Need for same-sex marriage ban gets questions

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- As the House of Representatives debated a proposed state constitutional ban on same-sex marriages on Wednesday, even some supporters questioned the need for the measure.

"We are wasting a lot of time for something that doesn't even need to be brought up," said state Rep. Ed Wildberger, a St. Joseph Democrat who voted for the legislation.

Although state law already prohibits same-sex marriages, some lawmakers say adding that restriction to the Missouri Constitution would thwart any future lawsuit claiming homosexual couples are entitled to state recognition of their marriages under the constitutional doctrine of equal protection under the law.

House Majority Floor Leader Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau, angrily dismissed assertions by opponents of the proposal who claimed it is merely an election-year ploy to score points with socially conservative voters.

"It is sickening the attitude of the other side of the aisle that this is a trivial issue," said Crowell, a sponsor of the measure. "All we are doing is protecting the sanctity of marriage."

After a 128-20 procedural vote in favor of the legislation, the House granted it first-round approval by acclamation. Another vote is required to forward the measure to the Senate, which has already sent a similar proposal to the House.

If it clears the legislature, Missouri voters would have to ratify the amendment for it to become part of the state constitution.

By default, the issue would go on the Nov. 2 ballot. However, the constitution gives Gov. Bob Holden, a Democrat, the option of placing it before voters at the Aug. 3 party primaries.

A vote at the earlier election would clear the issue from being a subject for debate during general election campaigns and deny Republicans an opportunity to motivate conservatives to the polls on Election Day, when Democratic and GOP candidates will be going head to head in races for statewide offices and legislative seats.

A floor amendment that would have recommended an August vote on the matter was defeated. House Speaker Pro Tem Rod Jetton, R-Marble Hill, said the issue would best be decided at the higher turnout general election.

The proposed constitutional amendment would specify that Missouri recognizes civil marriages as being only between a man and a woman and denies state recognition of same-sex marriages legally performed in other states or countries.

It would not affect the ability of religious sects to perform same-sex marriages, though such unions would have no legal status.

State Rep. Richard Byrd, R-Kirkwood, said church approval of a marriage -- even between a heterosexual couple -- has no bearing on the legality of the union.

"That is simply a ceremony; it is fluff," Byrd said. "It is not relevant to the legal act of marriage."

Last weekend a Unitarian minister officiated for the wedding of two women in Byrd's hometown in suburban St. Louis. The minister on Monday filed an affidavit with the St. Louis County recorder of deeds that he had solemnized the union.

However, the state law passed in 2001 that bans same-sex marriage precludes the couple from obtaining a marriage license.

State Rep. Margaret Donnelly, D-St. Louis, said that situation proves the current law sufficiently addresses the issue.

"This amendment is absolutely an overreaction and unnecessary," Donnelly said.

The measure is HJR 39.

mpowers@semissourian.com

(573) 635-4608