Pennsylvania Sen. John Eichelberger (R-30th Dist.), who announced last month that he intends to introduce an amendment to the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage, further extrapolated on his position on LGBT rights last week during a radio debate with Sen. Daylin Leach (D-17th Dist.), who recently introduced a bill to legalize same-sex marriage in Pennsylvania.
During a one-hour show June 19 on WHYY’s “Radio Times” with host Marty Moss-Coane, Leach asked Eichelberger if he felt government should adopt a policy of “punishment, to somehow prove [to the LGBT community] that they’ve done something wrong,” to which Eichelberger responded, “They’re not being punished. We’re allowing them to exist and do what every American can do. We’re just not rewarding them any special designation.”
Eichelberger told PGN this week that he was referring to the fact that same-sex couples, not just individuals, are allowed under law to exist.
“The question he was asking me was a question about our policies toward couples, not individuals or an entire class of people,” Eichelberger said. “What I was arguing was there is no penalty, these couples are not being punished, but they’re not going to be given any special designation.”
Eichelberger said his comment was taken out of context in online circles, but that he’s spoken with several lawmakers who asked for clarification and “were fine with it” after his explanation.
Leach said that after hearing the remark, he tried to give Eichelberger the benefit of the doubt.
“I try to see good in all people, and I’d like to think that, given more time, and when he wasn’t in the heat of battle, Sen. Eichelberger would have said something different,” Leach said. “But there were a number of things in the debate which were disturbing, and this was certainly one of them.”
Eichelberger centered his argument during the debate on the idea that heterosexual marriage is the foundation of American society and should not be amended.
“We have a proven model, which is the family of one man, one woman; this has been around for thousands of years, and there are tens of thousands of studies that show that this is the best model for a society to operate under,” he said. “There is no evidence to show that we should change that fundamental building block of society. Any time we tamper with this fundamental building block, such as by liberalizing divorce laws, statistics show that children are affected, society is affected. It devalues marriage.”
Eichelberger said the institution of marriage is meant to “reward people for actions that reward our society.”
“It’s proven that an action that rewards our society is traditional marriage. This new concept that we can have homosexual couples marry, there are no facts that show it’s a benefit to our society,” Eichelberger said. “Why would we do something as irresponsible as rewarding people for a marriage that has no benefit to our society? They’re allowed to live in a relationship. There’s nothing that penalizes them for that. But they’re not going to be rewarded and sanctioned by our government, which is what we do with traditional married couples because they have a benefit to our society.”
Leach contended, however, that the issue of marriage equality centers more on rights than rewards.
“This is about basic civil rights. Everyone deserves to be treated equally, and that’s what we’re fighting for,” Leach said. “The current state of the law is discriminatory and denies same-sex couples the benefits, rights and responsibilities given to opposite-sex couples to encourage them to form stable, monogamous relationships, which we feel benefits not only the couples themselves but society as a whole.”
Leach asked Eichelberger to name the studies he’s read that found that same-sex marriage has a negative impact on society, but Eichelberger said he would have to “get some.”
Leach told PGN this week that he has not received any research from Eichelberger on the issue.
Leach said he’s reviewed countless research studies on the effects of same-sex marriage, and only two could possibly be construed as having a negative impact on society: one that found children of gay and lesbian parents are slightly more likely than children of straight parents to self-identify as gay or lesbian, and another study out of Sweden that found the heterosexual marriage rate declined after same-sex marriage was legalized. Leach said this last study could have been colored by the fact that the year before the data was collected, couples rushed to marry to take advantage of a tax break that was expiring at the end of the year.
To counter Eichelberger’s arguments, Leach contended that marriage equality has an inherently positive effect on society, as it allows same-sex couples to better provide for one another’s healthcare, become economically stable and provide a better environment for their children.
Coane asked Eichelberger that: If he doesn’t support marriage equality for same-sex couples, what does he think should be done to protect and promote stability for children who are being raised by same-sex couples?
“Nothing,” Eichelberger responded. “People in those relationships are making that decision. We don’t reward people for walking out on relationships. I’ve met people over the years who have been stuck in a tough relationship where the father walks out on the children, and we don’t reward those people. That’s not contributing to our society.”
Eichelberger also raised the oft-used argument that allowing marriage equality would encourage polygamy and pedophilia.
“We can call all kinds of things families. I mean, we can say a three-party marriage is a family, or seven or eight people or marrying younger and younger children these days,” he said.
Leach called this notion “crazy” and a scare tactic, and contended the slippery-slope argument defies rationality.
“That’s fallacious. Saying that if you allow two men to marry, then you’ll have to allow someone to marry an aardvark or a lawnmower is just not accurate. We draw reasonable lines all the time,” Leach said. “We can drive 65 and not 95 and can keep a gun but not a truck bomb. To me, the line should be drawn where it allows for every person to marry the one person they love most in the world. There is no support for interspecies marriage or polygamy. That’s a false concern.”
Coane went on to ask if Eichelberger felt that “by their very nature, homosexual relationships are dysfunctional,” to which the senator responded, “Umm, I guess I would say that. I would say that.”
Jen Colletta can be reached at [email protected].