Many in the group were bussed to the Capitol by conservative churches and wore buttons that read, “Marriage. One Man. One woman”.

“It’s our belief that this bill is actually a Trojan horse that appears to be built on equality and fairness, but it’s actually destructive of society’s greater welfare,” said Maureen Richardson of the conservative Concerned Women for America told the House Judiciary Committee. “This bill is a continuation of the erosion of the special and unique status granted to married couples.”

As one opponent after another stood to speak against the bill there were loud “amens” and applause. At one point, Rep. Jamie Pedersen (D) called for order. The openly gay lawmaker is the sponsor of the bill.

“There are strong feelings on this bill, but we are not going to tolerate disrespect. I understand that there has been some name-calling and pushing out in the halls. We are not going to tolerate that in here and neither will security,” he told the gallery.

He was loudly booed.

Among those supporting the bill were David Cremeens, his partner, Michael Riter, and their daughter Heaven.

“All we want is to have the same financial protections other loving couples have who happen to be married,” Cremeens told the committee. “It’s important that the state, with this legislation, is setting an example that there should be simple fairness in the way we treat families.”

A public hearing on a companion bill in the Senate received a more subdued reception. The legislation is expected to pass out of the committees next week and head to votes on the floors of the two houses. 

Gov. Chris Gregoire (D) has said she would sign the measure if it is passed. Gregoire also signed the earlier partner bill into law. It provided inheritance rights when there is no will, hospital visitation rights and the ability to authorize autopsies and organ donations. Under the law, partners must be 18 or order and not already married or in a domestic relationship with someone else.  The law also requires that couples share a home and be financially dependent up one another.

It also allows opposite-sex couples to register if one partner is at least 62 years old. 

Nearly 5,000 domestic partnership registrations have been filed since the law took effect in July 2007.

Vermont Senate Majority Leader John Campbell said earlier this week he would file the bill -  to amend the state’s civil union law to provide for full marriage – in the new session of the legislature.

But Campbell said the measure’s success with fellow lawmakers would depend on the governor’s support.

Douglas said Thursday that civil unions are adequate and that the legislature should be focusing on the economy.

“I think the current civil union law is sufficient,” Douglas said.  “It accords equality of rights to Vermonters in terms of their relationships and I think we should leave the law as it is.”

Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force chair Beth Robinson called the governor’s position unfortunate and said it implies he believes lawmakers can only deal with one issue at a time.

“The Legislature can absolutely do more than one thing at once,” Robinson told The Associated Press.

“The notion that working on civil rights takes away from these other issues really is a false one.”

Vermont was the first state in the country to legalize civil unions in 2000. Last year, an 11-member commission was set up by the leaders of the Vermont House and Senate, both Democrats, to look into Vermont’s civil unions law to see if it is providing equality for gay and lesbian couples.

It submitted its report to the legislature in April, but made no recommendations on revising the law to allow for same-sex marriage.

The Vermont Commission on Family Recognition and Protection detailed months of hearings it held throughout the state, where same-sex couples complained they were still discriminated against because employers, hospitals and insurance companies do not see their relationships as the equivalent of marriage.

The commission was chaired by former state Rep. Tom Little (R). Little was chairman of the House Judiciary Committee when it passed the law legalizing civil unions in 2000.

Little said the commission purposely decided not to include recommendations in the report. “That’s a decision for Vermont’s elected officials,” Little said at the time.

A public opinion survey earlier this year found that the majority of people in the state believe gay and lesbian couples should have the right to marry.

Earlier this week, the Boston-based group that won equal marriage rights in Massachusetts and Connecticut announced an ambitious plan to fight for equal marriage throughout New England and predicted success in the four additional states by 2012.

Meanwhile, police are investigating a death threat against Campbell over his gay marriage bill.

The threat was made by an anonymous woman angry over the proposed bill who telephoned Campbell. Campbell said she threatened to blow up his home.

Campbell said the threat was not just against him but also his family.

In signing the bill, President Bush said, “With this funding, we will support treatment for at least 3 million people.” However, the bill itself doesn’t set a specific target.

Early versions of the bill that passed the House specified a target of treating at least 3 million people by 2013, but that number was removed in the final version that Bush signed. Instead, the bill now says U.S. policy is to increase the number of people receiving anti-retroviral treatment beyond the original goal of 2 million.

The $48 billion measure renews the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, which is set to expire in September. The program has been credited by Republicans and Democrats alike with saving millions of lives in Africa alone.

The State Department said 1.7 million people had received treatment as of March 31 and the original bill’s 2 million-person goal will be reached by December.

The five-year, $48 billion plan renews a program credited with saving millions of lives in Africa alone and is widely seen as one of the major achievements of the Bush presidency.

Bush said the program, launched by him in 2003, “is the largest commitment by any nation to combat a single disease in human history.”

The president signed the bill in the ornate East Room of the White House, surrounded by lawmakers and people affected by AIDS whom he met on his February trip to Africa.

The legislation is a rare case of relatively easy cooperation between the Democratic-controlled Congress and the White House. It passed the House last week by a 303-115 vote and the Senate earlier in the month by a vote of 80-16.

