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%

 Those who support the idea that marriage should mean anything and everything are the most opposed to the idea that Pennsylvania citizens should have the opportunity to define marriage. Why not let the citizens of the state make that determination?

 The latest polling says that even those who don’t completely support the majority who define marriage as the union of man and woman only, still want the people to have the final say!

 Let the people vote.

 -Pa for Marriage

”To be perfectly clear, the question is not whether children love the parents who raise them. Children almost universally and unquestioningly love their parents, whether their parents are married, divorced, single, gay or straight. Rather, the question is how children feel and how they make sense of their identities when their mother or father (or both) is absent from their daily lives.” Read more…

http://www.ionainstitute.ie/pdfs/Marquardt_talk.pdf

Retire list:

lose weight (that was easy)
exercise (another no brainer)

Add list:

read more
Here’s a good one: “The Future of Marriage” by David Blankenhorn. David, President of the American Values Institute, writes, “If we change marriage, we change parenthood—for all families.”

Another must read: “One Man One Woman”, Dale O’Leary’s guide to strengthening marriage. “O’Leary shows how the redefinition of marriage in Europe and Canada has already taken a predictable toll on marriage rates, family stability, religious freedom, and children’s well-being.”

If you have any time left, take a look at “The Meaning of Marriage” edited by Robert George and Jean Bethke Elshtain. This collection of essays “brings together the best of contemporary scholarship on marriage from a variety of disciplines—history, ethics, economics, law and public policy, philosophy, sociology, psychiatry, political science—to inform, and reform, public debate.”

No matter where you stand on the need for a marriage amendment in Pennsylvania, make an effort to read what these scholars have to say about the importance of the institution of marriage.

All of us at Pennsyvlania for Marriage wish you a Happy New Year—and a happy new year of reading!

-Pa for Marriage

 Another “bright light” this season  is the perennial  movie  favorite, “It’s a Wonderful Life”. No matter  how many times it plays on cable tv, the story rings a familiar note reminding us of  the importance of family, especially in times of crisis.

Pennsylvania for Marriage wants to ensure that marriage between a mother and a father is protected and strengthened to offer the brightest future for our children. Please ask your Senator and Representative to support a marriage protection amendment now.

May your days be merry and bright…

 Pennsylvania for Marriage

James came to the workshop because he believes so strongly in the institution of marriage. It troubles him that so many families don’t have both their mom and dad together raising their children. James and Rhonda want to make a difference.

Many large cities, like Philadelphia, are experiencing broken families and in many cases, moms and dads that don’t marry in the first place. James and Rhonda want to spread the word that marriage isn’t always easy, but it’s the best place for kids to grow into strong and healthy adults.

Christine and I want to thank you, James, for taking the time to be with us and for your dedication to marriage. Christine and I love Philadelphia (we were both born here!), but we like it even more knowing you.

See you on the road!

Christine and Eleanor

Rule #1:

Don’t ever go to the Allentown fair on a diet. The smells of onions and peppers sautéing, sausages sizzling and what are those potato chip fries that come piled to the ceiling! They look like potato chips, but taste like fries. That’s a marriage made in heaven!

Speaking of marriage…. We had a terrific turnout at our Pennsylvania for Marriage booth. A few people thought we were a dating service, but most stayed to find out about the Marriage Protection Amendment. Fairs seem to bring out the heart and soul of Pennsylvania communities. Thanks for your words of encouragement and willingness to volunteer.

Get out and see the sights in Allentown this weekend. Don’t forget to pet the 5-legged sheep. (We saw it with our own eyes). As for the snake-girl—you’ll have to see for yourself.

And thanks, Norm! You’re our “Volunteer of the Week”!!

Next stop: Philadelphia!

-Eleanor and Christine

a) The banana split was invented here
b) Fred Rogers was from here
c) It’s the home of the first professional football team
d) The home of Arnold Palmer
e) Eleanor and Christine got lost
f) All of the above

If you answered “f”, you are correct. That’s the nice thing about getting lost sometimes. After driving down Ligonier Rd about a thousand times, we noticed the “fun-fact flags” all around town. I have to admit, I knew about Fred Rogers and Arnold Palmer, but I had no idea about the banana split!

One thing is for sure…the people of Latrobe are some of the friendliest around and assured us that they support our efforts to keep marriage alive and well in Pennsylvania. See you on the road!

Eleanor & Christine

Allentown is full of “salt of the earth” people who shared their hearts for marriage. We met with several deacons who enthusiastically want to join with us on our crusade to strengthen marriage across the state. Before we left town, we talked about meeting our new friends at the upcoming Lehigh Valley fairs. Hope to see all of you there! HINT:

Look for the table with the blue balloons…

We didn’t see a Krispy Kreme, but Panera sure makes a great cup of coffee and office on the road.

So long for now!

Eleanor and Christine