Gay marriage ban advances in House
By John Moritz, Star-Telegram from the Web, April 26, 2005
AUSTIN, TX -- Gay marriages and civil unions would be prohibited by the state Constitution under legislation approved Monday by the Texas House after a sometimes stormy floor debate.
The measure, House Joint Resolution 6 by Pampa Republican Warren Chisum, now goes to the Texas Senate, where the presiding officer predicted that it would pass easily.
It would then be placed on the statewide ballot for a vote of the people.
Chisum entered the floor debate in the 150-member House buffered by the support of at least 88 co-sponsors for his resolution, which would define marriage as a "union of one man and one woman."
For the measure to advance, he would need at least 100 votes. He ended up with 101.
While a small band of House Democrats decried the resolution as "constitutional discrimination" and political pandering, Chisum and his supporters defended it as a buttress against activist judges who might strike down current marriage statutes, or against the whims of legislatures in other states that might legalize gay marriages and expect Texas to recognize them.
"I think marriage is important enough to the people of this state that it deserves the highest level of protection, and I'm willing to put it in the Constitution," Chisum said.
But state Rep. Rafael Anchia, a freshman Democrat from Dallas, said the resolution was symbolic at best because state law already prohibits same-sex marriage.
"The Constitution is a liberating document," Anchia said. "We need to be on the side of rights, not on the side of discrimination."
Some African-American House Democrats likened the measure to the Jim Crow laws of a century ago, which limited the rights of blacks, sometimes on religious grounds or on the notion that those laws would protect marriage because they forbade the wedding of couples from different races.
"Some of those [lawmakers of the past] hid behind their Bibles, too," said state Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, the longest-serving African-American House member.
"We are going in the wrong direction -- the direction of hate, discrimination and fear."
However, another Houston Democrat, state Rep. Al Edwards, supported the resolution and called homosexuality "a social ill."
Chisum rejected arguments that rights were being denied or that freedoms were being stripped away.
The resolution contains a clause saying that the state would recognize contractual arrangements between couples that provide for such matters as insurance benefits, hospital visitation, property distribution for a deceased partner and other issues that are commonly the prerogative of a spouse.
But the resolution makes clear that partners in same-sex relationships could not claim spousal status under the law.
In an interview with reporters, Chisum acknowledged that the distinction is slight.
"It looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck," he said.
The resolution came less than a week after the House approved legislation that would bar gays and lesbians from participating in the state's foster parent program, a move that gay-rights activists called discriminatory and punitive.
Some opponents of the resolution argued that the House should be concentrating on more pressing issues as the 140-day legislation session heads into its final five weeks. Supporters disagreed.
"There are a lot of social issues and problems that this bill doesn't address," said state Rep. Carl Isett, R-Lubbock.
"But I believe this legislation is one step to restoring the most important institution in our society."
Tarrant County lawmakers voted along party lines with Republican members supporting the resolution and the county's two Democrats -- Lon Burnam and Marc Veasey -- opposing it.
Even though Chisum has yet to line up a Senate sponsor, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst predicted that the GOP-dominated Senate would approve the resolution.
In a Texas Poll taken in fall 2003, 63 percent of those surveyed said they support a state prohibition on gay marriages, while 28 percent said they would oppose such a measure.
The debate is also playing out on the national stage.
President Bush has signaled his support for a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
Last year, the effort failed to win the necessary two-thirds support in the U.S. House and Senate to send the matter to the states.
|
