The Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment says “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.”  What is the functional equivalent of marriage?

The NJ Supreme Court circumvented the will of the people and undermined the legislature by directing the NJ legislature to either legalize same-sex marriage or “enact a parallel statutory structure by another name, in which same-sex couples would not only enjoy the rights and benefits, but also bear the burdens and obligations of civil marriage” (1). In New Jersey, the functional equivalent of marriage is called civil union.

The authors of the New Jersey law intended civil unions to be identical to marriage in all aspects but name. The forced legislation amends state marriage statutes by painstakingly adding the phrase “or civil union” after every mention of “marriage” in more than 80 pages of rules governing nuptials.

By stark contrast, most employee “domestic partnerships” (by government employers or private employers) differ from civil unions in that they confer a specific, limited list of benefits to registered couples who may be of the same or opposite sex. Case in point: The city of Pittsburgh offers “domestic partnership benefits” to city employees that include “health insurance, dental insurance, vision care insurance, and the ability to participate in the bonus waiver program, as are provided to other City employees and their families” (2). This example clearly does not constitute the functional equivalent of marriage that the NJ Supreme Court ordered and that SB 1250 seeks to prevent.

In fact, in the NJ case, the NJ Bar Association filed a legal brief (in favor of giving marital status to same-sex couples) and pointed out the contrast between existing domestic partner benefit policies and the far-reaching effects of same-sex civil unions:

“While the rights granted under the DPA [NJ Domestic Partnership Act] are very important, the words ’spouse’, ‘wife’, husband’, and ‘marriage’ appear in 850 separate provisions of the New Jersey State statutes granting rights and bestowing obligations to and upon married couples in New Jersey which impact upon every level of their lives. The DPA grants merely a handful of the New Jersey spousal rights and privileges to domestic partners” (3).

A similiar scenario played out in Vermont in 2000 with the court mandating the functional equivalent of marriage and - just as in New Jersey - “civil unions” consequently changed all aspects of civil law that “are granted to spouses in a marriage” (Vermont Act 91).

Pennsylvania voters overwhelmingly want the citizens, not the courts, to have the final say on marriage: 72% to 16% or a 4.5 to 1 ratio! (4)

17 bipartisan co-sponsors introduced SB 1250 - the Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment - the first step to putting the marriage question on the ballot. But it must pass the General Assembly by June 2008!

Marriage makes a difference; it is worth constitutional protection.  Support SB 1250 and give our citizens, not the courts, the final say on marriage.

For more information, visit www.PA4Marriage.org or call 717-657-4990 x 106.

_____________________________

1. Lewis v. Harris, 188 N.J. 463. 2. City of Pittsburgh, Chapter 186.01.

2. City of Pittsburgh, Chapter 186.01.3. Lewis v. Harris, Brief Amicus Curiae of New Jersey Bar Association, at p. 6 (Supreme Court of NJ, 2006)

3. Lewis v. Harris, Brief Amicus Curiae of New Jersey Bar Association, at p. 6 (Supreme Court of NJ, 2006)

4. Precision Marketing, January 2008, margin of error +/- 4%