[pissant]

Wow. Why would this fail in one of the top 5 most conservative states in the Union? I hope you spud-heads replace the politicians who voted no in the next election!

[lilylangtree]

Sad. WA state is next. God help us all.

[BibChr]

Wha-a-at?? Idaho?!!

That's where I've wanted to move!

Unngh!

/c8<

Dan

[taxesareforever]

Liberal strains are deeper than what we had hoped.

[rockrr]

First Washington (state), then Idaho and Montana.

I believe what you're seeing is the "liberal flight" effect - the lefties leaving Kalifornica and infesting other areas.

The "Homies" need to stop these parasites in their tracks, lest you find yourself in the same straits as Washington...

[snarkytart]

The gay lobby has tons of money thats why.
It is so sad that the politicians really only represent the interests of a very few.

The majority's opinion is irrelevant to them. They figure we are too busy living our lives and working to care about what they are doing.

Squeaky wheel gets the oil thing!

[BullDog108]

Sad. Sad. Sad. Kansas ahead of Idaho.....

[So Cal Rocket]

Eight Republican senators joined with six Democrats to form a blockade of moderates.

Does Utah have a Recall provision in their State Constitution? Looks like there's at least 8 targets right here.

[old and tired]

I know nothing about this, but off the top of my head I'd guess it's about polygamy. Aren't there a good number of renegade old school Mormon people there in Idaho?

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Opponents say the state should not discriminate against an entire class of people based on their sexual preference, and they also argue that the legislation is unnecessary and mean-spirited because gay marriage is already prohibited by law.

Opponents can argue that it is discrimination OR that it is unnecessary because of current law. They can't legitimately argue both unless they also seek to repeal the law. If the amendment is discriminatory then so is the law. But they will never spend the politcal capital to repeal the law; they want the courts to do it for them. That's the REAL reason they don't want the amendment.

[Mark in the Old South]

Idaho? Hummmm? Isn't that where Jackson Hole is located.

No wait that's WY. Never mind

[atomicpossum]

Notice it failed amongst politicians, not in a vote of the people.

[Veto!]

Doesn't Idaho already have marriage laws that describe marriage correctly? Probably they are not voting against gay marriage ban because they think they already have it covered, and besides, they don't want to face any more bigotry charges from the media.

Can some Idahoan please explain?

[cruiserman]

Idaho has a relatively large contingent of libertarians.

[Truthsayer20]

Conservatism in the North-West has a more libertarian orientation than, for example, in the South. This vote is not a big suprise to me.

[KillBill]

I have to agree with the moderates here. Unless there's a reason they can't make it illegal without an amendment, they shouldn't go for an amendment. This is just pandering here.

[cardinal4]

Isnt 14 out of 21 two thirds?

[B Knotts]

This is odd. We passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman here in Oregon by a good margin.

Now the pro-"homosexual-marriage" activists are trying to argue that we don't have the right to amend the state constitution on certain subjects.

[MileHi]

PING

[B Knotts]

Ah ha. I see what the problem is. Idaho, like Washington, has no procedure for voter-initiated constitutional amendments.

In Oregon, we have full citizen initiative and referendum rights.

[THEUPMAN]

"blockade of moderates. "

no ... a blockade of militant pro homosexuals

there is nothing moderate about the sodomite agenda.