House Bill 1092aimed to change the language of marriage in South Dakota from an agreement between a man and a woman – to an agreement between two persons.
Rep. Linda Duba presented the bill to the House State Affairs Committee Monday. She said it ties up loose ends from the time before legal same-sex marriages.
“In the State of South Dakota, we are supporting these, but we are not requiring our religious organizations to carry out ceremonies," Duba said. "So, this is simply a cleanup bill to update our statutes to support the law of the land of the United States of America.”
Casey Murschel, a lobbyist representing the South Dakota Advocacy Network for Women, spoke in support of the bill.
“What this bill is about is civil contract," Murschel said. "This will not impact all the wonderful ways people can celebrate their marriage. All this does is one thing – it addresses that license, that civil contract, and it makes it accurate in South Dakota’s codes."
Lobbyists spoke in opposition to the bill as well, including Florence Thompson, representing Citizens for Liberty. Thompson refused to accept the Supreme Court decision.
“You don’t call a spade something else, it’s a spade," Thompson said. "If you’re gonna call marriage “marriage,” it’s between a man and a woman. That has always been our civilization, our culture, and its not just our culture, but around the world.”
The committee killed the bill in a seven to five vote.