A controversial marriage amendment to the Pennsylvania constitution could come up for a vote as early as April 24.
The Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment intends to "preserve the traditional institution of marriage," sponsors say, by stipulating that marriage is only valid between men and women and by refusing to recognize other types of unions.
State Reps. Scott Boyd (R-Lancaster) and Daryl Metcalfe (R-Butler) sponsored the bill, which was introduced in January.
"The institution of marriage is in danger of being compromised by activist judges and special interests who want to permanently redefine it," Boyd said in a statement.
Earlier this month, Boyd said that the amendment wasn't intended to discriminate against gay couples.
But state Rep. Babette Josephs (D-Phila.) said that the vague reasons given for the amendment by Boyd and others baffle her.
"Proponents are saying that this will 'protect marriage.' ... I have no notion what they mean," she said.
Even if the bill clears the House, though, it would still be a long way from becoming an amendment. It would have to be passed by a majority of both the houses of the state legislature by June and then by both houses again before June 2008. Finally, a majority of Pennsylvania voters would have to approve it.
If the amendment does pass, Josephs and other opponents say that it could hurt Pennsylvania residents and businesses.
Larry Frankel, the legislative director of the Pennsylvania American Civil Liberties Union, said that the amendment would cast a bad light on the state.
"It makes us look like a backward state," he said.
"We are very concerned about a whole range of problems that his amendment might make for heterosexual and same-sex relationships that aren't marriage," Josephs said.
She added that the amendment would damage businesses by driving away many highly qualified candidates who don't want to live under the restrictions that would be imposed.
State House Democratic legislative spokesman Ben Turner said that the amendment has been read two of the required three times before the full House of Representatives, so a vote there could happen soon.
Turner added that "considering the lack of public airing of the legislation, including zero public hearings" while the bill was in committee, legislators who support the bill may be trying to hurry it through the process.
Frankel said that it would be unwise to move the bill forward quickly, however.
"There's no need to rush into this kind of amendment," he said.
"We're definitely opposed to this or any other amendment that restricts the rights" of gays, said Cliff Jones of Penn's Lambda Alliance, an umbrella organization for gay-interest groups on campus.
Jones said that there has been little media attention paid to this amendment because similar legislation is frequently proposed in other states.
Defining marriage - The Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment could face a House vote this month - The proposed amendment says that marriage in Pennsylvania can only exist between a man and a woman - Bill would have to clear several more hurdles to be added to state constitution
