Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Indiana House approves constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages
FOX News ^ | 1-28-14 | FOX

Posted on 01/28/2014 2:42:09 PM PST by tcrlaf

Edited on 01/28/2014 3:29:27 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

INDIANAPOLIS The Indiana House of Representatives approved a proposal Tuesday that would place the state's gay marriage ban in the state constitution, while leaving the door open to eventual approval of civil unions.

The proposed ban, which cleared the chamber on 57-40 vote, now heads to the Indiana Senate, where members of the Senate Judiciary Committee are set to take up the issue.


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Indiana
KEYWORDS: amendment; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; indiana; marriageamendment; protectmarriage
Democrats are screaming bloody murder about this.

They KNOW it means huge numbers of average people, who donb't vote for a living, will turn out to vote against it, as has happened in every state that has been allowed to vote on it.

1 posted on 01/28/2014 2:42:09 PM PST by tcrlaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

I wonder if this thread will be flooded by those who oppose this action.

Most gay marriage threads get taken over by them.


2 posted on 01/28/2014 2:45:03 PM PST by ansel12 (Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

Why, why, this is something the TALIBAN would do. Oh wait, the taliban would actually KILL the fagola.


3 posted on 01/28/2014 2:45:25 PM PST by Zuben Elgenubi (NOPe to GOPe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

Only to have some activist judge come along and knock it down.


4 posted on 01/28/2014 2:45:48 PM PST by Thorliveshere (Minnesota Survivor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

Congrats to Indiana! Voting for my state’s constitutional definition of marriage as between one man and one woman was one of the three votes in my life that I was most proud of casting. The other two being for Reagan in ‘88 and for Palin in ‘08.


5 posted on 01/28/2014 2:49:05 PM PST by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
The longer this argument goes on, the less I care about it.

I was married for half my life and was miserable.

Anybody who wants to share that kind of misery is welcome to do so in my book.

6 posted on 01/28/2014 2:49:08 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

What are the chances in the senate, and the guv’s desk?


7 posted on 01/28/2014 2:49:21 PM PST by umgud (2A can't survive dem majorities)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

I thought they already had an amendment.


8 posted on 01/28/2014 2:49:47 PM PST by darkangel82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greene66

Oops, I meant Reagan in ‘84.


9 posted on 01/28/2014 2:50:02 PM PST by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

Hooray, Indiana! Maybe you’ll lead the way for other states and start the return to sanity.

Of course, all this means is that homo “marriage” is ultimately destined to be decided by the Supreme Court.


10 posted on 01/28/2014 2:54:05 PM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I only oppose the fact that the Democraps git the camels nose in the tent by removing the civil union ban. Other than that it’s great news. God bless Indiana. Went demo once.... never again!


11 posted on 01/28/2014 2:57:27 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

YEA!


12 posted on 01/28/2014 2:57:35 PM PST by JSDude1 (Defeat Hagan, elect a Constutional Conservative: Dr. Greg Brannon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
>> I wonder if this thread will be flooded by those who oppose this action. Most gay marriage threads get taken over by them. <<

Strange, most of the folks who want to surrender to the gay agenda nationally claim we should "send it back to the states" and wash our hands of it, so they should be happy the STATE of Indiana is doing as they on the STATE level.

13 posted on 01/28/2014 3:11:17 PM PST by BillyBoy (Looking at the weather lately, I could really use some 'global warming' right now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

“send it back to the states”

But it SHOULD be a state issue, same way as some states recognize common-law marriage and some don’t, some have different age limits, some allow first cousins to marry, etc. Don’t get me wrong, I’m totally against gay “marriage”. Here in Washington State it got jammed through in spite of the fact that some of us troglodytes said no. I’m just saying the Constitution doesn’t touch on it so the power is not the Feds’ to use.


14 posted on 01/28/2014 3:22:08 PM PST by beelzepug (if any alphabets are watchin', I'll be coming home right after the meetin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

The Judge Shopping Begins.


