DURHAM -- The Durham City Council unanimously passed a resolution Thursday opposing a state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage
The resolution opposes Senate and House bills seeking a 2012 referendum on a constitutional amendment that would prohibit same-sex marriage. If approved, the amendment could invalidate other recognitions of such partnerships, such as the city's domestic partnership benefits, and lead to litigation, Durham elected officials said.
The state already has a law banning same-sex marriage. Supporters of a constitutional amendment have said the law is vulnerable to changes by future legislatures or judicial decisions.
The proposed amendment would go on the 2012 ballot if three-fifths of the state House and Senate vote in favor. The governor cannot veto proposed constitutional amendments.
While a referendum has been debated before, many think it is likely to move forward in the Republican-controlled legislature.
"The majority is trying to fertilize the ground in North Carolina to switch us back to a red state," Chapel Hill Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt said in an interview Thursday. "You put something like this on the ballot, I think in their minds it drives people who will vote for their party to the polls."
Chapel Hill and Carrboro, which also offer domestic partner benefits, have previously gone on record opposing a constitutional amendment.
"This is one of our legislative priorities and has been for some time," said Kleinschmidt, who is gay.
Durham City Councilman Mike Woodard presented the resolution at Thursday's work session, a meeting where the council typically does not vote. Leaders suspended the rules and approved it with little comment.
It says the city has shown "its commitment to making Durham a welcoming community for gay and lesbian residents" by extending health care benefits to same sex domestic partners in 2002 and passing a resolution supporting marriage equality in 2009.
"We have got more important issues to deal with in this state," City Council member Eugene Brown said after the vote. "Secondly I have just enough of a libertarian streak in me to say keep the government out of our bedrooms," unless it relates to practices such as sex with minors.
Legislators' response
Sen. Dan Soucek, a Republican from Boone who sponsoring the bill, said he is glad groups are expressing their opinions.
"I don't think it is going to upset the opinion of many people," he said. "I think it is going to move forward, and I think it is going to pass and go to a vote of the people."
Rep. Dewey Hill, a Columbus County Democrat and sponsor of the House bill, said he thinks the bill, which he said is popular in his district, won't come up until next year.
But Durham Democrat Sen. Floyd McKissick Jr. said the bills, along with other potential constitutional amendments, will be discussed at a special session that could start as soon as August.
McKissick, who said he hasn't read the legislation, said he generally opposes amending the constitution with such measures.
"We need to reserve that for things that are more appropriate," he said.
Staff writer Mark Schultz contributed to this report.
