Proposals to ban gay marriage advance in Wisconsin, Kansas legislatures

Lawmakers in Wisconsin and Kansas pushed ahead Friday on efforts to amend their states' constitutions to ban gay marriage, two days after Utah's Legislature agreed to put the question to voters.

Friday, March 5th 2004, 12:00 am

By: News On 6

Lawmakers in Wisconsin and Kansas pushed ahead Friday on efforts to amend their states' constitutions to ban gay marriage, two days after Utah's Legislature agreed to put the question to voters.

The moves countered efforts elsewhere to legalize the partnerships, including nearly 3,600 same-sex marriages performed by San Francisco officials in the past three weeks.

The proposal approved by the Wisconsin Assembly 68-27 would prohibit same-sex marriages and civil unions. It now goes to the state Senate. More approval from lawmakers and voters would also be required for it to become law, with a statewide referendum coming no earlier than April 2005.

In Kansas, the House voted 88-36 for a proposed amendment to ban gay marriages and the granting of benefits associated with marriage to other relationships. It also advances to the Senate; if it passes there, it would only need approval from voters in November to become part of the constitution.

Fourteen states are seeking this year to amend their constitutions to ban same-sex marriages. States in recent years have already acted broadly in opposition to the prospect of same-sex marriages, passing so-called Defense of Marriage laws in 38 states. And four have already amended their own constitutions to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

President Bush is supporting a movement to amend the U.S. Constitution, citing decisions by Massachusetts' top court that prohibiting same-sex marriages would violate that state's constitution. The court rulings cleared the way for full-fledged gay marriages by mid-May and sparked the parade of marriages in San Francisco.

County and local officials in liberal spots in Oregon, New Mexico and New York have followed suit.

Wisconsin statutes already define marriage as a contract between a husband and a wife and do not recognize gay marriage. But backers feared a judge would overrule that.

``Amending our statutes is not going to address the problem,'' said Republican Rep. Mark Gundrum, the amendment's main author. ``We need to have this in our state constitution or we are every bit as vulnerable to activists judges instituting same-sex marriage as they did in Massachusetts.''

Democratic Rep. Tom Hebl said the amendment's 43 words were among the most spiteful ever put on paper.

``It's liberty and justice for all unless you're gay and lesbian,'' Hebl said.

To take effect, the proposed amendment would have to pass both houses of the Legislature by simple majorities in consecutive two-year sessions and be approved by voters in a referendum. Such a vote could come no earlier than April 2005

The Kansas proposal won only four votes more than the required two-thirds majority of 84. Two-thirds of the Senate must now pass it to put it on the Nov. 2 ballot, when it would need approval from a simple majority of voters.

Kansas already has a law, adopted in 1996, stating that marriage is valid only between one man and one woman. The proposed amendment would add a similar statement to the state constitution, along with the benefits prohibition.

In Utah, where a strong majority of the population and the Legislature belong to the conservative Mormon church, hundreds of gay rights activists unsuccessfully marched on the statehouse to urge lawmakers to reconsider.

Sen. Chris Buttars, a key supporter of the amendment, said it wouldn't strip away civil rights for gays.

``They want to make an alternate choice, that's fine, make it, but you are not a man and a woman legally married,'' he said.