AMERICAN FAMILY ASSOCIATION OF PENNSYLVANIA

Resources

Home

Statement of Purpose

Current Action Alert ( sign up to receive AFA of PA Action Alerts

Pornography Fight

Pro-Life Issues

THE EFFORT TO PROTECT TRADITIONAL
MARRIAGE IN PENNSYLVANIA

-- The Process: Introduction of a bill is the first step in a multi-year process of getting an amendment to the PA Constitution. This bill with the exact language must be passed in both the State Senate and State House in two consecutive legislative sessions. The governor has no veto power over the bills. The earliest Pennsylvanians can vote to preserve marriage is November 2009.

2007-2009 Legislative Session

May 14, 2008 -- As S.B. 1250 remains stalled, too many PA legislators bow to pressure from 2.9 percent of the population. News Release
May 6, 2008 -- S.B. 1250 tabled in the Senate.
May 5, 2008 -- Good News! By a vote of 18-8 S.B.1250 -- the Marriage Protection Amendment moves out of the Appropriations Committee and to a full Senate vote.
News Release Action Alert
The third hearing on S.B. 1250 -- the Marriage Protection Amendment -- was held on Tuesday, April 29th in the State Capitol. This was in the Senate Appropriations Committee. Vote may come as early as May 7th.
3.18.08 -- S.B. 1250 -- Marriage Protection Amendment moves out of Senate Judiciary Committee by a 10-4 vote. It now moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee. If your Senator is on this committee, please contact him or her and ask for their support of S.B. 1250 in committee. If you Senator is not on this committee, please contact Committee Chairman Gibson Armstrong, and Senate Pro-Tempore Joseph Scarnati and ask that they move the bill forward. Where does your State Senator and State Representative stand on S.B. 1250? Do they support the Marriage Protection Amendment?
2.14.08 -- The effort begins anew: The Marriage Protection Amendment -- SB 1250 -- was introduced. Why are legislators afraid to place the protection of marriage into the hands of voters?

2005-2007 Legislative Session

6.21.06 -- By a vote of 38 to 12 the State Senate voted to pass the weakened H.B. 2381 which would permit civil unions. There was an unsuccessful effort to revert back to the prior printer number. Then Senator John Gordner (R-27) introduced an amendment with very similar language to the original in H.B. 2381 which would have also banned both same-sex marriage and civil unions. It failed by a vote of 23-27. This is the silver lining in this evening's activities . . . .23 Senators voted to ban same-sex marriage AND civil unions! In all actuality, this was the most important vote of June 21! The weakened bill now goes to the House.
Roll Call on Gordner Amendment. The Senators who voted 'yea' on the Gordner Amendment were the ones who voted for marriage this evening . . . the ones who voted 'nay' do not want to protect one man one woman marriage.
6.13.06 -- By a vote of 9 to 5 State Senate Judicial Committee strips language from H.B. 2381 that would prevent the legalization of civil unions. If approved, Pennsylvania could end up like Oregon -- within seven months of the passage of a similar amendment there was an attempt to legalize civil unions! The U.S. Senate has its 'Gang of 14,' now Pennsylvania has its 'Gang of 9." Roll Call
June 6, 2006 -- Pennsylvania State House Passes Marriage Protection Amendment by a vote of 136-61. Now it goes to the State Senate for a vote.
Vote on Federal Marriage Protection Amendment and Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment the week of June 5th -- Contact your State Representative and ask him or her to support H.B. 2381.
Contact Senator Specter and ask him to support S.J. Res. 1 -- Action Alert
Projected vote in the House on April 26th has been postponed.
March 15, 2006 -- H.B. 2381 by a vote of 15-13 is moved out of the House State Government Committee. Click here to view the Roll Call vote. Click here to read some of the comments made by legislators during that meeting.
February 6, 2006 -- Marriage Protection Amendment Legislation introduced in the Senate by Senator Bob Regola. Click here to view SB 1084.
January 24, 2006 -- Marriage Protection Amendment legislation (H.B. 2381) introduced by five primary co-sponsors -- Representatives Scott Boyd (R-Lancaster), Katie True (R-Lancaster), Tom Yewcic (D-Cambria), Daryl Metcalfe (R-Butler) and Teresa Forcier (R-Crawford). There are almost 85 co-sponsors! In coming weeks Senator Bob Regola will introduce same language in the State Senate. The earliest the amendment can be before the people is November 2007!
Canada is on the verge of legalizing same-sex marriage. Because of the action of elected officials in the north the AFA of PA meets with key legislators in July 2003 and February 2004 voicing the need for a marriage amendment to the PA Constitution to define marriage as only between one man and one woman.
November 15, 2004 -- State House unanimously passes S.B. 296 -- BUT only after removal of marriage strengthening Birmelin and McNaugton Amendments. News Release Action Alert
May 26, 2004 -- State House voted 96-94 to table S.B. 296 because of its marriage strengthening amendments (the Birmelin and McNaughton Amendments). See how your House member voted.

Legislators' comments during the March 15 State Government Committee meeting:

Representative Louise Bishop (D-Philadelphia) was concerned, as a divorcee, how the phrase ‘one man one woman’ in the amendment would affect her if she wants to remarry in the future. She also stated that the majority of phone calls she received were opposed to the Marriage Protection Amendment.

Representative Lawrence Curry, a Democrat representing parts of Philadelphia and Montgomery Counties, was concerned about how the amendment would affect polygamy and Mormons.

Representative Thomas Blackwell, IV (D-Philadelphia) said that the majority of phone calls his office received opposed the MPA.

Representative Josh Shapiro (D-Montgomery) was concerned about the domestic partner benefits that Montgomery County offers. He was also concerned about restricting insurance companies, the ability to make medical decisions and how the MPA would affect existing laws.

But most disturbing was Representative Greg Vitali (D-Delaware) and his comparison of those who supported the Marriage Protection Amendment to the Taliban! He stated that those who support the amendment are trying to impose their religious and moral views on all Pennsylvania just like the Taliban. Apparently there is no official transcript of the committee meeting because that was the first defense Representative Vitali gave when confronted by the Delaware County Times. After several phone conversations with them and my assurances that there was no mistaking his comment as I was standing directly across from him when he made it, they covered the story.

During the afternoon meeting of the State Government Committee, some additional ‘interesting’ comments came up.

Representative Mark Cohen (D-Philadelphia) said the Marriage Protection Amendment would affect more heterosexuals than homosexuals.

Representative Babette Josephs (D-Philadelphia) made several comments:

1.) clergy will not have to perform same-sex marriage even without the amendment

2.) children of ‘gays’ will be negatively affected by amendment

3.) economic development and growth in Pennsylvania will be negatively impacted by passage of the amendment

Representative Katharine Watson (R-Bucks) said as a former English teacher she was concerned with the placement of commas and periods in the language. But she had made a promise to constituents to vote bills out of committee, which she did on H.B. 2381. But she did not indicate she would vote ‘yes’ when it came to the vote on the floor of the House.

Representative Mauree Gingrich (R-Lebanon) voiced hope that we will do the amendment right so it will negatively impact the least.