Marriage bill clears Senate committee


By Lou Baldwin
Special to the CS&T


A proposed amendment to the Pennsylvania State Constitution defining marriage solely as a union between one man and one woman easily passed its first legislative hurdle.

On March 18 the Senate Judiciary Committee approved by a 10-4 vote Senate Bill 1250, which states, “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.”

The bill, introduced by Senator Michael Brubaker (Lancaster and Bucks Counties) and 10 cosponsors, must now go to the Appropriations Committee before going to the full Senate, and if it should pass, to the House of Representatives.

Local senators on the Judiciary Committee who supported the proposed amendment were Stewart Greenleaf (R-Montgomery), John Rafferty (R-Chester) and Mike Stack (D-Phila.).

“This is a statement that defines marriage as applicable only to a man or a woman,” Sen. Greenleaf said. “It is not the intention of anyone to take benefits or protections away from anyone else.”

The Harrisburg-based Pennsylvania Catholic Conference (PCC), which represents the Catholic Bishops of Pennsylvania, was among the strongest supporters for the proposed amendment.

“Pennsylvanians overwhelmingly support marriage as a union between one man and one woman,” said Robert O’Hara, executive director of the PCC.

“It takes courage and leadership to take a stand on a controversial issue such as the marriage protection amendment,” O’Hara added. “The Bishops of Pennsylvania strongly believe that defending marriage as the union between one man and one woman is best for society and is worth protecting. Thanks to these supporters we are one step closer to ensuring that marriage remains defined as it is — one man and one woman.”

State constitutional amendments are not easily enacted. After clearing the committees, the bill must be passed by both the Senate and the House before the completion of the legislative session, which will probably be in June. Then the entire process must be repeated in the next legislative session, and finally it must be approved by the voters.

A similar amendment was proposed two years ago and was passed by the House. But the Senate amended the bill before passing it. This required it to return to the House for another vote, or a compromise version would have to be agreed upon. Before this could happen, the legislative session ended and the bill died.

This year’s bill, because it was introduced in the Senate first, is believed to have a better chance of passing, O’Hara explained.
Pennsylvania already has a Defense of Marriage Act that was passed as law in 1996 with much the same wording. Why is an amendment needed?

Actually, O’Hara explained, most other states also have similar Defense of Marriage Acts, and 25 states have an amendment. The reason it is necessary is because some opponents to the definition of marriage as a union only between one man and one woman challenge the laws in state courts, for instance, under equal protection laws.

“A judge in Iowa declared their state law invalid,” he said. “If it is a constitutional amendment, the state judges cannot overturn it,” O’Hara said.

Lou Baldwin is a member of St. Leo Parish and a freelance writer.

 

To subscribe now, click here.

 

Home | Subscribe | Advertise | Classifieds | Archives  
Education | In the Parishes | Contact Us | Vocation Series | Young Adult 
Youth | Fresh Faith
 | Cardinal Justin Rigali | Hispanic
Black Catholic
 | Catholic Directory
 | People and Events