Related articles:

Gay-marriage-ban petition submitted Foes of same-sex marriage ban file suit Marriage- initiative opponents raise more

Other articles by Daniel Scarpinato:

AZ budget game goes into overtime Redo budget, Brewer tells lawmakers Senate sends bill for Pima baseball-tax vote to Brewer Legislators OK change to Tucson elections Gov. Brewer follows through on veto threat, orders lawmakers to return GOP legislative leaders try to save budget deal Arizona lawmakers' budget deal stalls Political notebook : Sanford letter had unfortunate timing Tax proposals stall action until Monday Two Minutes with a Lawmaker : Republican senator discusses liberty, gov't, air conditioning

Sales and Marketing
Everready Glass
Sales Reps Administrative & Professional
Jorgensen Brooks Group
Counselor Mechanical
Komatsu Equipment Co
Resident Field Mechanic Administrative & Professional
Tucson Urban League
CEO/President Finance and Accounting
Charles E. Gillman Company
Accounting Specialist Trades/Construction
RANCHO RESORT
MAINTANANCE POSITION

In what will likely be the start of a contentious and high-profile campaign, opponents of a November ballot initiative to ban same-sex marriage filed a lawsuit Wednesday seeking to derail the measure.

Three unmarried Tucson couples are involved in the lawsuit, saying the initiative violates state law by asking voters to approve more than one amendment at a time.

Two of the couples, both straight, appeared at a Tucson press conference Wednesday saying the constitutional amendment would target them directly if it passes in November, since it would outlaw state-recognized domestic-partnership benefits.

Proponents of the initiative quickly fired back, saying those behind the lawsuit are attempting to rob Arizonans of the chance to vote on the measure.

The suit, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court on behalf of five couples, all heterosexual, alleges the initiative violates the state's "Separate Amendment Rule." Lawyers hired by Arizona Together, the group campaigning against the initiative and leading the legal fight, say the initiative asks voters to ban three things: same-sex marriage, civil unions and domestic-partnership benefits provided by state agencies.

"They should bring an honest question to the citizens of Arizona and not try to have these underhanded shenanigans where they use this overall scary boogeyman of same-sex marriage," said Ruben Gallego, campaign manager for Arizona Together.

Supporters of the amendment say the lawsuit is ill-intentioned.

"They're grasping at rhetorical straws in an attempt to change the subject away from the real issue, which is that marriage is a union between a man and woman," said Nathan Sproul, campaign consultant for Protect Marriage Arizona. "We considered Arizona's standard very carefully when we wrote this initiative, and we also anticipated that the other side would use it in an attempt to deny the people of Arizona the chance to vote on this issue."

But opponents say the amendment's backers are sidestepping the question of what effect the amendment would have not just on gay couples, but on straight unmarried couples, too.

Picture Rocks residents Albert Lannon and Kaitlin Meadows, plaintiffs in the case, said they have chosen not to marry because doing so would cost them money in retirement benefits. They enrolled in the city's domestic-partner registry instead, they said.

"We saw it as an opportunity to honor our vows and our commitment to each other," Lannon said. "I have heart disease and it's an uncertain world. I'm 68 years old, and we need all the protection we can get."

All the plaintiffs being heterosexual couples didn't stop Cathi Herrod, interim president of the Center for Arizona Policy, from saying Wednesday that the lawsuit was filed by "a coalition of liberal and homosexual activist groups."

While the lawsuit plaintiffs are not homosexuals, the largest single source of funds is the Human Rights Campaign, which describes itself as the nation's "largest civil rights organization working to achieve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality."

The suit comes just a week after a ruling in Georgia on a similar challenge. The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that a similar ban on same-sex marriage there, approved by 76 percent of voters, did not violate the state's separate-amendment rule. Also last week, New York's Court of Appeals upheld a ban on same-sex marriage.

Attorney Lisa Hauser, also representing Arizona Together, acknowledged similar arguments in other states have failed, but said this is different.

"The Georgia Supreme Court doesn't know Arizona law," she said. Hauser also said the Georgia lawsuit was filed after voters had approved the measure, while this one wants to keep it from getting to the ballot in the first place.

The push in Arizona to define marriage reflects a national move. President Bush has unsuccessfully called on Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution. So far, 20 states have gone about amending their constitutions to define marriage as between a man and a woman, according to the Heritage Foundation.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs hope the case is resolved within four to five weeks. In the meantime, both sides are still raising money and campaigning under the assumption the measure will remain on the ballot.

Even though the state Court of Appeals has ruled Arizona law already bars same-sex marriage, backers want the issue resolved through an amendment.