Skip to comments.Gay marriage supporters hail setback for Indiana ban
Posted on 02/13/2014 5:42:04 PM PST by Olog-hai
Opponents of an effort to place Indianas gay marriage ban in the state constitution won a surprising victory Thursday as the Senate effectively pushed off a statewide vote on the issue for at least two years, and possibly longer.
In a parliamentary move that spared state senators a tough vote on the measure, the Senate advanced the marriage ban without the second sentence ban on civil unions. The House stripped that language from the amendment before passing it last month, and the Senates decision not to restore the language before voting Thursday means the effort to amend the constitution must start fresh.
Even if Indianas marriage ban clears the Senate on a final vote Monday, it would have to be debated again in the next biennial session, 2015-16, before it could appear before voters.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Just pathetic shambling by the state GOP, being undermined by liberals in their own party. What a disgrace. I can see Dems taking over Indiana with these idiots running the show. Just plain sad.
This is one reason why I left Indiana for North Carolina, too many RINOS (even after many years of “Republican” rule under both Mitch Daniels and Mike Pence).
IMO what is spearheading this is the gay marriage crusaders as companies like CUMMINS and others in the Indianapolis area.
Typical gutless, cowardly Republicans. I don't have faith in the same court that declared Obamacare a "tax" and thus was legal and miraculously pulling a privacy law out of the Constitution's ass to legalize abortion.
So what does Mr. Indiana, Richard Lugar, say about all this?
People in IN just can’t figure out politics. They haven’t had anyone good since Homer Capehart unless you want to count Dan Quayle a little.
Even if voters approve such a ban, it is certain at some point to be struck down by Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Anthony Kennedy et al.
They’re always tell us that America overwhelming supports counterfeit “marriage” but won’t let them prove it at the ballot box.
They don’t believe their own polls.
Well, it’s appearing of late that even constitutional amendments aren’t black-robed-tyrant proof anymore, at the federal level anyway. I think that recent developments, though it may not stand, by some miracle, has kind of muffled the strong push this issue once had.
It was proven in four states in the last election. No activist judges or runaway legislatures there.
Hardly proven. I content that this last general election was the most corrupt, fraudulent farce in the history of this country. The numerous instances of circumstantial evidence of election fraud, although not rising to the level to convict a single individual or group in most cases, were ubiquitous in nearly every state. Precincts with over 110% voting age residents voting; districts WITHOUT A SINGLE VOTE for the Republican candidate; electronic voting machines which were SHOWN to default to the democrat candidates upon the verification step, etc., etc., etc......
Line me up...
“Impeachment in the United States is an expressed power of the legislature that allows for formal charges against a civil officer of government for crimes committed in office. The actual trial on those charges, and subsequent removal of an official on conviction on those charges, is separate from the act of impeachment itself.
Impeachment is analogous to indictment in regular court proceedings, while trial by the other house is analogous to the trial before judge and jury in regular courts. Typically, the lower house of the legislature will impeach the official and the upper house will conduct the trial.
At the federal level, Article II of the United States Constitution (Section 4) states that “The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.” The House of Representatives has the sole power of impeaching, while the United States Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. The removal of impeached officials is automatic upon conviction in the Senate. In Nixon v. United States (1993), the Supreme Court determined that the federal judiciary cannot review such proceedings.
Impeachment can also occur at the state level; state legislatures can impeach state officials, including governors, according to their respective state constitutions.
At the Philadelphia Convention, Benjamin Franklin noted that, historically, the removal of obnoxious chief executives had been accomplished by assassination. Franklin suggested that a proceduralized mechanism ...”
Thought Pence was a big social conservative.
Supposedly, but he didn’t really “fight” for the marriage amendment behind the scenes, so I have read, but I don’t know for sure so I can’t tell.
Pence is a social conservative, but TOO MANY RINOS in the Leg.