If Fargo City Commissioner John Cosgriff has his way, appointments to city advisory panels will come with muzzles.

Last week, Cosgriff criticized the Fargo Human Relations Commission for taking a stance on the North Dakota marriage amendment. The measure aims to constitutionally ban same-sex marriages and deny civil benefits to same-sex couples. It will be on the November ballot. The commission urged a no vote.

Cosgriff said that since the human relations panel receives city funds, it should not take a position on "an elected matter." That's a curious conclusion, since any number of city-created committees and commissions speak out about issues with which they deal. Some end up on the ballot.

Without assessing (at this point) the merits of a no vote or a yes vote on the marriage amendment, it seems well within the job description of the Human Relations Commission to speak out on a proposal that might affect the rights of North Dakota individuals, businesses and governments.

If passed, the measure would amend the state Constitution to prevent granting rights to a specific group of North Dakotans. In addition to prohibiting same-sex unions, it would stop the private sector and local governments from offering benefits to same-sex couples - benefits which are routinely offered to heterosexual couples and individuals. A handful of private employers already extend benefits to same-sex couples.

The Human Relations Commission's work is meaningless unless it focuses on real and perceived violations of civil rights. If commissioners believe the marriage amendment is a threat to basic rights, they have an obligation to speak out. If they avoided tackling controversial issues - as Cosgriff seems to favor - they would be violating their mandate.

The human relations panel's attention to civil rights issues is no different than the Library Board's stance on library matters. For example, board members have endorsed a proposed half-cent library sales tax, which will be on the November ballot. Would Cosgriff have them shut up?

Fargo Dome Authority members have never been reluctant to speak up about dome issues, and the authority depends in large part on a sales tax that required a vote.

The city's Planning Commission, which functions with the support of public funds, often confronts controversial development projects, and members tend to speak out about them. Should they also keep their mouths shut about important public business?

Of course not. Nor should the Human Relations Commission duck an issue because it's emotional and controversial. And make no mistake about it, the marriage amendment debate has the potential to get nasty before November. That's all the more reason for the human rights panel to take a stand and stimulate a civil discussion.

Forum editorials represent the opinion of Forum management and the newspaper's Editorial Board