Indiana Assembly To Delay Vote On Mar...

Indiana Assembly To Delay Vote On Marriage Equality Ban

There are 23 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Feb 7, 2013, titled Indiana Assembly To Delay Vote On Marriage Equality Ban. In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma and Indiana Senate President Pro Tem David Long, both Republicans, announced that they will delay any action on a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage until 2014.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1 Feb 7, 2013
I don't buy it.

No one really believes the SCOTUS is going to overturn all state bans with their decision(s) in June.

More likely the Indiana GOP isn't sure they have the votes.
Neil Andblowme

Hoboken, NJ

#2 Feb 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
I don't buy it.
No one really believes the SCOTUS is going to overturn all state bans with their decision(s) in June.
More likely the Indiana GOP isn't sure they have the votes.
I agree.
straight shooter

Montpelier, VT

#3 Feb 7, 2013
Neil Andblowme wrote:
<quoted text> I agree.
you don't have a clue...
stop pretending you do...

what job did you claim you had at GE?
forget already?
AzAdam

United States

#4 Feb 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
I don't buy it.
No one really believes the SCOTUS is going to overturn all state bans with their decision(s) in June.
More likely the Indiana GOP isn't sure they have the votes.
I believe

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#5 Feb 7, 2013
AzAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe
You're going to be disappointed.
David Traversa

Buenos Aires, Argentina

#6 Feb 7, 2013
The dinosaurs.. that's the way they will be remembered..
AzAdam

United States

#7 Feb 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
You're going to be disappointed.
Hope is worth the disappointment
AzAdam

United States

#8 Feb 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
You're going to be disappointed.
Expect gloating if you're wrong. I'm not above gloating.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#9 Feb 7, 2013
Sheeple's correct. If the anti-gay had the votes, they would snatch the opportunity while it is in hand. Even Republicans can see the direction things are headed. England and Wales are ready to enact marriage equality by a landslide vote, and Scotland will follow. So will France, but the English vote will have a profound effect on American politicians.

Waiting merely gives our side more opportunity to weaken the grip of the homophobes. And it forces the issue into an election year, when it can only harm the homophobes.[The people who are keen to see the amendment will know whom to re-elect to assure passage in the next session, whether the vote happens in 2013 or 2014. The mildly-interested will be aroused from their slumber by a divisive vote in 2014.]

So, as I understand it, 2016 is the first election that Indiana's constitutional amendment will be on the ballot. By that time, England, Scotland, and France will be practicing marriage equality, and their actions have more effect on Americans than Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, The Netherlands, Belgium, and Spain put together.

In addition, three to five more legislatures are likely to enact marriage equality. At least one more will enact civil unions.

Against this backdrop, even the Hoosiers may not be anxious to pass and amendment, especially in a Presidential election year.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#10 Feb 7, 2013
.....Eric Miller, stating I think its important to let the people of Indiana know and let the Supreme Court know that Indiana is going to continue to move forward to protect marriage between a man and a woman.

Once again, protect it FROM WHAT???? More loving couples that wish to honor and participate in the institution??? Oh, the horror!!!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#11 Feb 7, 2013
AzAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Expect gloating if you're wrong. I'm not above gloating.
If they SHOULD happen to overturn all the bans, I'll be celebrating right along with you.

I prefer to be realistic in my expectations. I think both DOMA & Prop 8 will be overturned, but the Prop 8 decision will almost certainly be limited to just California.

I WISH the SCOTUS would overturn all bans.
I HOPE someday the will overturn all bans.

I'm just realistic enough to know that's it's highly unlikely they'll do it now.

Do you have an actual reason why you think they're going to overturn all the bans at once, or are you just blindly hoping they will?

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#12 Feb 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
You're going to be disappointed.
Time will tell, they have surprised us before.

As for Indiana attempts to delay equality are futile.
AzAdam

United States

#13 Feb 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
If they SHOULD happen to overturn all the bans, I'll be celebrating right along with you.
I prefer to be realistic in my expectations. I think both DOMA & Prop 8 will be overturned, but the Prop 8 decision will almost certainly be limited to just California.
I WISH the SCOTUS would overturn all bans.
I HOPE someday the will overturn all bans.
I'm just realistic enough to know that's it's highly unlikely they'll do it now.
Do you have an actual reason why you think they're going to overturn all the bans at once, or are you just blindly hoping they will?
2 reasons.

1. If they wanted to limit the effect of the ruling to CA, all they had to do is not take it.

2. To lose, Kennedy must vote against equality. I think a pro gay vote from Roberts is more likely than an anti equality vote from Kennedy.

I think DOMA falls 6-3 and prop 8 falls 5-4.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#14 Feb 7, 2013
AzAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
2 reasons.
1. If they wanted to limit the effect of the ruling to CA, all they had to do is not take it.
2. To lose, Kennedy must vote against equality. I think a pro gay vote from Roberts is more likely than an anti equality vote from Kennedy.
I think DOMA falls 6-3 and prop 8 falls 5-4.
Okay, at least you have some reasoning.

However, since we don't know which justices voted to take the Prop 8 case (it only takes 4 votes), it could have been the 4 conservatives who voted to take it with the hope of getting Kennedy's vote. That will likely be futile, but I think that's the most likely reason they decided to take the Prop 8 case; not to make a sweeping ruling to overturn all bans.

I agree Roberts is a possible "yes" vote to overturn DOMA, but that won't affect state bans either.

I could also see them making a very narrow ruling on DOMA as well which could limit it just to the plaintiff involved or at most the 2nd circuit by ruling BLAG doesn't have standing to appeal.
AzAdam

Scottsdale, AZ

#15 Feb 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, at least you have some reasoning.
However, since we don't know which justices voted to take the Prop 8 case (it only takes 4 votes), it could have been the 4 conservatives who voted to take it with the hope of getting Kennedy's vote. That will likely be futile, but I think that's the most likely reason they decided to take the Prop 8 case; not to make a sweeping ruling to overturn all bans.
I agree Roberts is a possible "yes" vote to overturn DOMA, but that won't affect state bans either.
I could also see them making a very narrow ruling on DOMA as well which could limit it just to the plaintiff involved or at most the 2nd circuit by ruling BLAG doesn't have standing to appeal.
Assuming the conservative justices were the ones voting to take the case, the liberals could get Kennedy's vote and still make a sweeping ruling.

Since: Jul 09

Indy/Philly/Toronto

#16 Feb 7, 2013
" ... Indiana is going to continue to move forward to protect marriage between a man and a woman.- Eric Miller

Hey douche bag! That is NOT moving forward. It's called regression. It's called discrimination. It's called bigotry. It's called the GOP.

Your days are numbered. Even in back-assward Indiana.(I can say that ... I was born there.)

Have a nice day.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#17 Feb 8, 2013
AzAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
2 reasons.
1. If they wanted to limit the effect of the ruling to CA, all they had to do is not take it.
2. To lose, Kennedy must vote against equality. I think a pro gay vote from Roberts is more likely than an anti equality vote from Kennedy.
I think DOMA falls 6-3 and prop 8 falls 5-4.
I hope you're right about the final votes. But I think you should also consider the state's rights influence on this court. They could make a strong advance by overturning DOMA at the same time they uphold Prop 8.

As for broadening the Ninth Circuit's decision, I just don't see five justices being eager to do that. At best, we get a decision minimally in our favor on Prop 8.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#18 Feb 8, 2013
AzAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Assuming the conservative justices were the ones voting to take the case, the liberals could get Kennedy's vote and still make a sweeping ruling.
Of course they COULD, I just don't think it's likely they WILL. The court tends to avoid sweeping decisions and instead address the issue before them; in this case the issue is whether Prop8 violated the constitution by taking away a right previously granted from just one particular group.

Our recent victories at the ballot box makes it MORE likley the SCOTUS will let this issue work through the states a while longer.

Just my opinion.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#19 Feb 8, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Of course they COULD, I just don't think it's likely they WILL. The court tends to avoid sweeping decisions and instead address the issue before them; in this case the issue is whether Prop8 violated the constitution by taking away a right previously granted from just one particular group.
Our recent victories at the ballot box makes it MORE likley the SCOTUS will let this issue work through the states a while longer.
Just my opinion.
One could take such a narrow view, or they could take the even narrower one of whether Prop 8 was fundamentally constitutional. I don't see any way that they could find it does not violate the 14th Amendment, because I have never heard any argument offering a legitimate state interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry. It will be an interesting case to watch.
AzAdam

United States

#20 Feb 8, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope you're right about the final votes. But I think you should also consider the state's rights influence on this court. They could make a strong advance by overturning DOMA at the same time they uphold Prop 8.
As for broadening the Ninth Circuit's decision, I just don't see five justices being eager to do that. At best, we get a decision minimally in our favor on Prop 8.
I'm not all pie in the sky optimism. I do see the potential for the court to make a states rights issue out of these two cases. I just think if they did that, it would be a poor choice since a tide of change is sweeping anti gay laws away. They can see that. Why pick, as a states rights case, something that would be overturned soon?

I also consider they may have taken these cases to make a point that lower courts have improperly allowed uninvolved parties to advance these cases.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 12 min RevKen 33,357
News Rare Under 40 poll: This is what young people t... 14 min JohnInToronto 15
News Gay marriage (Mar '13) 17 min Nine Ball 59,835
News Bette Midler Weighs In on Josh Duggar Scandal, ... 27 min Tazo 30
News Rick Santorum Will Fight The Supreme Court If I... 37 min lides 109
News Jenner debuts post-Bruce look, breaks Twitter r... 39 min Gremlin 1
News Merkel's party resists calls to embrace full ga... 51 min Gremlin 11
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr lides 21,892
News Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 1 hr lides 2,674
News Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 9 hr NoahLovesU 5,783
More from around the web