Today's paper | eEdition | Subscribe
The Truth-O-Meter
Latest print edition
St. Petersburg Times
Politics: State
Special report
  • Testing Grounds
    The latest industry being outsourced to India is clinical drug trials. And any number of tragic things can happen on the way to your medicine cabinet.
  • More special reports
Video report
  • Friday Night Rewind
    It doesn't matter which team you cheer for. We've got video previews of every high school football program in Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco and Hernando County.
  • More video reports
Multimedia report
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Your name Your email
Recipient email
You may enter up to 20 multiple email addresses, separated by commas.
Your message
Validation Code
Hear
validation
code
  Enter validation code

Hundreds in Tampa rally against gay marriage ban

By Chandra Broadwater, Times Staff Writer
In print: Monday, October 27, 2008


Social Bookmarking
Digg Facebook Stumbleupon
Reddit Del.icio.us Newsvine
ADVERTISEMENT
Loading Video...
Loading...

TAMPA — For Bobbie Hernandez, it's about knowing that her children would be taken care of if something were to happen to her.

It's knowing that the home the 35-year-old has with her partner, Shar Ishee, would still be there for the family.

"And if I were in the hospital or something like that, I'd want to know that she and the kids could come and visit me," Hernandez said.

But if Amendment 2, the proposed gay marriage ban, passes, the couple think their rights will be denied.

Along with about 200 Tampa Bay area residents, Hernandez and Ishee attended a Sunday afternoon rally against the ban at Lowry Park. Organized by more than a dozen interfaith leaders, the event also included civic, local and state government leaders.

Those who attended the rally sat on benches, at picnic tables or on blankets in the grass, enjoying the pleasant afternoon.

"Despite all of our differences, we are all united in our opposition to Amendment 2," said Abhi Janamanchi, minister of Unitarian Universalists of Clearwater, at the start of the rally. "It promotes division and fear, not equality and love."

The amendment would define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and would not recognize any other legal pairing.

Though Florida already has such a state law, supporters say the law could be overturned, as it was recently in Connecticut, or the Legislature could change it.

People against the constitutional change contend that the proposal will ban legal recognition and benefits for all unmarried couples, whether straight or gay. It could also adversely affect the state's large senior population, many of whom form domestic partnerships rather than remarry and risk losing benefits from previous marriages.

Those at Sunday's event also pointed to 2000 Census figures. They said Amendment 2 could affect 360,000 Florida residents, about 90 percent of whom are heterosexual.

Largo Mayor Pat Gerard told the crowd that it was time to stand up for "real family values" in the Tampa Bay community. She called the proposal an "intrusion" on her life and on the lives of everyone else who lives in the state.

When he spoke, state Rep. Bill Heller reminded residents that a ban on gay marriage already exists. The Democrat, running for re-election in District 52, said that the constitutional change would deny rights to many Florida citizens and allow "big government" to interfere.

"It says that it protects marriage, but it also denies the rights of people to make decisions important to them," Heller said. "We need to say no, emphatically, to Amendment 2."

As she sat and listened at a picnic table with her 11-year-old daughter, Ana, Ishee said the amendment won't change the structure of their family if it passes.

"It's not like it's going to destroy our family," Ishee said. "We love each other and will be together no matter what. We just don't think our rights should be denied."

Chandra Broadwater can be reached at cbroadwater@sptimes.com, or 661-2454.



[Last modified: Nov 02, 2008 07:31 PM]