It renews Bush’s original five-year, $15 billion program called the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, which was set to expire in September.

Some GOP conservatives questioned the new plan’s sharp spending increase. But most on both sides of the aisle, and in groups that advocate both health initiatives and Africa, praised the U.S. aid for boosting America’s reputation abroad.

Bush diverted from broader remarks to issue a personal appeal to those stricken with AIDS.

“Don’t let shame keep you from getting tested or treated,” he said. “Your life is treasured by the people who love you. … It matters to the people of the United States.”

The AIDS initiative has so far supported care for nearly 7 million people and helped deliver lifesaving anti-retroviral drugs to about 1.7 million HIV-positive people. With the AIDS pandemic now affecting 33 million people worldwide, both Democrats and Republicans have called it one of the most significant accomplishments of the Bush presidency.

The program’s five-year renewal comes with some significant changes that took months to negotiate: a third of prevention funds will no longer be reserved for abstinence education; a “conscience clause” gives religious groups the right to refuse participation; more focus is placed on women and girls; and HIV-positive people will find it easier to get visas into the United States.

Bush said the goal for the new funding is to prevent 12 million new HIV infections, treat more than 2 million with anti-retroviral drugs, support care for 12 million and train at least 140,000 new health care workers.

The 303-115 vote sends the global AIDS bill to President Bush for his signature. Bush, who first floated the idea of a campaign against the scourge of AIDS in his 2003 State of the Union speech, supports the five-year, $48 billion plan.

Passage of the bill culminated a rare instance of cooperation between the White House and the Democratic-controlled Congress. It was “born out of a willingness to work together and put the United States on the right side of history when it comes to this global pandemic,” said Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., a leader on the issue.

The current $15 billion act, which expires at the end of September, has helped bring lifesaving anti-retroviral drugs to some 1.7 million people and supported care for nearly 7 million. The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, known as PEPFAR, has won plaudits from some of Bush’s harshest critics both in Congress and around the world. Both Democrats and Republicans hailed it as one of the most significant accomplishments of the Bush presidency.

The United States, said Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, “has given hope to millions infected with the HIV virus, which just a few years ago was tantamount to a death sentence.”

According to a study by UNAIDS and the Kaiser Family Foundation, the United States provided one-fifth of AIDS funding from all sources – governments, international aid groups and the private sector – in 2007. About 40 percent of the $4.9 billion disbursed in 2007 from the G-8 countries, Europe and other donor governments came from the United States.

The legislation approves spending of $5 billion for malaria and $4 billion for tuberculosis, the leading cause of death for people with AIDS. It authorizes spending of up to $2 billion next year for the international Global Fund to Fight AIDS. The measure also provides $2 billion, on top of the $48 billion, for American Indian water, health and law enforcement programs.

While some GOP conservatives questioned the sharp spending increase, others said the U.S. aid had important security as well as moral implications and gave a needed boost to America’s reputation abroad.

The pandemic, said Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., top Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee, “is leaving a trail of poverty, despondency and death which has destabilized societies and undermined the security of entire regions.” The program has enhanced the U.S. image around the world, she said. “Even in the most remote areas of Kenya or Haiti, for example, people know about the PEPFAR program.”

PEPFAR has focused on nations in sub-Saharan Africa that have been devastated by AIDS, but it has also provided assistance in the Caribbean and other areas hit by the pandemic now affecting some 33 million worldwide. Even with advances in treating the disease, there are still about 7,000 new HIV infections every day around the world.

The new bill, like the current law, states that 10 percent of funds should be allocated for orphans and vulnerable children. It sets as a goal preventing 12 million new HIV infections, treating more than 2 million with anti-retroviral drugs, supporting care for 12 million people infected with HIV/AIDS and training at least 140,000 new health care workers and paraprofessionals.

It increases attention on women and girls, including stressing the importance of preventing gender-based violence.

Pamela W. Barnes, president and CEO of the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, applauded the bill’s target of reaching 80 percent of HIV-positive pregnant women with services needed to prevent transmission to their children. “We are still only reaching 34 percent of pregnant, HIV-positive mothers with the medicine they need to keep their babies HIV-free,” she said.

The final product took months of compromise: Democrats took out a provision in the existing act requiring that one-third of prevention funds be spent on abstinence education but allowed for reports to Congress if abstinence and fidelity spending falls below certain levels. Conservatives won “conscience clause” assurances that religious groups would not be forced to participate in programs to which they morally object.

Bush, who originally proposed doubling the program to $30 billion, first balked at but later accepted the $50 billion bill that passed the House in April. The Senate diverted $2 billion of the $50 billion to Indian programs and inserted a provision that more than half of funds for AIDS programs go for treatment and care.

The Senate also attached a measure, welcomed by AIDS advocacy groups, that ends a two-decade-old U.S. policy that has made it nearly impossible for HIV-positive people to get visas to this country as immigrants, students or tourists.

The bill is named after former House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairmen Henry Hyde, R-Ill., and Tom Lantos, D-Calif., who wrote the 2003 bill. Hyde died last November, and Lantos died in February as he was working on the new bill.