Diane Gramley might be a bit worried about how awesome you guys have been about calling your State Senators to oppose the  so-called protection of marriage amendment. 

Here's what she shared with me today:

Senator Michael Brubaker is looking for co-sponsors of SB 1250, the Marriage Protection Amendment bill.  Click here for a news release we issued earlier today ? marriage is being assaulted to our north, east and south.  We WILL be next, if steps are not taken to protect marriage.  

 Those who oppose this bill and would like to see same-sex marriage legalized are bombarding Senate offices asking them not to co-sponsor the bill. 

 Do they mean business?  Equality Advocates and the ?Value All Families Coalition? are planning a statewide week of action next week to gain support for passing HB 1400 which would add ?sexual orientation and gender identity or expression? to the PA Human Relations Act.  I can guarantee opposing SB 1250 will now be part of that statewide week of action.

OK, so she shared it with her entire email distribution list.  Having been part of that list for over two years, I sense a shift in tone. Gramley knows that people who might feel a little so-so on gay marriage are likely to be more sympathetic to extending civil protections in employment, housing and so forth to LGBT individuals and families. 

So keep up the good work.  If you haven't done so, call your Senator and ask s/he to oppose the Marriage Amendment.  Ask them about the PA Human Relations Act. 

Diane thinks you mean business.  Prove her right.

In today's Tribune Review, I found ample evidence of the need for our entire community and our allies to remain vigilant.  It is a simple letter to the editor and I'm sure no one is surprised to read a pro-Catholic/anti-gay marriage letter there.  Nonetheless, this letter isn't guised as some hysterical screed invoking horrific images of a thunderous God striking down the homo sinners. 

In his letter "Gays & the church" (Jan. 16 and PghTrib.com), Anthony Brown of New York City indicates that all gay couples want is tax, health, pension, visitation and death protections that are a part of marriage.

Currently in Pennsylvania there are no limitations on visitation rights and no restrictions on who can benefit in a will. Tax, health and pension benefits are economic in nature. It is interesting that what seems most important to the author is the economic "benefits" he could gain if his relationship were to be legally recognized as being equivalent to marriage.

If people start becoming partners so that they can share economic benefits, Social Security, Medicare and pension plans will become bankrupt. Employer-subsidized health care will cease to exist as people claim to be couples in order to exploit benefits. Rather than become embroiled in the need to determine who is and who is not a legitimate couple, companies will simply not offer spousal benefits to anyone.

Brown referred to spiritual intolerance and said it's "time for the Catholic Church to reach out to its gay and lesbian members, not marginalize them."

While Catholic and most other Christian churches do not support a gay lifestyle, they do not turn away gays and do not condone negative behavior toward those who make that choice.

Christian churches uphold the values that are documented in the Bible, which include compassion for others, and confirm that marriage is a lifelong bond between man and woman, based on love and respect, not based on economic benefits.

I applaud the Diocese of Greensburg in supporting the proposed marriage amendment for Pennsylvania.

Daniel Merkovsky
Jeannette

For every such letter published, we must have multiple contacts with our elected officials and the general public.  We need people to understand our issues and our lives and our stories. 

Contact you senator today.  You have to do it before Monday.  It will take just a few moments of your time. 

Now I'm going to enjoy a few chuckles at the expense of Mr. Merkovsky's oblivion with regard to marriage as an economic pact. 

It's back.  Sigh.  From Equality Advocates:

On January 17, 2008, Pennsylvania State Senators started working to pass a so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" that would amend the Pennsylvania Constitution to define marriage as solely between one man and one woman, as well as prohibit civil unions and potentially more. Please take a moment to call and e-mail your Senator and give a voice to the millions of Pennsylvanians who oppose writing discrimination into our State Constitution. To find your State Senator's contact information, click here. In 2006, Equality Advocates, with the help of countless LGBT Pennsylvanians and allies across the state, defeated the attempt to amend the Pennsylvania Constitution. This over-reaching amendment would have prohibited relationship recognition for all unmarried couples in the state. Please act now to help ensure fairness for all Pennsylvanians!

A gay visitor (Anthony M. Brown) to Pittsburgh (Greensburg) took a few minutes to share his thoughts with the Tribune Review.

We don't want anything more than what all other committed couples have: the tax, health, pension, visitation and death protections that are a part of marriage. These are not special rights. They are protections offered by the government, not the Catholic Church.

Anthony, thanks for making time to share your thoughts.  Another quarter heard from is the American Family Association of Pennsylvania where Diane Gramley was stomping her faith-clad furry boots because "homosexual organizations" got the jump on her in broadcasting this legislative flurry.  Here's an interesting claim:

Pennsylvania?s primary election is April 22^nd.  Are you registered to vote?  The last day to register is March 24^th.  An important fact mentioned by David Barton during my interview with him:  over 90% of homosexual men and lesbians voted in 2006, while 30 million Christians stayed home! 

As always, Diane asks for your money but not your prayers.

This was an ugly victory last time around in 2006 and a clear example of social conservative Democratic values clashing with the interests and civil rights of the entire LGBT community.   Here's how the last round of elected officials voted on the marriage amendment.  Many of those in the House took the straightforward coward's way of voting in favor of amending the constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.  The Senate did this elaborate dance of "yes, I am, no I am not" switcheroos so they could vote against the "concept" while not having to deal with a pro-homo vote. 

Don't let them get the jump on us.  Contact your Senator today and ask her/him to oppose amending hate into our Constitution.