August 29, 2014
Vt. House committee OKs 'gay marriage'
Posted on Mar 31, 2009 | by Staff

Email this Story

My Name*:
My Email*:
  Enter list of email recipients, one address per box
Recipient 1*
Recipient 2
Recipient 3
Recipient 4
Recipient 5
To fight spam-bots, we need to verify you're a real human user.
Please enter your answer below:
What is the first book in the Bible?
  * = Required Fields Close
MONTPELIER, Vt. (BP)--The Vermont legislature took another step Tuesday toward legalizing "gay marriage" when a House committee easily passed a bill that would recognize such relationships, sending it to the full chamber.

The bill passed 8-2, with seven Democrats joining one Republican in supporting it, and two Republicans opposing it, The Burlington Free Press reported. It is expected to pass the House, although both sides are unclear whether it will be by a two-thirds, veto-proof majority, as it was in the Senate. Republican Gov. Jim Douglas has promised to veto it. The House could vote on it as early as Friday. The bill is S. 115.

Bill supporters are hoping Vermont becomes the first state voluntarily to legalize "gay marriage."

Austin R. Nimocks, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, which opposes the bill, said legalizing "gay marriage" would result in dramatic social change.

"Politicians should never impose a system that knowingly deprives a child of a mom and a dad," Nimocks said in a statement. "All non-partisan research and plain common sense tells us that children need a mom and dad, so the issue is bigger than a 'personal relationship.' In the end, the question is this: Which parent doesn't matter: a mom or a dad?"

The bill would change the definition of marriage in state law from the "legally recognized union of one man and one woman" to the "legally recognize union of two people."

The House committee added an amendment to the bill to strengthen its religious freedom protections, although critics say the protections are weak and far too narrow and that, as Massachusetts has shown, religious freedoms naturally are curtailed when "gay marriage" is legalized. For instance, after the definition of marriage was changed in Massachusetts, the state's Catholic Charities got out of the adoption business altogether instead of being forced by the state to place children with homosexuals and homosexual couples.

The addition of the amendment in the committee means that if the bill passes the House, it either must return to the Senate for a vote or the two chambers must form a conference committee to work out the differences.

Nine years ago Vermont became the first state to legalize same-sex civil unions, which grant all the legal benefits of marriage, minus the name. Only two states -- Massachusetts and Connecticut -- recognize "gay marriage," although both changes in law came via court-order.

"Vermont is proof that so-called 'civil unions' are never a satisfactory answer to protecting marriage," Nimocks said. "Same-sex 'marriage' advocates for years have attempted to use civil unions as yet another way to undermine marriage. The truth is that you can't talk about civil unions or domestic partnerships without talking about same-sex 'marriage' because there really isn't any difference. The goal is the same."
Compiled by Michael Foust, assistant editor of Baptist Press.
Latest Stories
  • Platt assures new missionaries, 'This mission will succeed!'
  • TRUSTEES: Funding for short-term workers, Mideast refugee crisis accompany Platt vote
  • Stand, fight for religious liberty, Platt says
  • Bolivian laws threaten religious liberty
  • Healed ALS patient takes Ice Bucket Challenge
  • 2nd VIEW: Pastor David Platt succeeds Tom Elliff as IMB president
  • FIRST-PERSON: Bullying & doing the right thing
  • Bible Study: August 31, 2014
  • Add Baptist Press to
    your news reader


     © Copyright 2014 Baptist Press. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use.

    Southern Baptist Convention