Unified strategy dooms prohomosexual law.
In April, Philadelphia Mayor Ed Rendell sent a communique to city council members urging swift passage of “Domestic Partners” (DP) legislation. In essence, the bill called for legal recognition of domestic partners—that is, homosexual couples, living under the same roof.
Marriage between homosexuals is not recognized as legal in Pennsylvania. But the legislation called for same-sex partners of city employees and residents to have access to pension, health benefits, and death benefits traditionally reserved for married couples.
Though similar legislation has passed in other cities, Philadelphia’s version was unique in that it was limited to homosexual couples, as opposed to unmarried heterosexual partners.
Uphill battle
Early on, 13 of the city’s 17 council members favored the bill. With the mayor’s unequivocal support, the legislation seemed unassailable. Nevertheless, proponents of traditional family values felt it was a battle worth fighting.
Shortly after Rendell had the legislation introduced, the Catholic Archdiocese of Philadelphia contacted Bill Devlin, director of the Philadelphia Christian Action Council (PCAC), to discuss a strategy. “At that time,” says Devlin, “the odds were a hundred to one against us.”
Soon, however, a three-pronged plan was in place. It called for a multicultural, multiethnic, religious coalition to rally opposition to DP. Representatives of the city’s African-American churches and even a Muslim cleric soon signed on with Catholics and the mostly white evangelical church represented by the PCAC.
The strategy’s second prong addressed attitude and style. “We looked at how this issue was handled in other places, such as Oregon and Colorado,” says Devlin, “and made an intentional choice to make ours a very positive, life-affirming effort.”
Rejecting what he called a “Rambo Christian” approach, Devlin says the coalition sought to avoid appearing
overly judgmental. It sought to gain support through “principled persuasion” as opposed to power. The principled persuasion focused not on arguments from the Bible, but on what was best for children, for families, and for society as a whole. Opponents also addressed practical matters, observing, for example, that while the awarding of benefits presumes relationships of commitment, homosexuals typically move frequently from partner to partner.
Turning the tide
Finally, the strategy called for flooding the city council with phone calls, letters, and postcards. The archdiocese printed one million postcards, with messages calling the DP measure a “tragic mistake” for the city and a “direct attack on the natural arrangement of family life.”
A quarter of a million signed postcards were hand-delivered to City Hall; an unknown number of others were mailed. Devlin, two black Christian leaders, and Philadelphia’s Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua were among those who testified against the measure before the city council. Bevilacqua said, “This proposed legislation extends legal recognition to a sexual relationship which I, and I sincerely believe the overwhelming majority of the citizens of this city, consider immoral.”
Not long afterwards, the city council president came out against the legislation. Then, citing the well-organized public opposition, Rendell decided to call off the effort.
Devlin attributes the success of the effort in part to reporters who asked “fair, respectful questions.” Not as encouraging was the difficulty in mustering support from the white evangelical community, as opposed to Catholics and blacks used to social action.
Overall, the support was great enough to stop the legislation. The battle, however, may not be over. Supporters of the legislation, including Rendell, are expected to introduce a new plan later this year.
By Randy Frame in Philadelphia.
