Debate on a controversial gay rights bill stalled yesterday in the state Senate when opponents of the measure attempted to sidetrack the legislation with a less protective amendment.

The counter-proposal, which was offered just hours after debate on the bill opened, forced the Senate to end consideration of the measure until this morning.

Supporters of the bill said the substitute proposal is "innocuous and ineffective," and an attempt to prevent passage of any gay rights bill before the Senate disbands next month.

The initial bill would prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, credit and loans based on sexual orientation. The House of Representatives has already passed the measure.

The amendment, presented by Senator Arthur J. Lewis, Jr. (D-Boston), would make it illegal for employers and landlords to inquire about the sexual orientation of a prospective employee or tenant. The amendment, however, does not explicitly state that it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

"Lewis' amendment is an attempt to gut the bill and prevent its enforcement," said William J. Hutchinson, chairman of the Greater Boston Lesbian and Gay Political Alliance. "It is simply an attempt to delay consideration of the bill. After it is discussed on the floor it will go back into committee for up to 45 days."

The Senate debate comes amid continued furor following a recent Archdiocese of Boston editorial, which claimed that the bill protects homosexual activity and increases the risk of AIDS.

The Editorial

The editorial appeared in this week's Pilot, the official Archdiocese newspaper.

While editors at The Pilot defended the newspaper's stance, many of the bill's supporters and gay rights activists have contested the editorial as factually incorrect and reactionary.

"The writer clearly did not read the civil rights bill we are debating. It is simply the existing civil rights legislation which protects citizens from discriminatrion on the basis of sex and race expanded to include protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation," said Michael J. Barrett '70 (D--Cambridge), a Catholic state Senator who is managing the bill on the floor, yesterday.

The Pilot's Executive Editor Philip F. Lawler '72, who wrote the editorial, defended his statements, saying, "The law states precisely that homosexuals, bisexuals and heterosexuals are equally entitled to all facets of the law."