Conservatives expressed concern, saying Massachusetts' legalization could open the doors for a rush of homosexual couples to show up at Pennsylvania courthouses and demand a marriage license even though it's illegal in the Commonwealth.

Meanwhile, the leader of a Lancaster group that promotes tolerance and diversity called it a historic day that allowed two loving people to be in a committed, legal relationship.

The Pennsylvania Family Institute, a conservative organization based in Harrisburg, called today "Destruction of Marriage Day.'' "When you redefine something, you're changing it,'' said Tom J. Shaheen, vice president of the institute.

"To redefine marriage, if it no longer means what it traditionally meant, between a man and a woman, you've destroyed the meaning and that plays out in the future. Our society is worse off and our children are worse off,'' he said. "That's why it's seen as destructive.'' The organization said the same-sex marriages will have "far-reaching effects on our nation,'' in a press release issued over the weekend.

Massachusetts law bars out-of-state couples from marrying in Massachusetts if the union would be illegal in their home state.

Shaheen said his organization, and other conservatives across the country, are worried that same-sex couples from across America will travel to Massachusetts to seek legal sanction for their relationship and demand recognition of their union in their home state, Shaheen said.

"In Pennsylvania, that's what we're concerned about here,'' Shaheen said.

A 1996 Pennsylvania law that forbids gay marriage states, in part, that "marriage between persons of the same sex, which was entered into in another state or foreign jurisdiction, even if valid where entered into, shall be void in this commonwealth.'' Donna Reinaker, Lancaster County register of wills, was unavailable to comment this morning about what she would do if she received marriage applications from same-sex couples.

Prothonotary Randall Wenger, however, said that any elected official must uphold the 1996 law, because "to act in a manner contrary would violate that oath.'' Same-sex marriage is one symptom of a very serious problem we face in our nation, that of the judicial branch legislating,'' Wenger said. "Justices should not be writing state laws. That is a constitutional role of our legislators.'' The Pennsylvania Family Institute also maintains that same-sex marriages will cause homosexual couples to adopt children at a higher rate, which will "needlessly place thousands of innocent children in homes that are motherless or fatherless by design.'' But Laura Montgomery Rutt of Lancaster's Alliance for Tolerance and Freedom said the group's claims are outrageous.

"They say this will be the downfall of the family. Tell me why. They don't have any good reason,'' she said.

"(The gay and lesbian couples) want to commit to one another. Why is that going to hurt my marriage and destroy civilization? Kids with gay and lesbian parents will have the benefit of growing up in a loving home,'' she said.

Montgomery Rutt, founder of the alliance and a heterosexual, is pleased with Massachusetts' decision.

She said the term "gay marriage'' should actually be replace with "equal rights marriage.'' "What we're doing is stopping discrimination,'' Montgomery Rutt said. "Basically, we've been discriminating against gay people by not allowing them to marry and Massachusetts is the first state in the nation to stop discrimination.'' She added, "I don't understand why people are so threatened by two people who want to share life together, love each other and take care of each other till death do they part.'' On Friday, a dozen state house members, including four from Lancaster County, filed suit against a Bucks County gay couple that unsuccessfully sought a marriage license in that county. The couple has since threatened to appeal that county's decision.

Represented by the law firm of Clymer & Musser, the lawmakers want a court to uphold the state's 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

"I absolutely believe that marriage is between a man and a woman,'' said Rep. Katie True, a Republican who represents Lancaster County's 41st District.

True and fellow Lancaster County House Republicans Gib C. Armstrong, 100th District, Gordon Denlinger, 99th District, and Tom Creighton, 37th District, were among the dozen who are asking the court to find the rule constitutional.

"I don't have any mean-spiritedness about this, but I do have my own personal beliefs and this is one that I feel very strongly about,'' said True.

"If you really feel that is the way it should be, you can't be faint of heart. You need to stand by your beliefs. Not everyone in the 41st District (agrees) but the majority does.'' True was a co-sponsor of the law in 1996. The other three local lawmakers were not in office at the time.

Rep. Mike Sturla, the lone Democrat in the Lancaster County delegation who represents Lancaster City, said he supported the 1996 law, but said he believes that the state needs to find a way to recognize the rights of same-sex couples. He said they should have the same rights as married people.

"The fact of the matter is that we are denying people health care benefits, we are denying them inheritance, all those things,'' he said.

He said the dozen lawmakers who filed suit are trying to "politicize the judiciary before the next judicial election.'' "I don't care if you want to define marriage as between a man and a woman,'' he said. But, he added, Pennsylvania needs to find "some way of recognizing life-long commitments, whether it is in the common-law definition of marriage or whether it is a civil union or simply a contractual agreement.'' If they want to defend marriage, he said the dozen lawmakers who signed the lawsuit should instead look to find ways to cut down divorce rates. Asked if he had any suggestions, Sturla responded: "I leave that up to the guys that appear to have the answers to everything.'' The Rev. Dan Allen, senior pastor of Bible Fellowship Church of Ephrata, said he was "saddened'' by the news out of Massachusetts.

"We live in what the Bible says is a fallen and sinful world and this is just to be expected,'' he said. "I am saddened by it, but I don't think this is totally unexpected.'' The pastor said, however, he was encouraged by what the dozen Pennsylvania lawmakers are attempting to do, and that it may help "stave off'' the trend of gay marriages for the time being.

"I think it will temporarily stop it, but I don't think it will have that great effect in the (long term),'' he said.

The New Era tried unsuccessfully to reach a pastor in support of the legalization.

Officials from the Unitarian Universalist Church of Lancaster were unavailable to comment, but issued a statement last month supporting same-sex marriages.

"We agree with the Unitarian Universalist President, the Rev. William G. Sinkford, that "to deny same-gender couples the rights and responsibilities of marriage would be to enshrine discrimination into the document that provides foundation for our democracy,'' the statement said.