IBJNews

  • Home

Indiana Senate approves marriage amendment

Associated Press
March 29, 2011
Keywords
Constitutional amendment, Elected Officials, Gay Marriage, Government, Legislation, Legislature, State Government
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana Senate has approved a proposed amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage and civil unions.

The 40-10 vote on Tuesday happened below an empty public gallery, which was closed after protesters disrupted the Senate's debate of the resolution Monday.

The amendment states that "Only a marriage between one (1) man and one (1) woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Indiana. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized."

Democratic Sen. Tim Lanane of Anderson argued that attitudes toward same-sex marriages are rapidly changing and the amendment would make it difficult for future changes in state law.

Current state law prohibits gay marriages. Amendment sponsor Sen. Dennis Kruse of Auburn says the measure would provide maximum protection for the basic family unit of society.

The Republican-led House approved the amendment last month. The measure must pass both the House and Senate again in 2013 or 2014 to go before voters on the 2014 ballot.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Religion....
    JoeMarch 30, 2011 3:20 PM
    Religion is purely the shield used to drive this agenda. Adultery is supposed to be punished by death according to the bible and divorce and remarriage is considered adultery. Why are we not killing people that break this insane religious cult rule...oops! I mean law?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • response to your "Good Public Policy"
    CarolMarch 30, 2011 3:17 PM
    Wow!! How easy is it for you to to just say such outlandish things as "it is good public policy period" and they "don't know what is best for them"? But apparently you DO know what is best for them. You remarks are among the worst.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Good public policy
    GaryMarch 30, 2011 3:04 PM
    I understand that many only want to do what they want to do, not what is best for them or especially anyone else. But this is a policy decision as to what is best for Indiana, and this is best. Period.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • My Goodness...
      PrestonMarch 30, 2011 1:58 PM
      Well, it's nice to know that those hypocritical cowardly elected officials are watching out for our welfare. Although, I'm not quite sure exactly WHY a marriage or commitment ceremony between two people who love each other is going to harm anyone else's marriage? It's not being done for pro-creation, which in your thinking should also invalidate all marriages of couples either unwilling or unable to have children. It's being done for love. If you have a problem with that, you should put your personal biases (read: bigotry; hatred; fear; and blatant out-and-out discrimination) aside and vote for your constituency, not only the small and too-vocal minority who drags religion into what is supposed to me a free country, which includes freedom to worship more than one deity...
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Hypocrits
      CarolMarch 30, 2011 1:46 PM
      If our legislature truly wants to protect marriage then they need to outlaw divorce and make adultery a felony. Marriage is a civil right, not a religious right. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO GET MARRIED IN A CHURCH!!! Has our legislature forgotten that? No, they are using this as a tool to gain votes from people who are afraid of what they don't know. Removing civil rights from a group of people on religious grounds sounds a lot like what countries we go to war against do!
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Wrong on every level
      JuliaMarch 30, 2011 1:32 PM
      Why does the Indiana state legislature hate freedom?
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • So much wrong with it
      LovingHumanMarch 30, 2011 1:29 PM
      The thought of banning any kind of loving, caring, people from civil union is ludicrous to me. May I also point out that this is taking away civil unions of all kinds? I am a straight woman who has been in a civil union for over 10 years to a kind and loving man. And yes, there is working in that amendment to say that we no longer are considered a couple with any rights of married couples in the state of Indiana because we chose not to get married in a religious ceremony. In fact they were trying to figure out how to work in that those in previously recognized unions would have to pay back taxes as they would have to re-file as single. However, I understand they couldnââ?¬â?¢t come to an agreement on that point. Lack of punctuation notwithstanding, some of the comments here are simply from sheep following the herd. And, it seems that you have cherry-i=picked what you believe is in the Bible. If you want to say we are not "married" fine. Leave ââ?¬Å?marriageââ?¬Â? as a religious institution. But give us the right to claim the civil union that was sanctioned in 2000. ANY civil rights should not be trampled on like this ââ?¬â?? homosexual, straight, African American, American Indian, White, Hispanic, Asian, and anything in between. Oh, and so that you are aware, Cummins and Lilly are both perturbed enough about this to discuss leaving Indiana if it goes through. Exactly what we need in a downturn economy! (stepping off of soap box now)
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Gay Marriage Ban
      JoyceMarch 30, 2011 12:54 PM
      Why are our legislators wasting their time and our money on this issue? If two gay people love each other and want to be married, why not? There are benefits to being married that they are denied without legal married status, like next of kin rights. I hope the Supreme Court of the United States shoots down these gay marriage bans for what they are, a violation of civil rights.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Bible Belt?
      SassafrasMarch 30, 2011 9:58 AM
      Just a note on Usually Quiet's comments:

