Although a law already is on the state's books, a leading Republican lawmaker has proposed a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriages in Georgia.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Stephens (R-Canton) announced the amendment at a Wednesday afternoon press conference at the Capitol. Flanked by co-sponsors Sens. John Bulloch (R-Ochlocknee) and Don Cheeks (R-Augusta), Stephens said if the amendment passes the General Assembly, it could be on the ballot for voters' consideration in time for the November presidential election.
"For thousands of years, the institution of marriage has been between a man and a woman," Stephens said. "It begins to tear at the foundations of our institutions if it's anything other than that."
Georgia law, passed in 1996, already defines marriage as between a man and a woman. In addition, state law prohibits the recognition of same-sex marriages from a different state.
Stephens said that doesn't go far enough.
"In other states, there have been efforts by activist judges to redefine marriage by court order without regard to what legislators have written into law," he said. "Making the definition of marriage a part of Georgia's constitution means that will not happen in Georgia."
Gay rights advocates called the proposal election-year pandering.
"They are trying to trade our individual rights for their political gain, and it's nasty," said Allen Thornell, executive director of the gay advocacy group Georgia Equality. "It's an attempt to write discrimination against a particular group of people into the Georgia Constitution."
The amendment would require a two-thirds vote by both the House and Senate. The proposal met with a chilly reception among leaders of the House, which unlike the Senate is run by Democrats.
"It's already the law in Georgia that we passed in 1996 that defines marriage as between a man and a woman," said House Speaker Pro Tem DuBose Porter (D-Dublin). "It's currently very clear, and I think this is just grandstanding."
House Speaker Terry Coleman (D-Eastman) agreed. "I don't know the need for an amendment," Coleman said. "It's the law now."
Emory University law professor Robert Schapiro said that adding the provision to the constitution could make it more difficult to challenge.
"When a provision is just a statute, there is a possibility that the court could interpret a provision of the state constitution to find that the statute is unconstitutional," Schapiro said. "It would make it more difficult to find it unconstitutional if it is in the state constitution itself."
Last year, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriages are allowable under that state's constitution, sparking discussion among Republicans nationwide about adding gay marriage bans to state constitutions.
Nebraska, Alaska and Nevada currently have amendments to their constitutions barring same-sex marriages.
Charles Bullock, a University of Georgia political scientist, said the proposed amendment will help shore up the Republican base.
"Religious conservatives are a core constituency of the Republican Party," Bullock said. "And this would be a proposal that would be appealing to the Republican Party's core constituency. I expect a big winner."
Stephens scoffed at the notion that the proposed amendment is a ploy to get votes.
"This is the right kind of issue to be debated and the right thing to do," he said.
