HARRISBURG -- Some 300 activists filled the Capitol rotunda yesterday to fight a proposed constitutional amendment that would strengthen the state's 10-year-old ban on gay marriage.

		On the Net The bill can be read on the Legislature's Web site, www.legis.state.pa.us. Type HB2381 into the bill search box at the top of the page.

Reps. Scott W. Boyd, R-Lancaster, and Daryl Metcalfe, R-Cranberry, proposed the amendment in January. The aim, they said, was to pre-empt legal challenges that might cause a court to strike down the current law for violating the constitutional guarantee of equal protection for all Pennsylvanians.

The amendment would prevent the state from recognizing "a legal status identical or substantially equivalent to that of marriage for unmarried individuals."

Supporters say they want to preserve traditional marriage, but opponents say homosexual unions are no threat and that the proposed amendment affords no protection.

"[Yesterday] I got e-mail from someone urging me to protect marriage and my thought was, 'From what?' " asked Rep. Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery. "What exactly is happening that I need to be protecting my constituents from?"

Mr. Metcalfe said that the amendment is needed to prevent activist judges and special-interest groups from permanently redefining marriage.

"A small minority of our culture would like us to accept their lifestyle and want us to recognize them and use the same words to define their relationship that has always applied to traditional marriage," he said.

A circuit court judge in Baltimore struck down Maryland's prohibition of gay marriage in January, saying the ban violated the Maryland Constitution's guarantee of equal rights.

"It's only a matter of time before we see a push by activist judges to try to redefine marriage for the rest of us," Mr. Metcalfe said. "We want the people of Pennsylvania to have their voices heard on how they want marriage defined rather than allow an activist judge to make a ruling."

Constitutional amendments require legislative approval in two consecutive sessions and voter approval in a statewide referendum.

Opponents of the amendment say it could prevent unmarried couples -- both gay and straight -- from visiting their partners in the hospital, receiving health benefits and accessing pensions.

Constitutional amendments traditionally expand rights, not restrict them, they said.

"If this passes ... while the rest of the country moves forward, we will become the backwater of this country," said state Rep. Dan Frankel, D-Squirrel Hill. "Who is going to want to invest in Pennsylvania? Who is going to want to teach in Pennsylvania? Who is going to want to learn in Pennsylvania when we promote discrimination and intolerance?"

Rally participants included straight and gay Pennsylvanians of all ages.

Clarion University of Pennsylvania student Michelle Rupert, 21, attended to support gay friends.

"We have to learn from the past. Think about the past when blacks and whites couldn't get married. It's the same thing," she said.

Dave Martin, 63, of Oil City, who helped fight for racial equality in the '60s, said the proposed constitutional amendment "discriminates against a very weak and powerless group of people. That's not what our constitution stands for."