Jan 05, 2007  |  By: ELIZABETH A. PERRY  | COMMENTS     

When the Virginia State General Assembly convenes Jan. 10, legislators and their constituents may experience déjà vu.

Lawmakers will again consider a bill to require that students receive parental permission before joining extracurricular activities in public schools, a measure seen as targeting gay-straight alliances. And the contentious gay marriage issue will be back, following voter approval of a constitutional ban on same-sex unions in November.

Gay rights supporters fear HB1727 could threaten the existence of some 60 gay-straight alliances in Virginia’s public schools. Under the Federal Equal Access Act, schools are required to treat all extracurricular clubs equally.

Some legislators and schools have tried to get around the provision by requiring that parents approve all extracurricular activities. The bill is being sponsored by Republican Matthew Lohr, a delegate from Rockingham County, and Harrisonburg. It’s based on a similar policy already in place in Lohr’s school district in Harrisonburg.

For two consecutive years, Lohr has proposed permission slip legislation and twice it passed in the House and died in the Senate. Del. David Englin of Arlington predicts the same fate will befall the 2007 bill, adding that Senate Republicans tend to be more moderate than their House counterparts.

“I think it would be tragically wrong to force a gay child to come out to his parents in order to benefit from the emotional and psychological support of a [gay-straight alliance],” Englin said. “Or to force a straight child to get permission from her parents to actively promote tolerance and understanding of her gay and lesbian friends.”

Englin said he will introduce a bill to require all Virginia hospitals to allow any patient to name any individual as their next of kin for visitation purposes. He said it is just one of the measures being introduced to protect rights he believes have been impacted by the Marshall-Newman amendment, last year’s controversial measure that banned gay marriage in Virginia.

“This is an issue that ought to get broad support, even among social conservatives,” he said. “It will provide some practical measure of protection for gay and lesbian families.”

He also plans to introduce one or two constitutional amendments to minimize the impact he expects the Marshall-Newman amendment will have. One of his proposed amendments would fully repeal the amendment. The other would leave in the “one man, one woman,” language but repeal the rest of the amendment.

Englin said it is not realistic to expect either measure to pass this year, particularly with gay rights opponent Robert Marshall chairing the committee in charge of the bills. He and other state lawmakers who opposed the amendment want to take a stand.

“It’s important to make the statement that my constituents, who voted three to one against the amendment, don’t accept November’s result as the last word on the issue,” he said.  “Personally, I don’t believe that November’s defeat absolves me of my duty to stand up for all of my constituents, including the people who will be harmed by the amendment.”

Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria), the only openly gay member of the General Assembly, said he will also introduce a bill to modify the Marshall-Newman Amendment. His bill would add a clause similar to the language Marshall used when he introduced the original 2005 amendment. The text that was left out of the ratified amendment read, “A right, privilege or obligation may be bestowed on an unmarried person by statute even if it is among the whole number of rights, privileges and obligations of marriage.”

Ebbin’s other legislation will include a bill to prohibit employment discrimination in state hiring based on sexual orientation, as well as race, creed, gender, marital status or disability. Former Gov. Mark Warner issued an executive order prohibiting employment discrimination before leaving office in 2005. Current Gov. Tim Kaine upheld the order, which added sexual orientation to the state’s ban on employment discrimination against public employees.

“My bill would put it in the code so it would not be subject to change from governor to governor, based on what they choose to put in their executive orders,” Ebbin said.