Repeal of marriage act is goal of group

By STEPHANIE TAIT

Date published: 9/10/2005

A year-old Virginia law designed to prevent same-sex couples from enjoying some of the benefits of traditional marriage should be repealed, say local activists.

More than 100 people gathered at the Central Rappahannock Regional Library headquarters Thursday night to discuss the Affirmation of Marriage Act, which was amended by the legislature in 2004.

"People shouldn't be deterred just because this hasn't happened yet," said Lelia Kilgore, a Fredericksburg lawyer who participated in a panel discussion on the law. "It's potentially out there. Something this unconstitutional shouldn't become a part of the Constitution."

The General Assembly earlier this year voted in favor of a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. It will come up again in next year's session. If it passes again, it will go to Virginia voters in a referendum.

"No other state has this," Kilgore said. "Virginia is not for lovers."

Supporters have argued that the measure provides a safeguard for the institution of marriage.

Del. Robert Marshall, R-Prince William, and others have argued that the purpose of the legislation was not to prohibit business partnership agreements, medical directives, joint bank accounts or any other privileges not exclusive to the institution of marriage."

But opponents fear that the law will mean that any contract or arrangement between persons of the same sex can be ruled void.

Its effect, they say, is to take away from gay couples the protections generally enjoyed by married couples.

Local artist Suzanne Moe's "A Love Story in the Face of Hate," a documentary film that tells the story of a Fredericksburg couple, Barbara and Tibby, who moved from Virginia for fear of the new law, was shown to the group.

"People don't know about the law," said Susan Stanskas, an activist with the group Parents, Friends and Families of Lesbians and Gays and the organizer of the event. "They have no idea what it means to people's lives."

Kilgore, who has practiced law for 17 years, said the law "has taken away the ability of two people to contract. You don't even have to be gay."

According to Kilgore, the act has further implications.

"Specifically the part where it says 'or other arrangements' voids hospital visits, child custody and inheritance," she said.

Dyana Mason, executive director of Equality Virginia, the state's leading gay-rights organization, thinks the act sets a precedent.

"When it was enacted it was one of the most anti-gay pieces of legislation," Mason said. "Our General Assembly is trying to constitutionalize [the law] through the Virginia Marriage Amendment."

Kilgore recommends, from a legal standpoint, that the gay and lesbian community continue filling out the necessary documents, such as living wills, advance directives and powers of attorney.

Date published: 9/10/2005