Anti-Family Amendment
SB 1250: 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.
Who does it affect?
The 2000 United States Census found that unmarried same-sex couples live in every county in the state, in 80% of all the towns, and in every legislative district.
In 2000, there were 21,166 same-sex couples, and 216,456 unmarried opposite-couples in Pennsylvania. The proposed amendment does not protect anything, it discriminates against these families. It would impact all 237,622 couples and deny them and their children legal protections under our constitution.
Truth or Consequences: The Effects of Constitutional Amendments on Marriage in Ohio, Michigan, Missouri and Utah
Blog
May 18, 2006
Stonewall Statement on GOP Promotion of Anti-Family Amendment Party-Line Vote Sends Amendment to Full Senate
Washington, DC - Today, the National Stonewall Democrats issued the following statement on the promotion of the federal anti-marriage amendment to a full Senate vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee:
"In is immoral for Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee to attack the Constitution by sending the anti-marriage amendment to the Senate floor. Republican Chairman Arlen Specter underscores the chronic control that corrupt special interests hold over Senate Republicans. A Democratically-controlled Judiciary Committee would have defended the Constitution by killing this amendment on the spot. Instead, Republicans will once again use this measure to divide Americans for partisan purposes. Democrats do not believe in forcing the federal government to dictate family policy to individual states." - Jo Wyrick, NSD Interim Executive Director.
Posted on May 18, 2006 01:56 PM
April 25, 2006
The cost of discrimination
On April 24, the Budget Committee of the General Assembly released the anti-family amendment. Attached to the bill is a Fiscal Impact Note for the bill. Should the amendment be enacted, the budget committee notes that this year, the amendment would cost Pennsylvania Tax Payers $200,000 to publicize adding the discriminatory language to our constitution. This cost would have to be paid again in 2 years should the amendment pass the General Assembly this term. The fiscal note does not include the costs from litigation surrounding this amendment, the higher health care costs due to more people being uninsured, and other costs the Commonwealth will be forced to bear in order to legalize discrimination.
To put this in perspective, the $400,000 the Commonwealth must spend simply to publicize the amendment would provide the maximum $500 property tax/rent rebate to 800 more senior citizens on fixed incomes, or a $4,000 PHEAA financial aid grant for 100 more PA college students.
Instead of helping people, the sponsors of this amendment wish to deprive our neediest citizens in order to harm law-abiding citizens by depriving them of marriage and the rights associated with marriage.
Posted on April 25, 2006 01:15 PM
March 07, 2006
I Do, but I Can't
Last week, the National Sexuality Resource Center released a report on the mental health costs associated with denying same-sex couples legal marriage. The report states: "The correlation between marriage and well-being is robust. Marriage provides a critical context for the realization of individual potential via the social opportunities afforded to adults to fully develop capacities for love, care, and self-transcendence. Typically, marriage leads a couple toward greater social engagement in the community and, concomitantly, to greater rights and duties. In this way, modern marriage, particularly in the United States, grants couples the full privileges of citizenship. Many lesbians and gay men have expressed an interest in being legally married, and the realization of this deep interest is likely to translate into an enhanced sense of well-being. As is true for heterosexuals, however, marriage for same-sex couples will have variable meanings and mental health significance for specific individuals." Noting that "The correlation between marriage and well-being is robust. Marriage provides a critical context for the realization of individual potential via the social opportunities afforded to adults to fully develop capacities for love, care, and self-transcendence. Typically, marriage leads a couple toward greater social engagement in the community and, concomitantly, to greater rights and duties. In this way, modern marriage, particularly in the United States, grants couples the full privileges of citizenship. Many lesbians and gay men have expressed an interest in being legally married, and the realization of this deep interest is likely to translate into an enhanced sense of well-being. As is true for heterosexuals, however, marriage for same-sex couples will have variable meanings and mental health significance for specific individual," the report further states "the lack of legally recognized marriage contributes to common problems for gay and lesbian couples," including that "some couples may not value their own relationships as legitimate expressions of commitment and intimate sexual citizenship," and the "lack of recognition of their relationships deprives them of social and family support that could help counteract a sense of social isolation." This "invisibility can perpetuate stigma and shame and undermine a sense of life meaning, morale, and wellbeing."
The summary of the report can be read here.
Posted on March 7, 2006 10:54 AM
