SSM BAN APPROVED BY MISSOURI HOUSE: From the Kansas City Star

The Missouri House on Thursday overwhelmingly approved a proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage after a bitter debate in which bill supporters were accused of bigotry.

The proposal, approved 124-19, would ask voters to amend the state constitution to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. State law already defines marriage that way, but supporters want to put the ban in the constitution to strengthen the argument that Missouri would not have to recognize gay marriages performed in other states.

Supporters of the ban argued that gay marriage is deviant, debases American culture and violates natural law. They said issuing marriage licenses to gay couples would be morally wrong and would call into question other licenses the state issues, including licenses to practice medicine.

"It is an oxymoron to talk about same-sex marriages," said Ed Emery, a Lamar Republican. "But we no longer live in a society where an absurdity is recognized as an absurdity."

Emery, who last year held a ceremony to consecrate his Capitol office, said God determines what is right and wrong. Same-sex marriage, he said, is wrong.

Opponents said the ban would endorse bigotry and deny basic rights to a whole segment of society. Rep. Vicky Riback Wilson, a Columbia Democrat, said the legislature devalues marriage when it refuses to allow couples in committed relationships to marry and assume the emotional, financial and civic responsibilities that go with marriage.

Rep. Mike Sager, a Raytown Democrat, said supporters of the ban are hiding their bigotry against gays under the guise of preserving marriage.

"I heard Republican representatives call me a fag-lover," Sager said. "…I'm not offended by being called a fag-lover. I'll wear it like a badge of honor. People who vote for this bill ought to be ashamed."

Rep. Curt Dougherty, an Independence Democrat, said he opposed the ban because a law already on the books defines marriage as between a man and a woman. The legislature should not be clogging the constitution with issues that can be handled in statutes.

"We shouldn't meddle in the constitution because someone perceives that our law isn't good enough," Dougherty said. "Some things really should be left in the closet."

Rep. Barbara Fraser, a St. Louis County Democrat, said arguments about the need to preserve traditional marriage aren't valid because the definition of marriage has evolved over time. In the past, marriage has been limited to people of the same faith or the same race, and women were considered property of their husbands, she said.

"Today, we recognize that marriage is up to the people involved," Fraser said. "This is about equal rights, not religion. This is an 'I hate gay people' amendment."

But those views were in a decided minority. ...

The measure now goes to the Senate, which has approved its own version of a ban on gay marriage.

more
posted by Eve at 4:02 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home