A vote on the proposed “anti-marriage amendment” is expected Tuesday or Wednesday of this week. According to the Pennsylvania Gay and Lesbian Alliance, the amendment would:
1. Prohibit same-sex marriages in PA forever – even if a majority of Pennsylvanians supported same-sex marriage.
2. Prohibit recognition of same-sex marriages performed other states.
3. Render Philadelphia’s Life Partnership Ordinance invalid and unconstitutional.
4. Prohibit local goverments from offering domestic partnership benefits to their employees. Currently Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Montgomery County offer their employees domestic partnership benefits.
5. Prohibit universities from offering domestic partnership benefits to their employees.
6. Prohibit protection from abuse orders from being issued to non married persons.
Yesterday I sent an email to my representative through the PA-GALA website, and plan to call him today. If you’re a Pennsylvania resident, I urge you to do the same.
that preacher dude who spoke out at the panel is holding his own “other side”
using “pure logic” to approach the issue of gay marriage..i’m assuming from a religious perspective. hahaha, religion and pure logic in the same sentence..laugh riot.
PA is stuck in a horrid Conservative, Fundamentalist, Republican vaccuum. It is a shame this amendment is even being voted on.
I have a hard time believing that this amendment would not violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, especially the second part, which would deny tax and other benefits to a specific group of people. The amendment reads: “Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this Commonwealth, and neither the Commonwealth nor any of its political subdivisions shall create or recognize a legal status identical or substantially equivalent to that of marriage for unmarried individuals.”
On a personal note, I find it somewhat bemusing that there is a need among some to pass laws and constitutional amendments to “protect” marriage from gays and lesbians when heterosexuals have done fairly well in destroying the “sanctity” of the institution for years (equally bemusing is the Christian right claiming “persecution” despite the fact that they control the presidency and both houses of Congress).
I’m not sure what else to say, other than that somehow I hope our better natures prevail in the end and that this amendment dies a quick death.
I think the obvious answer here is that the state shouldn’t reconize or subsidize marriage in the first place. I’m not sure partnership benefits are a good reason to get married anyway.
I agree with d.c. libertarian. In this day and age there is no place for such amendment. I also have sent letters to my local representative as well as the state senators. I will leave you with this Syndey Harris quote that sums it up:
“Patriotism is proud of a country’s virtues and eager to correct its deficiencies; it also acknowledges the legitimate patriotism of other countries, with their own specific virtues. The pride of nationalism, however, trumpets its country’s virtues and denies its deficiencies, while it is contemptuous toward the virtues of other countries. It wants to be, and proclaims itself to be, “the greatest,” but greatness is not required of a country; only goodness is.
Ciao
hey. down with the honors program. don’t delete this. please…