Nevada begins marriage ban repeal process (updated)

Timothy Kincaid

April 11th, 2013

Nevada joins Oregon in beginning the process of repealing their constitutional amendment restricting marriage to heterosexuals. (Sun)

[Senate Judiciary] Committee Chairman Sen. Tick Segerblom, D-Las Vegas, says there are enough votes for Senate Joint Resolution 13 to clear both the committee and the full Senate. Some Republicans are supporting the measure, he said.

The resolution being considered would repeal [the anti-gay marriage] ban. It would have to be approved by this Legislature and again in 2015 and then be put on the 2016 ballot.

Governor Brian Sandoval (R) has stated that he supports the state’s everything-but-the-name domestic partnerships law but believes marriage should be between one man and one woman. However, based on his history of support, I expect that he will evolve on this issue in the near future, likely before the referendum. His support is not needed to put the repeal on the ballot, but would be useful in the campaign.



SJR13 was approved Thursday on a 3-2 party line vote by the Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections. It now goes to the Senate floor.

The original language sought only to repeal language in the state Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

But a late amendment adopted by the committee adds that the state “shall recognize marriages and issue marriage licenses, regardless of gender.”

I hope that Equality Nevada knows what it’s doing. While I’d much prefer to eliminate the step of having to come back to the legislature for a confirmation of marriage after the ban is repealed, I hope we don’t lose support by this revision.

I hope they have done a good vote count, as in committee they did lose one affirmative vote, along with the very important ‘bipartisan’ label.

Republican Sen. James Settelmeyer of Minden says he would have voted for the original bill, but he withdrew his support because he doesn’t believe marriage should be in the Constitution.

Lindoro Almaviva

April 11th, 2013

Republican Sen. James Settelmeyer of Minden says he would have voted for the original bill, but he withdrew his support because he doesn’t believe marriage should be in the Constitution.

Maybe someone needs to provide for him the information as to who put marriage in the constitution to start with. I am going to take a wild guess, shoot in the dark, blindfolded and say that not very many Democrats were on board for that. I’d be happy to stand corrected.


April 11th, 2013

I’d say we should go all out. 2016 is a safe bet for voters approving marriage equality in Nevada. Plus, if Republicans kill this effort, it’ll expose them as hypocrites (“let the people vote” and now “don’t let the people vote”).


April 11th, 2013


I was thinking the same thing, they are for States Rights until the State might do something they disapprove of. It woulod be humorous if not such a serious issue.


April 16th, 2013

Decreeing that only men and women could marry each other, in other words, supposedly str8s only can marry was a political move to prevent marriage equality and a religious move in that it was to keep the “abominable” Gays invisible and in the closet. Never mind that Nevada was already an abomination in that it allows evil, devilish gambling followed by (str8 clients only) whorehouses.

There are two main reasons for the State of Nevada to change it’s decree of prejudice and discrimination:
1) Now that the landscape regarding American thinking and feeling towards Gays has turned positive, Nevada politicians know that marriage equality is the future. 2) Tied to #1 and more important is the fact that research shows that marriage equality states have increased dollars pumped into their economies. Gays like to spend money and have a great time. So, they throw untold dollars into their marriages celebrations. Nevada politicians want their state to get more than its fair share of the money that Gay marriages generate.

Ever since Village Idiot Bush destroyed the world economy, Nevada has taken it especially hard because folks have drastically cut back on tourism trips to the state.

Nevada’s revenue comes mainly from two sources: 1) the mining industry and 2) tourism. Nevada doesn’t want to be “Left Behind.” Nevada wants to re-gain its lion’s share of tourist dollars. Gay marriages are certain to increase tourism in the state and the revenue that such additional tourism will bring.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts


Another Temporary Hiatus

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1971: Minnesota Couple Stake Claim To First American Same-Sex Marriage

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1954: "Perverts Vanish" From Miami

Born On This Day, 1907: Evelyn Hooker

Born On This Day, 1925: Fr. John J. McNeill

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.