I’ve been seeing Tweets and blog posts popping up everywhere claiming that SB5 is redefining marriage in Ohio. While I hate SB5 as much as everyone else I thought I’d clear up this misconception about the bill.

The text of the bill does, in fact, reference Sec. 3101.01 of the Ohio Revised Code. And this part of the code does state that “A marriage may only be entered into by one man and one woman”. But this is not new code. It already exists under Ohio law.

The problem here is that people are misreading the bill. Here’s a quick primer:

* Any underlined text is new language that would be added to existing law.
* Any Strike-through text is language that would be removed from existing law.
* Any regular text (not underlined or strike-through) is existing law.

So just to be clear: Senate Bill 5 does not redefine marriage in Ohio. The law being referenced was actually put into effect under Taft back in 2004 (HB 272) back when the GOP last controlled the legislature.

Don’t get me wrong, I am fully expecting a flood of equally horrible anti-gay and anti-women bills to be introduced this year. But Senate Bill 5 isn’t one of them.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention FYI: Senate Bill 5 DOES NOT redefine marriage in Ohio -- Topsy.com()

  • Amyinohio

    But doesn’t the fact that the language is included in the bill mean that same-sex domestic partners would lose their benefits?

  • J. Baker

    That’s what I thought too. Does anyone know for sure? Will my friends loose their partner benefits?

  • Amyinohio

    But doesn’t the fact that the language is included in the bill mean that same-sex domestic partners would lose their benefits?

  • Reader 1

    I had some conversations with people about this earlier in the week but everyone seemed confused about whether the strike-through in that area of the law would affect domestic partner benefits or domestic partner benefits achieved via collective bargaining. If that’s not the case, then what’s the point of striking that part of the law? Any thoughts about that?

  • http://twitter.com/MKBowersLaw Merisa Bowers

    I, too, am looking for more guidance on how SB5 affects collectively-bargained-for Domestic Partner Benefits specifically at state higher ed institutions. Any guidance?

  • http://meetadamandsteve.blogspot.com/ Hugh Yeman

    Oh bugger. I’ve been working on a video piece about SB5, and now it’s back to the drawing board. Oh well. Thanks for saving me some embarrassment.

  • Anonymous

    It’s no longer in the bill, but it was when it ended all collective bargaining because our State’s DOMA law references collective bargaining agreements, so it had to be included to show it striking that reference from the statute.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!