JEFFERSON CITY - Gay marriage would be explicitly outlawed in the Missouri Constitution, under a measure passed Tuesday night by a House committee.
In a party-line vote, the House Children and Families Committee approved the measure to define marriage as a "union of a man and a woman" -- sending it to the full House for consideration. If ultimately approved, the amendment will be placed on November's ballot for voter approval.
Rep. Kevin Engler, R-Farmington, is sponsoring the legislation, and said he was confident the bill would pass the full House. Engler said the "time had come" for Missourians to decide the issue of same-sex marriage, and that with other states moving on the issue, time was of the essence.
"We think differently than people in Vermont," Engler said. Vermont recently legalized civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.
While Missouri has already passed a law banning same-sex marriage, supporters of a constitutional amendment were obviously concerned about that law being overturned by the courts.
"We risk judges that will legislate from the bench," Engler said, saying codifying the measure in the constitution itself was the only way to prevent judicial intervention.
Rep. Bryan Stevenson, R-Webb City said putting the existing structure of marriage into the constitution would "prevent any easy modification of the traditional institution as we know it."
But opponents of the proposal said such an action had no place in the Missouri constitution.
"This is an attempt to write discrimination into our state constitution," said Marsha Richardson, with the American Civil Liberties Union of eastern Missouri.
Jeff Wunrow, executive director of PROMO, a gay-rights lobbying group, said lawmakers were overstepping their role.
"You're perfectly within your rights to think I'm going to hell," Wunrow told the House committee. "But that's between me and my god, not me and my government."
Lee McDaniel, owner of the Carberry Development Group in Joplin, said he did not see same-sex marriages as threatening to "family values."
"If I choose to marry another man, to be in a faithful and monogamous relationship, how does that threaten a husband and wife down the street?" McDaniel said.
McDaniel, who is also on the board of directors of United Church of Christ Family Fellowship, said he also believed the current law already banning same-sex marriages should be enough for those who oppose the practice.
"Good and honorable people who are uncomfortable with gay marriage should be happy with the current law," McDaniel said. "Those pushing for a constitutional amendment are simply out to demonize gay and lesbians as second-class citizens or as morally inferior."
But some argued that support for the rights of homosexuals did not necessarily translate into an endorsement for gay marriage as an institution.
"If two people want to live together in the same house, that's fine," said Rep. Kevin Wilson, R-Neosho. "But I don't think it should be sanctioned by the state."
In fact, those on both sides of the debate see the government as exceeding its authority when it comes to gay marriage.
"The choice of a marriage partner should belong to a person, not the state," McDaniel said.
The issue also struck a personal nerve for both the proponents and opponents of same-sex marriage. Emotions ran high as all of those involved as they struggled to defend what they said was most precious -- their families.
"Families are breaking down," Wilson said. "This is eating away at our basic family values."
PROMO's Wunrow later told the committee members, "It's not a good feeling to sit in a room...and be told that the love I feel for my partner is not as good and meaningful."