MONTPELIER – The Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously approved a bill
Friday extending marriage to same-sex couples in Vermont.

The
5-0 vote on the bill came after a week of testimony before the
committee, as parents, religious leaders, civil rights experts and
psychologists weighed in on the possibility of Vermont becoming the
third state to allow same-sex couples to marry.

The full Vermont Senate is expected to vote on the bill Monday.

“I
feel a step closer,” said Diane Shamas of Westminster West, who
attended Friday’s Statehouse vote with her partner, Bari Shamas. “But I
also know this isn’t over. It’s a long process.”

Beth Robinson,
the attorney who successfully argued the court case that led to the
civil union law, said that Friday’s committee vote was the next leg of
a journey for gay and lesbian rights that started 15 years ago.

“This
vote is certainly encouraging,” said Robinson, who works for the
Vermont Freedom to Marry Taskforce. “But I don’t want to assume this is
a done deal. We have a lot more education to do.”

Many observers
expected the Senate Judiciary Committee to approve the bill, but the
solid vote of support from all members came as a surprise. Several key
lawmakers had declined to say how they would vote on the issue before
Friday.

That included Sen. Kevin Mullin, R-Rutland, who
sponsored an amendment Friday that would have instead placed the
same-sex marriage question before the state’s voters as a non-binding
referendum at the 2010 town meetings – one of the requests of several
groups opposed to same-sex marriage.

“I believe our gay and
lesbian brothers and sisters in Vermont would find much greater comfort
to know that their friends, neighbors and families also agree that
allowing same-sex couples to marry is a good idea,” Mullin said, in
pushing for the amendment.

But Sen. Richard Sears, D-Bennington,
the committee chairman, said he disagrees with using ballot referendums
to gauge public reaction. Allowing for a town meeting vote next year
would set up a major public relations battle – including the flux of
out-of-state money – similar to the build-up to the Proposition 8 vote
in California last year.

“It’s a slippery slope,” Sears said. “What’s the next step? Public referendums on gun laws?”

The amendment failed Friday morning with Mullin as the only committee member supporting it.

Steve
Cable, a Rutland resident and spokesperson for the Vermont Marriage
Advisory Council, a group opposed to same-sex marriage, said Friday’s
vote was an outrage and predicted that voters will remember who voted
yes when the next election rolls around.

“I think the voters in Rutland County will be extremely upset with Sen. Mullin,” Cable said.

Sen.
John Campbell, D-Windsor, the vice-chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee and a lead sponsor of the same-sex marriage bill, said he
knows Mullin was concerned about the political fallout of supporting
the bill, but said he took a “courageous stand.”

“Kevin is the real hero of the day,” Campbell said. “He took a stand and voted what he believes.”

Committee
members also approved an amendment Friday morning that made some slight
changes to the bill. The original bill contained language reaffirming
the Constitutional right of churches to refuse to marry people if it
disagrees with their faith.

But clergy and conservative
religious leaders this week told lawmakers that they were worried that
the provision was actually an attempt to, at some point in the future,
force religious communities to perform same-sex marriages. Several
religious leaders worried that their churches would be sued for not
solemnizing same-sex marriages.

The altered language – which was
approved in a 5-0 vote – made it clear that churches could not be sued
in civil court. Campbell, a Catholic who added in the original
provision, said it was an attempt at protecting religious freedoms.

“This is a civil marriage statute,” Campbell said. “It has nothing to do with religious marriage ceremonies.”

Contact Daniel Barlow at Daniel.Barlow@timesargus.com.