Our state senate is currently debating SB 1250 that would amend our state constitution to read:

No union other than a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as marriage or the functional equivalent of marriage by the Commonwealth.

The Pennsylvania Catholic Conference was nice enough to send their attorney to testify at a hearing on the bill yesterday. According to their press release:

Citing the 2004 Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision in Devlin v. City of Philadelphia (580 Pa. 564, 862 A.2d 1234), Connell said, "Essentially, the Court said that the City could grant health benefits and maintain domestic partnership status for those in its employ and that the
conferral of such benefits and the creation of the status was not the functional equivalent of marriage.

"The language means that the Pennsylvania courts or the General Assembly could not create a status just like marriage but by some other name, whether that might be a civil union or some other term not yet part of the popular vernacular. It does nothing more and nothing less."

Oh yeah, that's no big deal.

Now remember, PA already has a "baby DOMA" on the books (a state Defense of Marriage Act) which prohibits same-sex marriage. This bill would obviously take this a huge step further.

Two things (among many) really annoy me about this bill:

1. This is total Republican election-year hijinks, with no real agenda other than to turn out conservative voters for the Republican presidential nominee.
2. The drift of the One True Church away from its core mission, and into evangelical craziness and partisan politics (a la Rick Santorum) really bugs me.
   

First, the politics. Today's Inquirer contains a story about Liberty City LGBT Democratic Club' state senate forum last week (disclosure: a group I am the co-chair of). The article lays out the Democratic position on SB 1250, from the article:

The three candidates seeking the Democratic nomination for State Sen. Vincent J. Fumo's seat are hoping to win the homosexual vote through a mix of personal connections and support for gay-friendly initiatives.

Their efforts, in turn, underscore the political influence of the gay community in the diverse First District, which stretches from Port Richmond to Philadelphia International Airport and includes Center City.

Two of the candidates - Anne Dicker and Larry Farnese - support gay marriage. John J. Dougherty says he is in favor of civil unions but would back legislation "to extend marriage to same-sex couples."

All three have promised to fight any effort to pass a constitutional amendment defining marriage as existing only between a man and a woman and say they back legislation banning discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Their positions mirror those of Fumo, who has sponsored anti discrimination legislation and voted against measures seeking to ban same-sex marriage.

Thank God for the choice we have in all three of them, right? For the most part, Democrats are much better on LGBT issues, and certainly here in the city (though I wish Doc would support marriage too), than the Rs.

But the Republicans (and a few anti-gay idealouge Dems) in Harrisburg aren't just bad on LGBT issues, they actually see my community, and our needs, as an opportunity to create a wedge issue that they can use in the fall general election.

Any amendment to the state constitution must be brought before the voters after it passes both the house and the senate in the state assembly. And what better issue to draw McCain-timid Republicans to the polls than some good, old-fashioned lavender-baiting?

On the religion side: I got the Irish-Catholic and the Italian-Catholic in me. I am no practicing Catholic for sure, but I am a cultural catholic if you will. And like with my passing interest in the Eagles or SEPTA(as a very culturally Philadelphia), I sure wish the church would straighten up and fly right.

In the city of Philadelphia alone, 1/3 of all residents live in poverty. That really would have pissed JC off. There was a time (and maybe not for a long time, but a time) when fighting poverty was a priority at the Vatican.

And in fact, I used to know a staffer for the PA Catholic Conference (the group mentioned above) from my time as a welfare rights organizer. I traveled to Harrisburg monthly for a meeting of the PA Welfare Coalition which was fighting, at that time, to get the Republican-headed Department of Public Welfare to do a better job helping Pennsylvanians on cash assistance and Medicaid to get through the system.

The PA Catholic Conference then saw it as a priority to help fix welfare and address poverty: when did carrying the water against gays for Republicans become a bigger priority?

There's nowhere for a rant like this to go but down from here, but as someone who currently relies on the benefits reaped as a City employee domestic partner, and someone who wants the same rights as to be accessible to me as friggin' Brittany Spears gets, I must state for the record that SB 1250 is just not fair...and leaving aside all of our consternation about progressive issues in Philadelphia, the debate on this bill highlights the importance of statewide progressive (and even plain old Democratic party) organizing.

[Speaking of which, Kudos to Brady and everyone else who helped get the House to pass the health insurance bill yesterday!]

CORRECTION 3/19: Above, I say that one purpose of this bill is to get an anti-gay rights question on the ballot for the fall. That's wrong. This won't be something voters get to decide until 2009. Sorry for bad info.