ACLU fights for Mich. partner benefits - Yahoo! News
Fingers crossed. Although I wonder what effect a strikedown of this admendment would be- it might serve to rile the bigots up even more, and once again this becomes a burning (non) issue.

Quick, pass another law against the gays!

Meanwhile, jobs keep leaving, the price of healthcare keeps going up, college gets more expensive, city budgets are strained to the max, gas prices, inflation....why cant people see that Republicans use this issue to avoid addressing all the others? Furthermore, why doesn't the Democratic Party point that fact out?

In a Michigan courtroom on Tuesday, the ACLU asked a judge to clarify the state's anti-gay constitutional amendment, "Proposal 2," and its affect on domestic partner benefits for gay and lesbian employees.

The provision, passed along with similar ones in 11 states in November of last year, states: "To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose."

After the measure passed, Gov. Jennifer Granholm put a hold on domestic partner provisions that were about to be added to state employment contracts. Granholm said that a court would have to determine whether the amendment allowed the state to offer such benefits.

In March, Attorney General Mike Cox wrote a 16-page opinion, at the request of Kalamazoo city officials, declaring that the language bars local governments from offering domestic partner benefits to same-sex couples. As a result of that legal memo, the city decided to stop its domestic partner program effective next Jan. 1.

The ACLU sued, naming Granholm and Kalamazoo, on behalf of 21 same-sex couples seeking either to retain, or to obtain, domestic partner benefits. But last month, Granholm notified the court that she agreed with the ACLU's interpretation of the amendment, and as such, needed a new attorney.

Attorney General Cox, in turn, petitioned to be named as a defendant in order to make the case for his personal view of the amendment. Now, both Granholm and Cox are using lawyers from the Michigan attorney general's office, where they have erected a firewall in order to keep their legal work separate.

I've heard rumors that DeVos plans to use this in the campaign next year- I hope that the Michigan Democratic Party can find a way to turn the framing on this issue around and use it to our advantage. The issues I've listed above should be far more important to the majority of Michiganders- all it takes is someone (Jennifer?- Don't let me down!) to speak up and make it clear.