Liberal democracy just took another hit!
Pennsylvania's Senatorial Appropriations Committee today voted 18-8 to put a gay marriage amendment to a vote, which will likely happen tomorrow. Many of you are probably thinking, "Wait, doesn't Pennsylvania already have a law banning same-sex marriage?"
Well, yes; yes, it does, but conservative politicians think that an amendment's needed to ensure nothing like civil unions can be legalized. Because even pseudo-queer-equality's yucky!
The amendment reads thus: "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." Baaarf!
As can be expected, gay activists and progressive politicians protested today's Committee passage:
Among the legislators who spoke at the rally was Sen. Vincent Fumo, D-Philadelphia, who said, "When the basic human rights are threatened, then no one's rights are safe." Sen. Connie Williams, D-Montgomery, noted, "Pennsylvania's constitution was never intended to be a tool that restricts people's rights."
Rep. Dan Frankel, D-Allegheny, said he was taught in school that the constitution was put there to protect individuals' rights, so "it takes a lot of chutzpah to talk about putting discrimination into the constitution of Pennsylvania."
You know shit's serious when Frankel breaks out the yiddish.
The Senate will vote tomorrow and, if the amendment passes, it will go back to the house, then the Senate, then the House and, finally, the voters will get a crack at it. At least deconstructing democracy's not as easy as some would like, right. Although that does nothing to ease our uneasiness.
Can’t A Television Show Say ‘Fag’ Anymore Without GLAAD Getting Upset? (86)
· Mr. Enemabag Jones says: Jack Mackerel What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Better yet,... »
Maggie Gallagher’s Maine Condolence Letter Will Surely Cause You to Tear Up (60)
· 1EqualityUSA says: On the bookshelf, behind Maggie’s head, is that a copy of, “Rubyfruit... »
· 1EqualityUSA says: Jerrold, I’ve noticed her weight gain and how totally unhealthy she looks... »
PHOTOS: He’s a Good Cristian (2)
· Adam says: Physically – lots of promise. No doubt he’s a handsome guy with great body... »
The Big Problem If ENDA Doesn’t Stipulate What Changes Must Be Made to Employee Bathrooms (8)
· Meghan Stabler says: Jillian is absolutely correct in her responses to the article and to... »
Sandra Bernhard’s Tips for Winning Equality: Stop Hairstyling, Decorating + Designing (21)
· Charles Merrill says: Swish and fetch it. We are the ’second banana’ in their comedy act. »
Judgment Day Sure Looks Like Something to Look Forward To (15)
· Ted C. says: Guy in the bottom-left corner looks like he might be Asian. Damn, you made me look at... »
The DNC Totally SCREWED US OVER in Maine. And Then Lied About It (41)
· Brian NJ says: The DNC and the gay elites have a mob protection scheme, just like Bill Purdue said.... »
Robert Bellamy Jr. Bashed 2 Guys Because ‘God Made Me’ (35)
· Tackle says: @ Jason, what a silly commit. You’re a perfect example of how rascism... »
Were These Dads Harassed + Detained By Wal-Mart Because They’re Gay? (29)
· YCKTR says: @ ricky “gay couples shop at this wal mart all the time and they have gay... »
I always thought Pennsylvania was a fairly liberal state? What are the chances of this destructive bill passing?
The rights of a minority should never be chosen by the majority. That's the whole point of representative government. The people are too stupid to vote for what is best for the country.
Not to sound, you know, elitist or anything..
Every single "right" in our Constitution was voted on by the people.
@ CitizenGeek …
I would say Pennsylvania is generally moderate — but, the commonwealth legislature is governed by mostly conservatives (both repugs and dems)
barf indeed!
Thankfully, my representative from Pittsburgh is liberal, and doesn't support this nonsense!
As for it passing… here's a snippet from the PIttsburgh POst Gazette:
"if the Senate approves the bill, it likely will go to the House State Government Committee, which is headed by Rep. Babette Josephs, D-Philadelphia, who strongly opposes it.
Asked if she can kill it in committee, she said, "We'll see."
Fritz, the constitution was drafted and ratified by delegates from the 13 states (55 men).
Actually, most of PA is quite socially conservative – most folks who vote Democrat here do so because they're members of labor unions or otherwise associated with blue collar industries.
And, to emphasize Kid A's point, the rights we have now were voted on by white, property owning men. Incidentally, they really only applied to white men for quite some time, if you'll recall … so we maybe shouldn't romanticize the history of liberal rights in the U.S.
We need a judge to say "equal protection".
If "equal protection" requires that same-sex couples must be given the same protections as opposite-sex couples, then either all couples may marry, or no couples may marry.
If they pass an amendment that same-sex couples may not marry, and then a judge says "equal protection", the state could well be enjoined from recognizing any marriage whatever.
The unintended consequence of denying recognition to certain couples could be that they must deny that same recognition to all couples.
Governor Ed Rendell said in his speech on Saturday night at the EQuality Forum that he would veto this bill. There was no mention that maybe the legistlature could override this veto but that is usually very difficult.
I think that they can get around equal protection, saying that the protection applies to a man and woman, not two men. I don't know what precidence there is but it would be a hell of a place to set one.
Understandably, these are Clinton people. go figure.