AMERICAN FAMILY ASSOCIATION OF PENNSYLVANIA

Resources

Home

Statement of Purpose

Current Action Alert ( sign up to receive AFA of PA Action Alerts

Pornography Fight

Pro-Life Issues

Calif. gay unions may open Pa. door

By F.A. Krift
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, June 17, 2008

A 1996 law banning same-sex marriages in Pennsylvania could face a legal challenge now that the practice is legal in California, opponents of such unions said.

Because California doesn't have a residency requirement, a same-sex couple from Pennsylvania can wed in the Golden State and later challenge Pennsylvania's Defense of Marriage Act in state court.

"That's a big problem," said Diane Gramley, president of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania.

Efforts to create a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriages, which would make it more difficult to challenge in state court, died last month in the state Senate. But proponents of the amendment vow to fight on.

"We're not going away," Gramley said.

In 2000, California voters passed Proposition 22, which recognized marriage as only between a man and a woman, but that state's Supreme Court overturned the law in May. That cleared the way for gay couples to legally marry, starting Monday.

"The bottom line is this: many legislators have consistently said that a constitutional amendment is unnecessary because we already have a law," said Michael Geer, president of the Pennsylvania Family Institute. "We've said a law isn't enough, and what has happened in California clearly demonstrates that."

The constitutional amendment bill was scheduled for a Senate vote May 6, but its principal sponsor Sen. Michael Brubaker, R-Lancaster, asked to delay the vote indefinitely after recognizing it faced dim prospects in the House.

Without any assurance that the House would take action, the measure won't reach the floor, said Nathan Flood, Brubaker's chief of staff.

Sen. Vincent J. Fumo, D- Philadelphia, a vocal opponent of an amendment, doesn't expect the bill to be addressed this legislative session, and its proponents have admitted defeat, said Fumo spokesman Gary Tuma.

The bill would amend the Constitution to read, "No union other than a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as marriage or the functional equivalent of marriage by the Commonwealth."

If the bill passed the Senate, it would go to House State Government Committee. Rep. Babette Josephs, a Philadelphia Democrat, chairs the committee and staunchly opposes the amendment.

Enough time has passed to advance the bill, Gramley said, but the Senate's Republican leadership is allowing the measure to die on its floor without a fight.

"It's the R's that are standing in the way of advancing the bill," Gramley said.

She wants the bill to get a chance.

"At least, it would go down fighting," she said. "It's just sitting there smoldering, and nothing is happening."

A state constitutional amendment requires approval from both the House and the Senate in two consecutive sessions before it goes before voters in a referendum.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_573091.html