Comments on this article
by John Nov 2, 2008 7:31 PM
come on i believe marriage is a special thing and it should not be changed and why is it so important for you to use marriage why cant you just call it something else like domestic partnership instead
by qotfw Nov 2, 2008 6:47 PM
Homophobia: straight men's fear that others might think they are gay. oops you are busted clyde.
by qotfw Nov 2, 2008 6:47 PM
Clyde, Too bad we can't see your pointy white hat. How long have you been with the clan? Would you like gays to sit in the back of the bus with black folks too? I bet you go to church every sunday too.
by qotfw Nov 2, 2008 6:47 PM
Those who would vote for amendment 2 are the same type of folks who where against the civil rights act and interracial marriage. They want gays to remain second class citizens. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.
by Bob Oct 30, 2008 3:25 PM
Has ANYONE thought about stepping back and looking at what our State Constitution will look like if this passes? Among the key rights and roles of Government, we MIGHT have a DEFINITION of a WORD! How embarassing that anyone would sanction that!
by Rich Oct 30, 2008 2:23 PM
Seems to me this is the religious using government to make laws to uphold the morals the christians wish to impose on society. Govenment sponsored religion.
by Marshall Oct 29, 2008 10:16 PM
Nicole, You are insane!...Just like Obama you are immature. Thinking gay marriages will help the foster kids. Gays should not be allowed to get married at all.
by Clyde Oct 28, 2008 6:58 PM
homosexual, with multiple people, with animal, etc.) whereas the term marriage should be defined by religion.
by Clyde Oct 28, 2008 6:58 PM
The problem lies in the fact that the term marriage, which really was originally defined by religion, has been assumed by government. Church and state have to be separate. A civil union should be the partnership of two or more people (heterosexual, h
by Cindy Oct 28, 2008 6:53 PM
Forget gay marriage. I want to know how its legal for gay couples to adopt children in this country, are you kidding!? Where's the law banning that so I can sign it? Don't you think we need to study this a little before allowing it to continue?
by Doug Oct 27, 2008 10:37 PM
Funny thing, when people get divorced from marriage, where do they go.. the church or the lawyer? It's the lawyer, that makes it civil act, not religious.
by Lilith Oct 27, 2008 7:18 PM
Just because you "love" someone of a differnt sex, does not mean you have a "right" to anything. GET OVER IT! Marriage is a CIVIL sanction. You do not have any "rights", nor should you, just because you're straight!
by Scott Oct 27, 2008 4:19 PM
THIS IS NOT ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE!!!! this is about domestic partnership rites. I have lived with my girlfriend now for over 20 years, we are not married and do not choose to do so. If she or I gets sick and goes to the hospital, neither have rights.
by Rosie B. Oct 27, 2008 4:03 PM
Why do people feel the need to ban LOVE between consenting adults? Focus on some of the real problems in our community. Feed and house hungry children. And you call yourselves Christians! Act like it. Live and let live - love and let love.
by Honor Oct 27, 2008 2:04 PM
I like big government. I think people need to get a grip. Strange article. Rights? Whose rights? People should be married or descendants or related. Other than that, forget it. We don't call our own shots here because we are too greedy.
by Mike Oct 27, 2008 1:59 PM
If this proposition passes. We are planning on boycotting Florida Orange Juice. We see this as the Anita Bryant of our generation. If the people of Florida don't support us, why should we support them?
by Stu Oct 27, 2008 1:50 PM
Marriage is not a "religious sanction", it's a civil institution, the ceremony for which takes place, more often than not, in a secular environment. As such it should be available to all, whatever you superstitious folk may think.
by Chloe Oct 27, 2008 1:41 PM
I wish there was a really good amendment which involved most folks, like changing the funding for education to a sales tax and leave the property owners in peace. On this gay thing, who cares? If marriage for gays is illegal, it is what it is.
by Chloe Oct 27, 2008 1:31 PM
I wish there was a really good amendment which involved most folks, like changing the funding for education to a sales tax and leave the property owners in peace. On this gay thing, who cares? If marriage for gays is illegal, it is what it is.
by Against this one Oct 27, 2008 1:11 PM
My boyfriend and I have been together for 3 years now and are considering sharing benefits under domestic partnership untii/if we decide to marry. If this ammendement passes, we will not be able to do that. VOTE NO!
by John Oct 27, 2008 1:11 PM
All this will do is protect the current law. If we don't vote Yes, then a liberal judge could throw out the current law. Don't be fooled by the GAYS that this will take any rights away. VOTE YES!!!
by Barbara Oct 27, 2008 1:05 PM
There are two forms of marriage - civil and religious. Civil same sex marriages should be allowed. Churches can do whatever they want. Too bad so many people confuse the two issues.
by VOTE NO Oct 27, 2008 1:04 PM
Vote NO on 2.
by Mary Oct 27, 2008 11:20 AM
I keep hearing this being called the gay marriage ban. But how would affect heterosexual couples that live together without being married? I've been living with my boyfriend for 10 years. Would he be able to visit me in the hospital, etc.? Answers?
by JT Oct 27, 2008 11:20 AM
Interesting, the Democrats are now the party in favor of taking "Big Government" out of the lives of individuals? So, will the Democrats now be working to dismantle Social Security and Medicare as part of their "less government the better" scheme?
by Nancy Oct 27, 2008 11:20 AM
I for one am FOR ammendment 2. These people are making it seem like it is about money and its NOT. It is about protecting the definition of marriage. Other legal means can protect Health Care and property issues.
by Julie Oct 27, 2008 11:20 AM
Vote YES on Amendment #2
by PL Oct 27, 2008 11:20 AM
I take solace that as often as the Constitution is amended overturning this should it pass will happen. I presume those who are for it think the founding fathers meant those who are straight, white, men were equal when they wrote "all".
by PL Oct 27, 2008 11:20 AM
Any woman who votes for this is willfully ignorant. Not long ago women were second class citizens, unable to vote, pieces of property, allowed to be raped by their husband. Voting FOR classes of citizens and ignoring history dooms one to repeat.
by Carol Oct 27, 2008 11:20 AM
Well..., not sure anymore about right or wrong because everyone seems to interpret that by themselves. BUT, I do know that I wish I had been raised by people that loved me AND each other - honestly. Not sure if I care they had the same parts or not.
by John Oct 27, 2008 11:19 AM
Just because you "love" someone of the same sex, does not mean you have a "right" to anything. GET OVER IT! Gay marriage is an abomination, and marriage is a RELIGIOUS sanction. You do not have any "rights", nor should you, just because you're gay!
by STRAIGHT ONE Oct 27, 2008 11:19 AM
Headline SHOULD read "99% of Tampa Bay does not show up for rally". Most are against it, but the St Pete Daily Worker is for it. I will marry my best friend, and get his benefits from job and have our girlfriends get married to share benefits
by Nicole Oct 27, 2008 11:19 AM
Do you have any idea how many children out of foster care people could legally adopt if we passed this amendment. It means permanency for children who need it. Quit being ignorant! It's 2008 people!
by TOM Oct 27, 2008 11:19 AM
A man and a woman ever since Adam and Eve.
by Devon Oct 27, 2008 11:19 AM
It was amazing to see representatives from different faith organizations coming together to stand for a singular cause. Amendment 2 is completely unnecessary and has ramifications far beyond same sex couples.
Subscribe to the Times
Click here for daily delivery
of the St. Petersburg Times.

Email Newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

 
ADVERTISEMENT