In Virginia, a Rare Opportunity . . .

On Nov. 7, Virginia will experience a Republican Moment.

The election presents the commonwealth's long-neglected moderate and libertarian Republican voters with a rare opportunity to challenge the party's religious extremists without supporting a Democrat .

A proposed amendment to Virginia's state constitution theoretically addresses the definition of marriage. In reality, however, the amendment would not change the status of marriage. Same-sex marriages have never been recognized in Virginia, and they have been prohibited by statute for more than 30 years. There is no prospect of the situation changing through legislative or judicial action. Therefore, thoughtful opponents of gay marriage have nothing to fear in voting against the amendment. Same-sex marriage would remain illegal.

Unfortunately, the amendment also would forbid local and state governments to recognize "another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage." Based on precedent in Ohio, that would call into question domestic violence statutes and other laws that recognize relationships other than marriage. It could also be interpreted to forbid private company benefits for domestic partners and cast doubt on the validity of the wills and medical directives that non-married couples often execute to protect their interests.

The result is an amendment that violates important Republican values.

By prohibiting legal recognition of civil unions or domestic partnerships, the amendment would take away the right of the people to consider alternative approaches to a difficult issue -- and vest the final say in the courts.

Whether or not they support such legislation, conservatives should be deeply offended by an amendment that would grant more power to the judiciary.

The amendment is also bad for business. Domestic partnership benefits offered by private companies typically track benefits offered to married couples and are usually premised on evidence of an actual relationship. That was certainly the case when my partner's employer recognized our domestic partnership.

Such benefits cannot be enforced if the courts can't legally recognize the relationship giving rise to them. Instead, if the amendment were to pass, the benefits could be held to violate public policy. Companies seeking to relocate to Virginia would take note of that.

It would be years before anyone would know the full impact of the poorly worded prohibition on recognizing "other" relationships. The Virginia Supreme Court does not generally hand down advisory opinions. Only after somebody were to challenge a company benefit plan (or a deceased partner's will) and the case were to make its way through the appellate process would the full effect of the law become clear.

In the interim, major corporations, concerned about the welfare of their employees, might look to Maryland, North Carolina or the District as reasonable alternative places to do business.

Faced with a proposal that empowers the judiciary and threatens business competitiveness, libertarian and moderate Republicans in Virginia have a chance to reiterate their party's values -- and challenge the kind of intolerance that cost their party the governorship last year. It does not require crossing party lines -- merely the casting of a "no" vote in support of traditional Republican values.

-- Ray Warren

Arlington

Th e writer, a Republican, is a lawyer who served in the North Carolina General Assembly in the 1980s.