15 posted on 01/28/2014 3:28:03 PM PST by Oliviaforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

I wasn’t talking about those, I meant the many here who rather than talking about fighting gay marriage politically and legislatively, have fallen into escapism, and just go on fantasying endlessly about wanting to just remove all marriage/divorce law in America.


16 posted on 01/28/2014 3:28:25 PM PST by ansel12 (Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

begs the question ... why did they not do this years ago?


17 posted on 01/28/2014 3:32:37 PM PST by campaignPete R-CT (Let the dead bury the dead. Let the GOP bury the GOP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
They KNOW it means huge numbers of average people, who don't vote for a living, will turn out to vote against it, as has happened in every state that has been allowed to vote on it.

No, in 2012 voters in Minnesota rejected an amendment outlawing same-sex marriage.

18 posted on 01/28/2014 3:40:12 PM PST by ConstantSkeptic (Be careful about preconceptions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug; Impy; EternalVigilance
>> But it SHOULD be a state issue <<

And how well did that work with the slavery issue? Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

I agree many things should be left up to individual states, but they don't have the "right" to do things like redefine natural law, claiming black people are not humans or call something "marriage" that is biologically impossible.

19 posted on 01/28/2014 3:41:23 PM PST by BillyBoy (Looking at the weather lately, I could really use some 'global warming' right now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

Amen.


20 posted on 01/28/2014 3:45:02 PM PST by EternalVigilance (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ConstantSkeptic
No, in 2012 voters in Minnesota rejected an amendment outlawing same-sex marriage.

Right. In 2012 the radical Left was allowed to turn an electoral corner, because A) the Left poured all their resources into forwarding their immoral agenda in four states. And B) The GOP, under the control of the Romney Republicans, for the first time completely ignored the issue.

Prior to that surrender though, we beat them every single time at the ballot box. More than thirty times in a row, in fact.

21 posted on 01/28/2014 3:49:05 PM PST by EternalVigilance (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
while leaving the door open to eventual approval of civil unions.

"Civil unions" = "gay marriage" with a different label.

22 posted on 01/28/2014 3:50:09 PM PST by EternalVigilance (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug
But it SHOULD be a state issue, same way as some states recognize common-law marriage and some don’t, some have different age limits, some allow first cousins to marry, etc. Don’t get me wrong, I’m totally against gay “marriage”.

Common law marriage for instance, if it is legal, then all states and the federal government recognize it, that goes for the rest of the minor variations among states.

The federal government also has to deal with marriage, and has had it's own laws dealing with it since 1780, the military, immigration families, federal employment, are all areas where the feds have to deal with marriage law.

23 posted on 01/28/2014 3:57:13 PM PST by ansel12 (Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

If Wikipedia can be trusted (a big if), here is how Indiana’s House is divided:

69 Republicans, 31 Demon-Rats

The Indiana House is divided:
39 Republicans, 13 Demon-Rats (apparently 1 vacancy)


24 posted on 01/28/2014 4:15:22 PM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

Would they also ban same sex marriages between people who are not “gay”?


25 posted on 01/28/2014 4:41:43 PM PST by Figment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Figment

? What’s your point?


26 posted on 01/28/2014 4:48:41 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

This is a defeat for those that fight for sanctity of marriage. Law had to be passed two years in a row without amendment. By passing an amended law, the cowards both left a door open for civil unions AND delayed the vote by another year making sure it does not go on the ballot in 2014. Dems and RINO’s doing what they always do.


27 posted on 01/28/2014 5:35:37 PM PST by BurningOak (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2830849/reply?c=1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

We have gay marriage supporters?


28 posted on 01/28/2014 6:02:09 PM PST by Impy (RED=COMMUNIST, NOT REPUBLICAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Impy

we even have “abolish legal marriage” supporters here, unfortunately


29 posted on 01/28/2014 6:03:21 PM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug; ansel12; BillyBoy; AuH2ORepublican; fieldmarshaldj

I disagree, if we could ban it federally (can’t currently of course) we absolutely should.


