"This is a remake of the homosexual agenda. It’s not about protecting children. It is an attack on the traditional family. It undermines traditional marriage structure that we need to keep strong and sacred." - Senator Scott Renfroe (R-Evans)
From the Denver Post:
But several Republicans argued that voters already have spoken on the issue - when they rejected Referendum I in the last election.
The referendum would have recognized same-sex unions and granted couples the same legal rights as married couples.
"That's not a policy that they want in the state of Colorado," said Sen. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch.
Sen. David Schultheis, R-Colorado Springs, said he was "appalled" lawmakers would try to push the legislation after Referendum I failed. The bill ignores "what is in the best interest of a child, which to me is a mother and a dad," he said.
But Veiga countered that her legislation is not about "whether you should have gay relationships" but about protecting children.
Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, kicked up another round of debate when he said the bill was about "unconditional love and people joining together to raise children."
"Children do well when they are loved," he said.
Romer's comments prompted Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, to tell him his "eloquent argument turned around and bit itself in the behind."
Mitchell called it "nonsense" that lawmakers could legislate love. "That's beyond the power of the legislature," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment