Gay marriage bill heads to House for vote
Toolbox
By DANIEL BARLOW VERMONT PRESS BUREAU - Published: April 1, 2009
MONTPELIER – The House Judiciary Committee voted 8-2 Tuesday morning to approve a same-sex marriage bill.
Seven Democrats on the committee were joined by a single Republican in approving the bill, which comes after more than a week of testimony. The bill is expected to be debated on the floor of the Vermont House on Thursday and Friday.
"It's no secret where I stand on this issue," said Rep. William Lippert, D-Hinesburg, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, shortly before he voted yes. "I believe this is the right thing to do. I believe this is the right time to do it."
Tuesday's vote brings Vermont one step closer to becoming the third state allowing same-sex couples to marry, although the bill faces a veto from Republican Gov. James Douglas if it passes the House.
With an eye toward the floor debate later this week, Rep. Aldrich French, D-Cuttingsville, said lawmakers on the fence about this issue should listen to the testimony covered in the House Judiciary Committee over the last week.
"I urge them to listen to this compelling testimony," he said. "I think the testimony would make them, like me, to become more in favor of this bill."
For many committee members, the personal stories of gay and lesbian Vermonters who want to marry convinced them to vote yes. Rep. Richard Marek, D-Newfane, said history has always favored "inclusion over exclusion" for minority groups.
Rep. Kathy Pellett, D-Chester, said a recent death in her own family stressed to her the importance of this issue. She said in her heart, she knows this is the right thing to do.
"Life is short," she said. "We're never sure when it will end. Happiness should not elude any of us."
The Judiciary Committee unanimously approved three amendments to the bill Tuesday morning, including boosting provisions that protect religious institutions from performing marriage ceremonies they don't agree with.
Other amendments that were easily approved include one that reaffirms the rights of organizations such as the Knights of Columbus to determine its own membership and one that retains the use of terms such as husband and wife in state law and documents – but makes it clear that the terms also include same-sex couples.
Lippert, who offered the final amendment, said he wanted to include that language to make it clear that lawmakers have no authority over religious marriages – that's protected by the U.S. Constitution – and that this bill only changes civil marriages in the eyes of the state.
The other two amendments were offered by Rep. Heidi Scheurermann, R-Stowe, the only member of her party on the committee who supported the bill.
Tuesday's vote was tough for some members. Rep. Margaret Flory, R-Pittsford, a veteran of the civil union debate of 2000, said she was verbally and physically accosted by a same-sex marriage supporter over the weekend, adding that she is "ashamed of Vermont for the way people, on both sides, reacted to this."
Flory voted no.
"I would be happier with the state getting out of the marriage business all together," she said. "We could grant any two people who want to be financially responsible for each other all the legal benefits and obligations."
Rep. Willem Jewett, D-Ripton, said he disagreed with Flory's assessment of the same-sex marriage debate. He said most opponents and proponents have been civil and polite as they shared heartfelt opinions on same-sex marriages.
He said once you speak person-to-person with someone who disagrees with you, "the ugliness washes away."
"I think Vermont should be proud," Jewett said.
Rep. Andrew Donaghy, R-Dorset, said his Catholic faith teaches him that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. He told his fellow committee members Tuesday that he believes this bill was rushed through the process, although he also praised Lippert for maintaining a civil discussion.
"We have a state law now that provides benefits," said Donaghy, who voted against the bill. "I don't see any new civil rights that would be extended with the word marriage."
daniel.barlow@rutland herald.com