Comments on: Anti-Marriage Amendment To Be Introduced In Indiana http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/01/12/8007 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Sat, 18 May 2013 21:35:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Lynn David http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/01/12/8007/comment-page-1#comment-30543 Lynn David Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:35:58 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8007#comment-30543 Oh well.... I hope Timothy Kincaid is right. I was hoping this wouldn't come up this session. But then I was hoping California would be constitutionally free of such discrimination also. But what happened in California has only emboldened them for a new try in Indiana. The FRC wonk was Tony Perkins himself. The amendment's wording evidently is: "<i>Only a marriage between one man and one woman should be valid or recognized as a marriage in Indiana. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.</i>" Last time they said they didn't want to rule out Civil Unions should Indiana might want to extend certain rights in such a vehicle (Should? Like Indiana ever will); but the languange now is such that Civil Unions would specifically be denied by the amendment. Bil Browning at <a href="http://www.bilerico.com/2009/01/indianas_marriage_amendment_now_with_mor.php" rel="nofollow">Bilerco</a> has video concerrning the introduction of the amendment. See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwQ9OHZOoz8 Or the link <a href="http://www.bilerico.com/2009/01/indianas_marriage_amendment_now_with_mor.php" rel="nofollow">Bilerco</a>. Oh well…. I hope Timothy Kincaid is right.

I was hoping this wouldn’t come up this session. But then I was hoping California would be constitutionally free of such discrimination also. But what happened in California has only emboldened them for a new try in Indiana.

The FRC wonk was Tony Perkins himself.

The amendment’s wording evidently is: “Only a marriage between one man and one woman should be valid or recognized as a marriage in Indiana. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.”

Last time they said they didn’t want to rule out Civil Unions should Indiana might want to extend certain rights in such a vehicle (Should? Like Indiana ever will); but the languange now is such that Civil Unions would specifically be denied by the amendment.

Bil Browning at Bilerco has video concerrning the introduction of the amendment. See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwQ9OHZOoz8
Or the link Bilerco.

]]> By: Richard W. Fitch http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/01/12/8007/comment-page-1#comment-30514 Richard W. Fitch Tue, 13 Jan 2009 03:36:40 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8007#comment-30514 The last round of this fiasco was defeated largely by the efforts of several large Indiana corporations including Lily Pharmaceuticals and Cummins Engine. They maintain that to keep the best and brightest for their industries requires an environment that is open to diversity. Hopefully they and others will be as adamant should this new/resuscitated bill reach the full legislature. Sadly, Indiana has a very 'Southern' mentality. The last round of this fiasco was defeated largely by the efforts of several large Indiana corporations including Lily Pharmaceuticals and Cummins Engine. They maintain that to keep the best and brightest for their industries requires an environment that is open to diversity. Hopefully they and others will be as adamant should this new/resuscitated bill reach the full legislature. Sadly, Indiana has a very ‘Southern’ mentality.

]]> By: Lindoro http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/01/12/8007/comment-page-1#comment-30496 Lindoro Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:07:29 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8007#comment-30496 <em><strong>[Ed - removed due to violation of our <a href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/About/NoCrawl/CommentPolicy.htm" rel="nofollow">Comments Policy</a>].</strong></em> Anyone wanting to contact this Republican on a Democrat skin can use this address: Dave Cheatham 1210 W County Road 60 S North Vernon, IN 47265-7034 (812) 346-6697 [Ed - removed due to violation of our Comments Policy].

Anyone wanting to contact this Republican on a Democrat skin can use this address:

Dave Cheatham
1210 W County Road 60 S
North Vernon, IN 47265-7034
(812) 346-6697

]]> By: Timothy Kincaid http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/01/12/8007/comment-page-1#comment-30492 Timothy Kincaid Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23:14:14 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8007#comment-30492 In Indiana, the state constitution can be amended only by the affirmative vote of two separately elected consecutive legislatures (in each house) followed by a vote of the constituents. In other words, by this legislature, by that elected in 2010, and then to the people in 2012. This proposal has been passed in the state Senate three times now. It has been consistently shuffled off to death by committee in the House. This year it is likely to suffer the same fate. In Indiana, the state constitution can be amended only by the affirmative vote of two separately elected consecutive legislatures (in each house) followed by a vote of the constituents.

In other words, by this legislature, by that elected in 2010, and then to the people in 2012.

This proposal has been passed in the state Senate three times now. It has been consistently shuffled off to death by committee in the House. This year it is likely to suffer the same fate.

]]>