Skip to comments.Lisa Murkowski Shares Thoughts on Marriage Equality with Alaskans (Another Republican Domino falls)
Posted on 06/19/2013 9:05:44 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Pursuit of Happiness Without Government Interference
Not too long ago, I had the honor of nominating an Alaskan family as Angels in Adoption, a celebration of the selflessness shown by foster care families and those who adopt children. They arrived in Washington, DC, a military family who had opened their doors to not one child but four siblings to make sure that these sisters and brother had the simplest gift you can give a child: a home together. We had lunch together, and they shared their stories with me. All the while, the children politely ate lunch and giggled as content youngsters do. Given my daily hectic Senate schedule, its not often that I get to sit down with such a happy family during a workday and I think of them often, as everything our nation should encourage.
I bring them up because the partners were two women who had first made the decision to open their home to provide foster care to the eldest child in 2007. Years later and after a deployment abroad with the Alaska National Guard for one of them they embraced the joy and sacrifice of four adopted children living under the same roof, with smiles, laughter, movie nights, parent-teacher conferences and runny noses.
Yet despite signing up and volunteering to give themselves fully to these four adorable children, our government does not meet this family halfway and allow them to be legally recognized as spouses. After their years of sleepless nights, after-school pickups and birthday cakes, if one of them gets sick or injured and needs critical care, the other would not be allowed to visit them in the emergency room and the children could possibly be taken away from the healthy partner. They do not get considered for household health care benefit coverage like spouses nationwide. This first-class Alaskan family still lives a second-class existence.
The Supreme Court is set to make a pair of decisions on the topic of marriage equality shortly, and the national conversation on this issue is picking back up. This is a significant moment for our nation when it comes to rethinking our societys priorities and the role of government in Americans private lives and decisions, so I want to be absolutely clear with Alaskans. I am a life-long Republican because I believe in promoting freedom and limiting the reach of government. When government does act, I believe it should encourage family values. I support the right of all Americans to marry the person they love and choose because I believe doing so promotes both values: it keeps politicians out of the most private and personal aspects of peoples lives while also encouraging more families to form and more adults to make a lifetime commitment to one another. While my support for same sex civil marriage is something I believe in, I am equally committed to guaranteeing that religious freedoms remain inviolate, so that churches and other religious institutions can continue to determine and practice their own definition of marriage.
With the notion of marriage an exclusive, emotional, binding til death do you part tie becoming more and more an exception to the rule given a rise in cohabitation and high rates of divorce, why should the federal government be telling adults who love one another that they cannot get married, simply because they happen to be gay? I believe when there are so many forces pulling our society apart, we need more commitment to marriage, not less.
This thinking is consistent with what I hear from more and more Alaskans especially our younger generations. Like the majority of Alaskans, I supported a constitutional amendment in 1998 defining marriage as only between a man and a woman, but my thinking has evolved as America has witnessed a clear cultural shift. Fifteen years after that vote, I find that when one looks closer at the issue, you quickly realize that same sex unions or civil marriages are consistent with the independent mindset of our state and they deserve a hands-off approach from our federal policies.
First, this is a personal liberty issue and has to do with the most important personal decision that any human makes. I believe that, as Americans, our freedoms come from God and not government, and include the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. What could be more important to the pursuit of happiness than the right to choose your spouse without asking a Washington politician for permission? If there is one belief that unifies most Alaskans our true north it is less government and more freedom. We dont want the government in our pockets or our bedrooms; we certainly dont need it in our families.
Secondly, civil marriage also touches the foundation of our national culture: safe, healthy families and robust community life. In so many ways, sound families are the foundation of our society. Any efforts or opportunity to expand the civil bonds and rights to anyone that wants to build a stable, happy household should be promoted.
Thirdly, by focusing on civil marriage -- but also reserving to religious institutions the right to define marriage as they see fit -- this approach respects religious liberty by stopping at the church door. As a Catholic, I see marriage as a valued sacrament that exists exclusively between a man and a woman. Other faiths and belief systems feel differently about this issue and they have every right to. Churches must be allowed to define marriage and conduct ceremonies according to their rules, but the government should not tell people who they have a right to marry through a civil ceremony.
I recently read an interview where Ronald Reagans daughter said that she believes he would have supported same-sex marriage, that he would think What difference does it make to anybody elses life? I also think because he wanted government out of peoples lives, he would not understand the intrusion of government banning such a thing. This is not what he would have thought government should be doing.
Like Reagan, Alaskans believe that government works best when it gets out of the way. Countless Alaskans and Americans want to give themselves to one another and create a home together. I support marriage equality and support the government getting out of the way to let that happen.
I never thought of Murkowski as a republican,,though I know she says she is
Once the GOP loses its moral compass its just the DNC at a 10% discount.
It was despicable corruption, especially for Alaska, courtesy of the GOP-e, the new Enemy of America.
Last I heard, she doesn’t even say she’s a Republican.
I can’t imagine this will help her in Alaska???
Democrats elected her as a write-in candidate. She’s no republican. However, considering that “republican” now means “selling out the party to compromise with democrats in all things”, I guess she is a republican. She’s at least a McCain/Rubio/Graham/Bush style of republican.
our government does not meet this family halfway and allow them to be legally recognized as spouses.
Because they are not spouses.
I thank these 2 women for their service as I would anyone that serves.
That does not mean I have to except their perversion or in any way legitimize it.
I thank them for helping these children but also hope that being exposed to the perversion does not damage the children.
This is why she was appointed by dear old dad and protected and supported in 2010 by the establishments of both parties. She’s a reliable vote for their causes.
“simply because they happen to be gay”.....
yes, downplay the entire problem here. everytime i hear that that is the left downplaying and mocking the very problem that is being objected to. it’s not a trivial issue. it’s not.
And that's still the case.The mission here is to render marriage superfluous.
I was watching a show on HGTV where two male homosexuals we going to buy a house together because, “We’re thinking of starting a family.”
My comment was, “So, which one of the two do you think has the uterus?”
That got a good laugh from the wife...man I love her.
We are thinking of starting our own indoctrination farm. That sounds better.
I remember when Lisa ran for state legislature from Anchorage. All she ever talked about were women issues and women's rights and such; people are concerned with other things like the economy & taxes & gun control and such.
Ole Frank set her right up and the Repub good ole boy network & their judges keep it that way. The Repubs suffer for it too.
Only reason she got elected was that she promised the Indians all the gold than can eat and all the dem Indians in many villages wrote in her name, all in the same handwriting. When the corruption gets so bad that people quit trying, it's bad for the Repubs too.
And Alaskans actually wrote this toolbag into office.
Seems that those HGTV shows are crawling with them.
Murkowski is not a Republican. She is a political, whore.
There s essentially one party in Washington: the Re-Election Party. And it’s really more of an orgy than a party.
It all sounds great: like running a business without government interference; or buying health care coverage without government interference; or making a phone call or ordering something online without government interference. Wouldn’t life be grand?
She will be primaried, and hopefully the voters of Alaska will Vote Joe in this time. This could be to our advantage, if we use it properly.