|
Home :
Lesbian & Gay Rights
:
Relationships
ACLU of Pennsylvania Calls Proposed Constitutional Amendment Anti-Family and Discriminatory (1/24/2006)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: media@aclu.orgAmendment Would Bar Recognition of Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, or
Life Partnerships for Both Same-Sex and Opposite-Sex Couples Statement of Larry Frankel, Legislative Director
ACLU of
Pennsylvania
PHILADELPHIA – The
American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania today proudly joins with our
allies and friends to announce our spirited opposition to the constitutional
amendment that is being proposed here in Pennsylvania. We know that this
amendment is not just about same-sex marriage. Rather we recognize it for
what it is – a political and divisive attack on thousands of families, children
and loving relationships. We call on the members of the Pennsylvania
General Assembly to reject this unnecessary and discriminatory amendment.
One need only look at the language of the proposed amendment to
understand that this is not just a question of banning same-sex marriage.
No, this amendment would bar the legal recognition of any kind of intimate
relationship that is not a heterosexual marriage. This means no
recognition for civil unions, domestic partnerships, or life partnerships.
This non-recognition would extend to opposite sex couples as well as same-sex
couples.
This amendment could have a substantial negative impact
on the children and other family members who live with such couples.
Access to health insurance could be impaired. Family or medical leave
could be denied. Domestic violence victims could be denied relief, just
like in Ohio.
Proponents of this amendment are saying that
Pennsylvania must act to amend its constitution because a judge in Maryland,
last week, decided that the Maryland law banning same sex marriage was sex
discrimination and violated the Maryland Constitution’s equal rights
provisions.
It is always troubling to see any legislature react to
any court decision by hastily passing a constitutional amendment. It would
be especially troubling to see this legislature do that in response to a trial
court decision from another state.
A court decision from another
state is no reason to create second-class citizens in Pennsylvania. Those
who want to put discrimination into the Constitution would have been promoting
this divisive idea no matter what the court in Maryland decided. Our
elected officials should act to protect and nurture all of Pennsylvania’s
families and not be persuaded by those special interests that think they own the
right to say who is a family.
House Bill 2381, which proposes the
state constitutional amendment can be found at http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/BI/BT/2005/0/HB2381P3397.HTM
|
|
