December 2, 2009
Pennsylvania pro-family lawmakers are currently working to introduce a Marriage Protection Amendment which would protect the institution of marriage from being redefined by our courts or legislature.
But some state lawmakers oppose this action insisting that the Pennsylvania Courts won’t let that happen here.
Let’s remind lawmakers of three common sense reasons why Pennsylvania needs a Marriage Protection Amendment:
1. State Judge Job Description: State Judges have the power to rule acts passed by legislators “unconstitutional.” Any State Judge interprets cases based upon the highest law: the State Constitution. In fact, Pennsylvania’s highest court became the first in the U.S. to be granted the power to declare laws made by elected legislators unconstitutional.
Perhaps the members of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would not rule the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional but saying that they won’t is only a matter of opinion. It’s a fact that they have the power to do so.
2. History: It has happened before in other states. Iowa is a prime example. Their state governmental system is very similar to that of Pennsylvania; especially the process to amend the State Constitution.
Despite their Defense of Marriage Act, the Iowa State Supreme Court Justices declared their state DOMA unconstitutional. If it happened in Iowa, it can happen in Pennsylvania.
3. Lawmaker Job Description: Legislators have the power to pass a law redefining marriage. SB 935 is currently introduced to Pennsylvania lawmakers that would declare marriage to be defined as “any two persons” in Pennsylvania. As our state waits for a Marriage Protection Amendment, more time passes to allow other legislative action to happen.
To say Pennsylvania does not need a Marriage Protection Amendment is to leave marriage vulnerable to an activist court or an overreaching legislature.
Leave a Reply