      This isn't remotely the Bible Belt, unless the Bible Belt covers 2/3 of the country. There are many far more conservative places than Indiana, I can assure you of that. I'm not in favor of this law, but to make it sound like it's extreme is ridiculous, when most of Indiana's neighboring states already have such a law in place.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Steve.....
      JoeMarch 30, 2011 8:47 AM
      Nothing would remove marriage between one man and one woman. Biblical references should not account for governing law. Your reference to AIDS is remarkably ignorant. AIDS has been traced as early as WWII in response to changing ecological habits. AIDS isn't a direct result of being gay, it was simply publicized so "people" like you could have ammunition against gay people. People die in car accidents, but we don't ban people over 16 years old from getting a license? It isn't about what you believe in, it is about what rights a human being has and they should be allowed to get married to whoever they want. On your mysterious "judgement day", I will gladly stand next to a gay couple and defend their love against your hate.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • real truth
      steveMarch 29, 2011 9:40 PM
      I'm glad the one man one woman marriage will stay in place. God created man and woman, God institued marriage for man and woman. This same sex marriage thing is wrong biblically. Alot of people don't believe in God or the bible. That's your right, I don't have to stand in judgement for you. Also, lot of the Aids epidemic started from this sort of thing. I don't believe in same sex maarriage, and there are more important things going on that should be resolved besides this.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • progress
        JBMarch 29, 2011 9:30 PM
        so why not ban interracial marriage as well? interesting how such a small few make decisions for the whole on how you are allowed to love someone. the idea of a free country belongs to those with plenty of capital in their pocket.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • WRONG
        JoeMarch 29, 2011 6:46 PM
        The bible isn't the governing body of the public. The bible is a novel that many people use to guide their lives. At no point should it restrict harmless freedoms of an individual. If we subject ourselves to religous doctrines, why not follow Buddhism? They have equal testimony to history and just as many facts to support it, although they attempt to improve society, a radical difference then Christians. I assume none of you that are against gay marriage work on the Sabbath? If so you are instructed to be put to death. Also if your Ox gores a man to death, the Ox shall be stoned. It is also ok to enslave a Hebrew for 6 years. Lets truly live the bible if you wish. Don't subject individuals to personal beliefs when it pleases you! If you believe in a loving and just god, what do you think she will prefer in heaven? A human who loved another or a monster who subjected a human to insult and disgrace?
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Are these really the people we want out of our state?
        Usually QuietMarch 29, 2011 6:17 PM
        First of all, I'm a heterosexual who usually doesn't stand up for the other guy, but amendments to take away civil liberties need to be taken seriously. I realize we are in the middle of the Bible belt, and the people here don't really believe our founders meant to separate church and state. But are gay people really the people we want to leave our state? These are people that tend to improve communities, have higher disposable incomes, and generally are creative. That sounds like the type of people we want to attract, not repel by saying they can't commit to the person they love. I certainly hear of more sex crimes from repressed religious people than gay people. We say our economy will thrive because we are more creative than countries with $3/day wages, yet we are alienating a group of creative people. It is kind of like saying we want more jobs while raising commercial property taxes, penalizing companies for hitting thresholds of 25 or 50 employees, and telling employers that it will be more expensive than ever if they have to lay off an employee for any reason. Besides, doesn't America have greater problems than gay marriage; let's concentrate on those first.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Become like you?
        lreganMarch 29, 2011 6:09 PM
        I am hurt I have a gay daughter who is the most wonderful, talented, funny, loving person I have ever known. I love her with my whole heart and soul. She is getting her masters in critical care for babies, you think you hate her? Well I will tell you if the time every comes that your baby will need my baby you will be ever so grateful they put your baby in my baby arms. And yes I would hope you all have such a wonderful child in your life. So your comment that their children will become just like them, I hope so I hope one day she has a child who brings her as much joy as she has brought me.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Re: Mike 21 comments
        ChrisMarch 29, 2011 6:00 PM
        Mike, I don't know about you, but I tend not to base my judgement on someone just on their sexuality--that's a personal and private matter. What business is it of yours if two people of the same sex get married? How does that directly affect you or your family? My wife and I lived near a gay couple up north who had a little boy. From everything I could tell they were good parents who loved their child very much. So sad to see your comments condemning gays like they were some sort of contagious disease, when you don't even take the person as a whole. Whether you like it or not gays have been in every civilization from the beginning of mankind. Guess you'll have to deal with it. I'm very ashamed of Indiana lawmakers for violating civil rights and making the state look bad.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • same sex couples
        mike221March 29, 2011 5:36 PM
        yes you are very sad,you would also be one that approves of gays adopting children so they can become just like them
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • same sex couples
        mike221March 29, 2011 5:30 PM
        the more i read of most of these comments the more sick i think this country has become how can anyone in their right mind look at two men or two women that stands out in public and talk about having sex with each other and you say its alright just the thought of it is nothing but sick and most of you know it, you just dont want to piss off the gay people if you think there is nothing wrong with two men having sex next time you need a babysitter call your local gay guys
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Creation as Principle
        Book of RomansMarch 29, 2011 5:10 PM
        This countries people, and any creature for that matter, always will be conceived between male and female. Same sex marriage is like, reversing the order of the world GOD created . . . Sodom and Gomorrah 2011?
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • How Sad...
        CRAIGMarch 29, 2011 5:08 PM
        and this is what it has come down to. how sad.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • What a Joke Indiana
          rwhMarch 29, 2011 5:05 PM
          This is an embarassment. Thank you Republicans. I was a Republican and now I will be a Democrat. What backwards thinking and a total waste of time. Maybe by 2014 this will backfire in the Senate's faces or it will become a national issue. Hopefully you will not have gay children.
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • All for Naught
          DutchEastIndieMarch 29, 2011 4:29 PM
          Thank you Marie and Choji for putting aside partisan politics and siding with civil rights. I wish our politicians could be so mature.

          This will all end up being a supreme waste of time and an embarrassment to our children, much like the Jim Crow laws of our parents and grandparents.
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • A step backward
          ChojiMarch 29, 2011 4:20 PM
          Intollerance seems to be the order of the day in Indiana state politics. This is a step backward for the state of Indiana. A clear message that Indiana does not want to welcome all people; just those with certain belief systems. Before you assume that I am a bleeding heart liberal, think again. I am a conservative Reagan era Republican, and this move by the Indiana Senate makes me sick.
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • The bigots are at it again
          MarieMarch 29, 2011 4:11 PM
          Why do ''holier than thou''Christians think they have all the answers and want to change our laws to fit their beliefs? Live and let live. I am neither gay nor Christian, and I am ashamed of Indiana.
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment

        Post a comment to this story

        COMMENTS POLICY
        We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
         
        You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
         
        Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
         
        No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
         
        We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
         

        Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

        ADVANCED SEARCH
        Sponsored by
        ADVERTISEMENT

        facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

        Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
        Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
         
        Subscribe to IBJ

        1. Saw the Indy Men's Chorus "Music of Gilbert & Sullivan" at the Indiana Historical Society on Sunday evening.

        2. Temporary workers are not "tools" they are people and companies that keep large amounts of temp staff are cheating.

        3. I miss having them around. I hope one of their stores is in the general Meridian/86th Street area. I will make good use of it.

        4. The Fringe! Plus, the simple fact that there are so many local faves in such close proximity to each other.

        5. I remenber, watching the toll road, being built, through South Bend, when I was 10 years old. I believe, back then that it was estimated, that the toll road, would be paid for in 20 years and then it would be free. I am now 71, what happened? Since the power is in the people, by that, I mean that, we the people are in total control of everything. I, suggest that no one ever use the toll road again, let it go broke. We the people can control the price of everything, from groceries to gas, if we would just do it. If we don't pay the asking price, the sellers will lower the price and if we wait awhile, they will lower the price to what we accept as reasonable. I would like to know why a highway like interstate 94, is so well maintained, a much better highway, than the toll road, but has no tolls. I would also like to know why, a sitting governor, with a term limit, maximum of eight years, can lease, public property, for 75 years. Even though I have transponders in both of my trucks and will not be affected by the increase, I have been and will contine to avoid using the toll road. I make many trips from northern Indiana to Chicago, every year, and I prefer the better highway, I94!

        ADVERTISEMENT