state house mug by julie.JPG

(Julie Bennett/jbennett@al.com)

After nearly four hours of debate, the Alabama House on Thursday passed a bill that gives judges, ministers and other officiants the right to refuse to perform marriage ceremonies.

Many Democrat lawmakers called the bill discriminatory, unnecessary and a waste of taxpayer money.

Rep. Jim Hill, R-Moody, said he sponsored the bill after receiving phone calls from judges and ministers concerned they would be required to perform marriages ceremonies they didn't want to perform.

House Bill 56, the Freedom of Religion in Marriage Protection Act, passed 69-25. The bill now moves on to the Senate for consideration.

In session today, Rep. A.J. McCampbell, D-Livingston, asked Hill: "Why all of a sudden has this become an issue?"

Hill replied: "I can't answer that, sir."

Tears came to the eyes of Rep. Patricia Todd, D-Birmingham, as she spoke against the bill on the House floor. Todd, the only openly gay legislator in the state, said the bill was drafted to discriminate against gay couples who want to marry.

"This is very hurtful to me as an openly gay person," she said.

Todd asked Hill, a former district and circuit judge, if he was ever forced to marry someone he didn't want to. Hill replied no.

Rep. Mike Ball, R-Madison, was the only lawmaker to speak in support of Hill's bill.

"I understand this is a hot-button issue," he said. "I think a lot of the debate winds up being about something that isn't in this bill."

Opponents of the marriage bill outside the legislature are concerned the bill's reach will prevent access for gay couples at religiously affiliated hospitals, schools and other social organizations.

The ACLU of Alabama, the Human Rights Campaign of Alabama, Equality Alabama and other groups have spoken out against HB56.

Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, also spoke to those same concerns on the House floor and proposed an amendment to remove the word "recognition" from the entire piece of legislation. England argued removing that word would limit the legislation to solemnizing marriages.

The amendment was tabled and didn't go to a vote.

Todd also proposed an amendment that would require ministers and judges who don't want to perform same-sex marriages to put a sign on their door indicating they will not perform such ceremonies. The amendment was tabled.

Rep. Craig Ford, D-Gadsden, who serves as House minority leader, said it is a "travesty to justice" that lawmakers continue to bring morality bills before getting to bills that will address the state's $700 million budget hole.

Several Democrat lawmakers questioned the need for the bill since judges and ministers already have the right to refuse to perform wedding ceremonies.

Hill repeatedly provided the same answer to the lawmaker questions. He said his bill is simply to clarify existing law that judges and ministers can't be compelled to perform marriage ceremonies they don't want to perform.

Democrats argued the bill is unnecessary and a waste of taxpayer money.

"This piece of legislation does nothing to change current law now," said Rep. Merika Coleman-Evans, D-Birmingham, said. "We are wasting time and wasting taxpayers' money."

Rep. Napoleon Bracy, D-Prichard, said the bill is discriminatory.

"We know this legislation is going to be struck down in federal court," he said.

Rep. Darrio Melton, D-Selma, a minister, said he has performed several marriage ceremonies over the years, and he has never been forced to perform any ceremonies.

He also agreed with other lawmakers that Hill's bill is discriminatory.

"I am tired of being first in everything that is bad and last in everything that is right," Melton, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, said.