised $120,000, compared with $31,000 for the opposition.

Before the House approved the amendment 86 to 37 in February, state Representative Tim Owens, an Overland Park Republican, called the measure discriminatory and predicted it probably would be overturned in the courts. ''When I was in the military they had an expression, 'Choose the hill you're willing to die on,' " Owens said at the time. ''I'm willing to die on this hill . . . because I think that this is that important."

But to many other legislators, the issue is not about discrimination, but about family and morality. ''Children need a mother and a father," state Representative Mike Kiegerl, an Olathe Republican, said before the final vote. ''They don't need two mothers."

To Ney and Stowe, Kansas generally has been a tolerant place for homosexuals to live. ''I've found people to be accepting and understanding," said Ney, who lives in the university city of Lawrence.

''It's not the first thing we tell people," Stowe said of her sexual orientation. ''But we've always been able to live our lives pretty openly." For Stowe, the amendment is about civil rights. If the proposal is approved, she speculated, a trust fund that the couple established for their children might be jeopardized.

Rich, the Washburn University professor, said he does not believe that the ''rights and incidents" phrasing would invalidate existing legal arrangements. However, he said, the language does pose ''extreme constitutional problems" because it would prevent gays and lesbians from petitioning the Legislature for equal treatment. Although many pastors argue that the amendment is an ''insurance policy" against activist judges, Rich said, ''it will be the judges whom we will be turning to" to sort out the legal challenges that he expects.

Ney predicted that ''we're going to die from a thousand splinters and paper cuts" from the appeals.

''This will be a sore on the constitution," Ney said. ''You take a group of people who go to work and pay their taxes, and you basically tell them they're going to be second-class citizens."

To Ney, who was raised in former senator Bob Dole's hometown of Russell, the issue's divisiveness is surprising. Kansas always seemed to be a consensus-seeking place, he said, despite its settlement by radical abolitionists from New England before the Civil War.

But the general tenor of public discourse, he said, ''has been moving to the extreme through these biblically driven, morally based issues. . . . As a moderate Republican, it's disturbing."

Rich said he expects that the amendment might crumble under constitutional scrutiny. When he made that comment, at a public forum on the amendment at Washburn University, Brad May and his 12-year-old son, Darwin, listened intently.

Earlier, May had headed to the forum by himself. But after he took a few steps out of the house, the Topeka father recalled, he did an about-face and told Darwin to tag along.

''You can do your homework anytime," May, 54, told his son. ''You need to get a social education."