Senate wants gay marriage unconstitutional

It’s a debate that has enveloped the United States from coast to coast.

Opinions on the argument seem to be as divided as the nation that it encompasses is wide, only amplified by that fact that there is little middle ground to stand on.

For one side, its objection is based on tradition and religion. For the other, it’s a fight for equality.

“We are the only group of people in the country who do not have civil rights,” said Helen Harrell, adviser for the IU Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Student Support Services group OUT.

In 1998, Hawaii became the first state to place an amendment in its constitution that limited marriage to between one man and one woman. Since then, 29 other states have followed suit.

On Wednesday, Indiana became a step closer to becoming the 31st state to pass such legislation when the Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of sending a similar resolution to a full Senate vote.

The proposed amendment is expected to pass easily through the Senate, which has a strong Republican majority.

Even if passed through the Senate, the resolution would still need to pass through the Democratic-led House of Representatives, pass both houses of the legislative branch again after another election, and win a statewide referendum to become part of the Indiana Constitution.

The earliest that referendum could come is November 2012, said Ryan McCann, director of operations and public policy for the Indiana Family Institute.

Currently, same-sex marriage is illegal in Indiana under the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996.

Opponents of an amendment banning same-sex marriage, including Speaker of the House Pat Bauer, D-South Bend, have said the Indiana DOMA statute already does enough to limit same-sex marriage and that the amendment is unnecessary.

“Putting a ban on it currently is irrelevant and redundant because it’s not even legal to begin with,” said IU senior and GLBT Student Support Services Program Coordinator Solomon Hursey.

Supporters of the amendment disagree, claiming that the current DOMA statute is still too weak.

“The fear is that the same folks will sue in court and challenge our state law,” McCann said. “For folks that want to protect traditional marriage, it’s pretty obvious we need constitutional protection.”

In 2005, the Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the DOMA law after it was challenged in court by the Indiana Civil Liberties Union.

The Senate has passed similar proposals to constitutionally ban same-sex marriage every year since 2004. The only time the House of Representatives voted on same-sex marriage bans in the constitution was in 2006, when they approved the legislation. They did not vote on the matter in the mandatory second round.

Supporters of a ban in the constitution have repeatedly blamed Bauer for not letting the proposal reach a vote.

“Just the way the process works, the Speaker has tremendous power,” McCann said.

McCann said he believes there’s enough support in the House for the amendment that it will pass if it receives a vote.