A proposed ban on same-sex marriages now faces just one more hurdle in the House before Hoosiers will be able to vote on the constitutional amendment.
The Indiana Senate voted 39-10 Monday to pass the amendment, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
How very sad. I just cannot understand how otherwise intelligent people can buy into this crazy nonsense. Thankfully not everyone does:
Indianacitizens have heard all of the justifications for SJ 7, the constitutional amendment to "defend marriage" against the assault of all those gay terrorists who just want to participate in it. And we've heard all of the pious assurances that the language in "part B," (forbidding any court from interpreting any law in any way that might confer the "incidents of marriage" on unmarried couples) isn't meant to deprive gays of health benefits or hospital visitation rights. It's just an effort to "clarify" that marriage is only between a man and a woman. Indiana
Let's be clear about this: The people pushing for SJ 7 want to make life as difficult as possible for
's gay citizens. They know same-sex marriage is already illegal in Indiana Indiana, and that courts have upheld the current law. There is no reason to pass this amendment except to void those few benefits that gay couples now enjoy. Indiana
They may get SJ 7 passed, but no one who believes in equal rights should let them get away with pretending that they don't mean what they say.
And this is why I shall refrain from making one big sweeping, mean-spirited generalization about