Unmarried couples would get the same rights and privileges as their married counterparts under a bill recommended Wednesday by a Senate committee.

The Senate Public Affairs Committee voted 5-4 to recommend passage of Senate Bill 12, also known as the Domestic Partners Rights and Responsibilities Act.

While supporters say it's a civil rights issue, opponents argue the legislation effectively would give legal recognition to gay marriage.

The Senate Judiciary Committee could vote on the bill Friday afternoon, possibly setting up a debate by the full Senate.

Asked if he thinks he has the votes on Judiciary, committee chairman and bill sponsor Sen. Cisco McSorley, D-Albuquerque, said, "Yes, I think we're going to pass the bill this year."

Last year, a similar bill passed the House of Representatives but stalled in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislation would give certain unmarried couples — homosexual or heterosexual — the same legal protections and benefits as married couples.

Most of those who spoke against the bill Wednesday were religious leaders.

However, much of the emphasis by proponents who spoke on the issue was not on same-sex couples but on the benefits they said the bill would have for elderly couples who couldn't marry for economic reasons.

Norma McCallan, 75, of Santa Fe stood by her partner of six years, Robert McKee. "We chose not to marry," she said. "To me, marriage is not necessary to do."

One same-sex couple in attendance was Jennifer Lawrence and Patricia Chase of Santa Fe. Lawrence said when her son almost died after a motorcycle accident, hospital personnel initially wouldn't let Chase in to see him. Lawrence said she and Chase would like to be able to have a will under a domestic partnership law.

"We both have homophobic relatives who, if one of us were to die, would go after the other partner and try to take away the things we hold dear, our belongings, our house and our joint monetary accounts," Lawrence said.

The Rev. Talitha Arnold of the United Church of Santa Fe, said, "Not all Christians fear this bill."

She disputed the argument that domestic partnerships threaten marriages. She said she's counseled many couples with troubles in their marriages. "Money tops the list, followed by jobs, communication, children, health and who cleans the bathroom," she said. "Not once in 28 years have I heard any married couple say their marriage was in trouble because of the old gay couple living down the street."

A large number of those who spoke in favor of the bill were high-ranking state officials, including Secretary of Aging and Long-term Services Cindy Padilla, Economic Development Secretary Fred Mondragon and Hazel Mella, director of Gov. Bill Richardson's Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives.

Opponents of the proposal have picked up an important ally in the Catholic Church.

Deacon Steve Rangel of the New Mexico Conference of Catholic Bishops said the bishops in past years have been neutral on the domestic partnership issue. But he said domestic partnership laws have led courts to declare same-sex marriage bans to be unconstitutional. Therefore, he said the bishops now oppose the bill and are for "protecting marriage as we know it."

Bill Duncan, director of the Utah-based Marriage Law Foundation, told the committees that domestic partnerships would have a serious impact on family law. He said families headed by cohabiting couples are less stable than those headed by married couples.

McSorley's bill, he said, "would sever the link between marriage and families."

The Rev. Jay McCollum, pastor of the First Baptist Church in Gallup, said, "We live in a very fractured world. Sad to say, it's a very a sexually fractured world. ... We live in a fractured world when we have so many of our people addicted to pornography. We live in a fractured world when so many children are abused, often times sexually. We live in a fractured world when we try to redefine marriage."

McCollum and other opponents referred to a case in which the state Human Rights Commission ruled last year that an Albuquerque photographer was guilty of discrimination for refusing to photograph a same-sex "commitment ceremony" because of the photographer's religious beliefs.

Brian Raum, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund — a national Christian legal organization based in Arizona that is representing photographer Elaine Huguenin in the ongoing case — told the lawmakers, "Domestic partnerships is on a crash course with religious liberty."

In addition to acting on McSorley's bill, the committee voted to table — thus effectively kill — SB144, the Contractual Common Households Act, sponsored by Sen. Bill Sharer, R-Farmington. Sharer said his bill would give unmarried couples the same rights as McSorley's bill, but wouldn't lead to the legalization of same-sex marriage. McSorley said Sharer's bill would not actually establish the rights Sharer claimed.

Five Democrats voted for McSorley's bill — Sens. Mary Jane Garcia, D-Dona Ana; Eric Griego, D-Albuquerque; Dede Feldman, D-Albuquerque, who is the committee chairwoman; Cynthia Nava, D-Las Cruces; and Tim Eichenberg, D-Albuquerque. Voting against it were all three Republicans on the committee — Sens. Vernon Asbill of Carlsbad; Mark Boitano of Albuquerque and Gay Kernan of Hobbs — plus Democrat George Munoz of Gallup.

Because domestic partnership discussions attract large crowds, the joint hearing was held in the Senate Chambers, which has far more room for onlookers than cramped committee rooms in the Capitol.

About an hour and a half before the hearing even began, the Senate Gallery — which by order of the state fire marshal has a maximum capacity of 210 — filled up, causing Senate sergeants at arms to man the doors and keep others from coming in.

Both supporters and opponents wore yellow rectangular tags stating their respective positions.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Contact Steve Terrell at 986-3037 or sterrell@sfnewmexican.com Read his political blog at roundhouseroundup.com.