Why Are These Men Smiling?
Harrisburg keeps serving up surprises.
Sen. Jane Earll of Erie was the latest to serve one up Tuesday in the Senate Judiciary Committee by taking the knife to a proposed Constitutional amendment designed to outlaw gay marriage.
As originally drafted -- and as passed by the state House -- the amendment read thusly:
"Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this Commonwealth, and neither the Commonwealth nor any of its political subdivisions shall create or recognize a legal status identical or substantially equivalent to that of marriage for unmarried individuals."
Here is the language, apres the Earll amendment, which was approved by the committee 13-1.
"Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this Commonwealth."
What's it all mean?
To quote that noted political analyst Mother Goose, Earll took the amendment and turned it in, turned it out and turned it into sauerkraut.
No wonder the pro-Family groups are in a dither.
By indirection, the Earll amendment allows counties and the state to approve domestic partnerships and/or civil unions. The original amendment banned such arrangements.
What's the difference between a marriage and a civil union? You got me. I thought marriage was a civil union (as opposed to Matrimony.)
Why the 13-1 vote? It was the Senate's way of saying to the House: "Go away and don't bug us with this cockamamie issue now."
My bet is, it kills the amendment.