Proponents of gay rights in Michigan took two big steps forward recently with the introduction of a resolution that would legalize same-sex marriage in the state and the passage through a state House of Representatives committee of a bill that would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Both the proposal to permit same-sex marriage in the state and the anti-discrimination House bill were introduced by state legislators whose districts include Ann Arbor.

The marriage resolution, introduced by House Speaker Pro Tempore Pam Byrnes (D–Lyndon Twp.), would overturn a 2004 amendment that limits marriage to heterosexual couples in the state. Additionally, the resolution would also make the state recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

The proposal also contains a component that would allow clergy members to exempt themselves from performing same-sex marriages.

In an interview yesterday, Byrnes said the main motivation in introducing the amendment was to ensure equal rights for all people.

“I think it’s time for people to acknowledge the change in attitude…that more and more people are accepting of homosexual relationships and the need that these people have to be respected and honored as anybody else as far as their rights are concerned,” Byrnes said.

But opponents of the bill, like Rep. Dave Agema (R–Grandville), argue that Byrnes’s proposal is unwarranted because Michigan citizens voted in 2004 to ban same-sex marriage in the state.

“In 2004, we voted on that issue and the people in the state of Michigan overwhelmingly voted not to do that,” Agema said. “So to me, what’s going on here is completely trying to erase or eliminate what the people in the state of Michigan have voted on.”

Legal rights and benefits for married couples were the main concerns that contributed to Byrnes’s decision to introduce the amendment.

“I’m looking at the legal aspect of acknowledgment and benefits in law that married couples, heterosexual married couples have, and I believe that those same benefits should be accorded to same sex partners,” Byrnes said.

But Byrnes said she decided to include the component that would exempt clergy members from performing marriage ceremonies to same-sex couples because she does not want to mandate this law for those who do not agree with it because of certain religious beliefs — a nuance that was modeled after Vermont’s same-sex marriage legislation.

“There are religious beliefs out there that do not support that position and…at this point in time, I felt very uncomfortable about mandating that all clergy must perform this ceremony because of religious beliefs,” Byrnes said.

As Byrnes introduced this proposal, the House Judiciary Committee passed a separate bill that would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The bill, introduced last year by Rep. Rebekah Warren (D–Ann Arbor), would update the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act passed in 1976.

The bill was introduced in order to extend equal civil rights to people of all sexual orientations as a moral imperative, Warren said.

“There should be equal protections for all of our citizens when it comes to public accommodations, when it comes to employment, when it comes to housing,” Warren said. “And the fact that we still have some of our citizens who are openly discriminated against because of their appearance, because of who they are or who they love, I felt like the legislature needed to take them to address.”

While similar bills have been introduced in the legislature in the past, this marks the first time a bill of this kind was passed by a committee.

The fact that the bill passed on with a bipartisan vote, indicates increasing acceptance of Michigan citizens in expanding gay rights in the state, Warren said.

“I think people are starting to just become much more aware of these issues and there is some change I think in public perception on these issues,” Warren said.