The same day that dozens of pro-LGBT lawmakers gathered in Harrisburg to unveil nondiscrimination legislation, a virulently antigay state legislator submitted his own bill to ban marriage equality in Pennsylvania.
State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe (R-12th Dist.) on Tuesday introduced a measure that would amend the state constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Pennsylvania has a similar statute on the books, but the constitutional amendment would add an extra barrier to legalizing marriage equality.
Metcalfe’s measure has 27 cosponsors, down from the 35 he introduced it with in 2011 — and the lowest number it’s ever been introduced with.
Rep. Dan Frankel (D-23rd Dist.), co-prime sponsor of the LGBT nondiscrimination bill and co-chair of the LGBT Equality Caucus, said the timing of the introduction of Metcalfe’s bill highlights the waning support for such efforts.
“Those who continue to resist equal rights for our LGBT family members, friends and neighbors are clearly on the wrong side of history. The ‘marriage amendment’ is unneeded and unwanted, and more legislators are realizing this,” he said, noting that just 13 percent of the House cosponsored the bill. “On the same day, 77 members of the House and 25 senators — half the Senate — sponsored legislation to end anti-LGBT discrimination in the workplace, housing and public accommodations. The growing support for the nondiscrimination bills includes sponsorship by several Republican legislators.”
Metcalfe, however, argued in a statement that the legislation is needed to protect “traditional” marriage.
“Pennsylvania does not need to wait for the United States Supreme Court to rule on what natural law already declares as self-evident,” Metcalfe said in a statement this week. “Marriage is a sacred bond that can only be fulfilled by one man and one woman, as established by God. Final passage of my legislation will allow state lawmakers to exercise their rightful responsibility and obligation to uphold the rule of law and the will of the people.”
Metcalfe’s measure would need to pass in identical forms in both chambers of the state legislature for two consecutive sessions and then be approved by a public referendum.