RICHMOND, Va. (AP) – Social conservatives will continue to push their agenda in the 2006 General Assembly despite losses by two of their favorite legislators in the fall elections, activists and lawmakers say.

The defeats of Republican Dels. Dick Black of Loudoun County and Brad Marrs of Chesterfield County were viewed by some as evidence that Virginians are tired of legislators focusing on hot-button social issues instead of core services such as public education and transportation.

“The voters of Virginia have spoken, and it would behoove the legislators to listen to those voters and address more pressing statewide issues,” said Ben Greenberg, executive director of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia.

Marrs complained that the news media made too much of campaign literature in which he pointed out that his opponent, independent Katherine Waddell, received a big donation from an openly gay auto dealer.

Black is among the legislature’s most outspoken opponents of abortion and gay rights. He created a furor in 2003 when he sent state senators pink plastic fetus dolls with a letter asking, “Would you kill this child?”

Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, who also is one of the state’s most conservative lawmakers, said he doesn’t buy the notion that Black and Marrs were doomed by their right-of-center ideology. He said both were dragged down by Republican Jerry Kilgore’s failed campaign for governor.

“I don’t see this as a refutation of conservative values at all,” said Lingamfelter, R-Prince William, who noted that other high-profile social conservatives were re-elected.

Among them was Bob Marshall, R-Prince William. Marshall has sponsored a raft of anti-abortion bills, and he said his campaign brochures plainly stated that he opposes same-sex marriage.

“I got elected – why the hell should I back off?” Marshall said during a recent panel discussion before journalists at the fourth annual AP Day at the Capital.

Same-sex marriage will be back on the legislative agenda when the session opens Jan. 11. The General Assembly last year approved a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman. The proposal must be approved a second time, after an intervening House of Delegates election, before being put before voters in a statewide referendum in November.

Eighteen other states have approved similar constitutional amendments, according to Family Foundation of Virginia spokesperson Victoria Cobb.

“It’s increasingly popular with the electorate, and we assume legislators will continue to respond to the voters,” said Cobb, who added that passage of the amendment is the foundation’s top priority for 2006.

Cobb noted that state law already bans same-sex marriage, but she said adding the prohibition to the constitution would make it clear that Virginia does not recognize same-sex “civil unions” or domestic partnerships performed in other states.

Some conservative lawmakers also have promised a fight over a provision in Gov. Mark R. Warner’s proposed state budget banning discrimination against gays and lesbians in state agency hiring practices. Warner had previously issued an executive order to that effect, but adding it to the budget would make it a state law.

Abortion opponents are expected to once again advocate legislation requiring abortion clinics to meet the same standards as outpatient surgery centers and mandating anesthesia for the fetus when a woman has an abortion.

Cobb said the Family Foundation will lobby for legislation requiring libraries that receive state funds to install Internet filters on computers to prevent users from looking at sexually explicit Web sites. Librarians would have authority to disable the filters for anyone doing “legitimate research,” Cobb said.

Lingamfelter said his top priority will be a bill requiring parental notification when a minor seeks birth control, treatment for sexually transmitted diseases or counseling for suicidal thoughts at a public health clinic. The legislation has been defeated in previous sessions.

“The thing that is always brought up is that if you tell the parents, the kids won’t use the facility. Well, good grief, are parents responsible for these kids or not?” Lingamfelter said.

Greenberg said anyone who wants to reduce abortions should oppose the bill because discouraging sexually active teens from getting birth control only leads to more unintended pregnancies.