30 posted on 01/28/2014 6:04:21 PM PST by Impy (RED=COMMUNIST, NOT REPUBLICAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy; EternalVigilance

the Constitution guarantees each state a Republican Form of Government ...

that has long gone by the wayside ...
1. One-party rule
2. state Supreme Courts, like CT, declaring gay marriage
over the will of the legislature. Hardly a Rep. Form of Gov


31 posted on 01/28/2014 6:13:44 PM PST by campaignPete R-CT (Let the dead bury the dead. Let the GOP bury the GOP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Impy

I see now what I left out of post 2.

We do have libertarians/rinos here who support and promote gay marriage, but that isn’t what I meant.

I meant the ones who try to turn these threads into arguments for somehow erasing marriage and divorce law in America, to them it becomes up to each individual and church, and Mosque, and cult, and gay assembly, to just make up their own marriages.

Some of those people also seem to believe that their argument means that THEIR church makes the rule, but the fantasy is that there be no law, no government.

It is a very confusing and politically useless argument, setting the GOP off on that campaign is not going to have any effect on stopping gay marriage and polygamy, besides, the GOP would never adopt such a fantasy anyway.


32 posted on 01/28/2014 6:17:32 PM PST by ansel12 (Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Impy

I’m for fighting it at city hall, at the county seat, at the state level, at the federal level, at every agency, in immigration, in the military, at the UN, and for parachuting leaflets over countries that are succumbing.


33 posted on 01/28/2014 6:20:42 PM PST by ansel12 (Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: trisham

Point #1 Gay marriage and same sex marriage aren’t even close to the same thing. Point#2 I didn’t ask you anything


34 posted on 01/28/2014 6:26:28 PM PST by Figment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
Indiana House approves constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages

Thank you...hope it passes...

35 posted on 01/28/2014 6:31:54 PM PST by ExCTCitizen (2014: The Year of DEAD RINOS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; GeronL
I meant the ones who try to turn these threads into arguments for somehow erasing marriage and divorce law in America

I heard a couple radical gay activists on TV say that they would like that just fine.

36 posted on 01/28/2014 9:20:29 PM PST by Impy (RED=COMMUNIST, NOT REPUBLICAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Impy

and I don’t want to be on the same side as that.

if religious people start forgoing marriage licensing, that’s one thing, but wanting to basically abolish the institution of marriage is insane


37 posted on 01/28/2014 9:41:49 PM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

People can already make up their own marriage rules as long as they don’t mind it not being legal.

In America religion means any and all religions, for instance polygamous Islam.

Besides, not many people want to not qualify as legally married, that works for short term shacking up, but not for people who intend to build extended families and estates and join the military, or so many other things, and when divorce came, most people would want to go to court and fight under law.


38 posted on 01/28/2014 9:58:28 PM PST by ansel12 (Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

FINALLY!!!! Go Indiana!!


39 posted on 01/29/2014 2:04:00 AM PST by Ann Archy (Abortion......the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darkangel82

Indiana has a very long, drawn out process for amending their constitution. Two consecutive legislatures must approve the change (every two years), before it can go before voters. This is the second time it has to be approved by the legislature.


40 posted on 01/29/2014 4:18:02 AM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT; BillyBoy

Time to take it back then.

See my tagline.


41 posted on 01/29/2014 5:23:44 AM PST by EternalVigilance (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

The label is important, making the distinction between those couples of the procreative sort and those couples with same-sex attraction disorder. Marriage is a child-based institution; civil unions are purely for the selfish interests of the disordered couple.

Civil unions would not be just for same-sex couples, but for any combination of couple regardless of relationship. A brother and a sister; a divorced mom and her son; two brothers, etc....


42 posted on 01/29/2014 5:50:18 AM PST by MikeyB806
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Figment

You made a post on a forum. If you didn’t want responses, you should have made a private post using mail.


43 posted on 01/29/2014 7:29:24 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson