Same-Sex Nuptials Prohibition Stalls

By CARL INGRAM

July 10, 1996 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITER

SACRAMENTO —

A bill that would prohibit California from recognizing gay and lesbian marriages performed in other states stalled Tuesday in a state Senate committee after it was filled with amendments that the author said gutted the measure.

On a preliminary roll call of the Democrat-dominated Senate Judiciary Committee, the heavily lobbied measure received only three of the five votes necessary for approval.

The bill’s author, Assemblyman William J. “Pete” Knight (R-Palmdale), said he was uncertain whether he would proceed with the measure, even if it receives enough committee votes.

“With these amendments, you’ve gutted the bill,” Knight told the committee. The amendments would allow California to recognize same-sex relationships as “domestic partnerships” with benefits just short of those legally provided in a marriage.

Voting for the amended bill were Democrats Nicholas C. Petris of Oakland, Jack O’Connell of San Luis Obispo and Chairman Charles M. Calderon of Whittier. Voting against it was Cathie Wright (R-Simi Valley.)

Knight blamed Democrats for employing election-year politics in an attempt to derail the measure, which is supported by Assembly Republicans and Gov. Pete Wilson and opposed by gay and lesbian activists.

The bill would prohibit California from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states. Historically, all states recognize marriages performed in other states as valid.

No state allows same-gender marriages, but Knight and his supporters asserted that courts in Hawaii are expected to clear the way for homosexual marriages soon. Same-sex marriages have been endorsed as a fundamental civil right by gay and lesbian organizations.

During the nearly three-hour hearing, witnesses from both sides of the emotional issue offered restrained, low-key testimony.

“This is not a bill bashing gays. This is not a mean-spirited bill,” Knight testified, asserting it was intended to protect the sanctity of traditional heterosexual marriages.

But one of Knight’s witnesses, Msgr. James Peterson of Sacramento, representing the Roman Catholic bishops of California, appeared to give Democrats on the committee an opening to amend the bill with proposals that Knight and other Republicans find unacceptable.

Peterson cited “injustices and inequities” suffered by gays and lesbians. He said these could be remedied by the Legislature, including allowing gays and lesbians the legal right to visit partners in the hospital and be named as beneficiaries in certain types of wills.

But, he insisted, “leave marriage alone.”

Petris, one of the Legislature’s civil rights champions, then proposed adding a “domestic partners” provision that would give same-sex unions official recognition.

Domestic partners would file a declaration of commitment with the secretary of state, agreeing to live in the same residence, share living expenses and provide care for each other. In addition, government and public school employers would be required to provide health care benefits to a gay or lesbian partner.

“This substantially meets the desires of those who opposed the bill,” Petris said of gay, lesbian, civil liberties and some church representatives who had urged that the bill be killed.

But Sen. Ray Haynes (R-Riverside) assailed the domestic partnership proposal.

“A piece of garbage by any other name still smells. All you are doing is calling a same-sex marriage something else,” he told Petris.

A similar domestic partners bill by Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar) was passed two years ago by the Legislature and vetoed by Wilson. It did not contain the health care benefits proposed by Petris in his amendments.

Neither Katz’ nor Petris’ proposal offered domestic partners the benefits provided by federal and state law to heterosexual spouses, including tax deductions, ownership of community property or veterans and Social Security benefits.

Witnesses supporting the bill claimed that if California recognized same-sex marriages performed in other states, it would lead to a rewriting of the school curriculum to include discussions of two families--”homosexual families and heterosexual families.” They said parents would oppose such instruction.

But Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward), a committee member, challenged the witnesses to cite any law that said such teaching would automatically occur.

Several, including the Rev. Lou Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said common sense dictates that texts be revised as conditions change. “Schools would follow public policy,” Sheldon argued.

But Lockyer countered that they could cite no specific law requiring a rewriting of the curriculum: “It’s inflammatory and reckless to make those claims.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Voting on Gay Marriage

Bills prohibiting the recognition of same-sex marriages have been introduced in 34 state legislatures since 1995.

Gay marriage ban enacted

Alaska

Arizona

Delaware

Georgia

Idaho

Illinois

Kansas

Michigan