Spirited Debate on Prop. 22

Offering moral and emotional arguments for banning recognition of same-sex marriage that have resonated with many voters, the Rev. Louis P. Sheldon received a skeptical hearing Tuesday in a roomful of law students.

At a Whittier Law School debate, Sheldon--chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, a national organization of more than 30,000 churches--argued the case for Proposition 22. His opponent was Irvine lawyer Jim Toledano, a former chairman of the Orange County Democratic Party.

The 14-word proposition on the March 7 state ballot, leading in polls of expected voters, would bar California from recognizing same-sex marriages--including those performed in other states. Although no state permits same-sex marriage, lawmakers in Vermont are debating the possibility.

In the lively debate, Sheldon premised his argument on everything from the Torah to theories on what causes homosexuality. He said no one is preventing gays and lesbians from forming relationships, but those unions should not be called marriages.

“Proposition 22 did not come about in any way, shape or form because of a mean spirit,” Sheldon said. “It’s a protection of marriage.”

The institution of marriage “is at a crossroads,” Sheldon said after the debate. “This is a defining moment for marriage. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. We want to keep it that way.”

Toledano said many arguments in favor of the initiative resemble those made decades ago against interracial marriage.

“Protect marriage from what?” he asked the crowd of about 150 students and faculty members attending the debate on the Costa Mesa campus. “This initiative has nothing to do with marriage. The purpose is to deny and devalue the relationships of people” on the basis of their sexual orientation, he said.

Both men raised concerns of government meddling in private affairs. Sheldon said proponents of Proposition 22 were forced to take the matter to voters because of proposals in some states to legalize same-sex marriage. And Toledano described the initiative as an improper attempt to give the government control of private relationships.

“Healthy people don’t care about other people’s sex lives,” Toledano said. “We should not be voting on the bedroom. We should not be voting on the relationships of other people.”

Toledano likened the struggle for same-sex marriage to other civil rights struggles--a notion Sheldon flatly rejected.

“Homosexuality is something you do,” he said. “It’s not something you are, like being black, Hispanic, Asian or being born handicapped.”

Among other questions, law students quizzed Sheldon on whether gay couples should not be allowed to enjoy some of the benefits of marriage, including hospital visitation and the right to inherit Social Security benefits. Some of those rights, he said, could be addressed through power-of-attorney agreements.