IN: Senate Approves Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage

The GOP-led Senate voted again Thursday to approve a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage in Indiana. Senate Joint Resolution 13 passed 38-10 with all local senators in support. The resolution must be approved again in 2011 before voters could make the final decision in a 2012 statewide referendum.

“Marriage is one of the foundations of our society and one I firmly believe needs to be protected,” said Sen. Carlin Yoder, R-Middlebury.

Sen. Tim Lanane, D-Anderson, expressed concern that the second sentence in the amendment could affect domestic violence protections afforded to unmarried Hoosiers. That provision says a “legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.” “This certainly will not say welcome to many people in our society,” Lanane said.

Full Story from the Journal Gazette
Click here for gay marriage resources in Indiana.
To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

IN: Senate May Vote Today on Gay Marriage Ban

Supporters of gay rights are moving to head off the latest attempt to put a gay-marriage ban in the Indiana Constitution. The Senate could vote as early as Thursday on a constitutional amendment. Opponents of the proposal concede it's almost certain to pass, and likely to die in the House.

Attorney Don Sherfick with Indiana Equality Action says the group is taking no chances. He says the IEA is lobbying for neither gay marriage nor civil unions at the moment, but argues a constitutional amendment would short-circuit public dialogue.

The National Association of Social Workers is joining in opposing the ban. Indianapolis social worker Josephine Hughes says the group considers it discriminatory.

Full Story from WIBC
Click here for gay marriage resources in Indiana.
To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Prop 8 Trial Update, Day 7

It was a phenomenal day in the courtroom, in particular testimony from Ryan Kendall about forced conversion therapy that moved many to tears. We also heard surprising revelations from experts who were supposed to support Prop 8 but whose opinions instead clearly shored up our side. After today, I wish more than ever that the public could be watching the video of this trial - I have truly never seen anything like it. Fortunately, daily transcripts of the trial are now being released with a one day delay and are available on AFER's website. The morning began with an argument over whether the court should allow excerpts to be played from the depositions of two of the defense's expert witnesses, Dr. Paul Nathanson and Dr. Katherine Young. Before trial, each side submitted a list of the witnesses they expected to call, and the Prop 8 proponents said they would call Dr. Nathanson and Dr. Young as experts. Both experts were deposed prior to trial, and their deposition testimony was recorded. Recently, however, the proponents withdrew both witnesses from testifying, suggesting that the experts had requested not to be called due to fears stemming from the proposed broadcasting of the trial. This morning, the plaintiffs asked to play some of those witnesses' testimony, and the Prop 8 proponents objected. Judge Walker allowed the evidence in. It was immediately clear why the Prop 8 proponents had really withdrawn these two expert witnesses -- their testimony strongly supported the plaintiffs' claims, not the defense. Indeed, many in the courtroom appeared to be shocked by how much the defense's experts sounded like they should have been testifying for the plaintiffs. In particular, Dr. Young testified that: (1) homosexuality is a normal variant of human behavior; (2) there have been sub-traditions of allowing marriage between same-sex couples in a number of cultures; (3) allowing same-sex couples to marry enhances their security and well-being and is good for their children; and (4) studies show that there is no harm to children from being raised by gay parents and there is "no reason to predict harm." Dr. Nathanson testified that, in the past, religion has been used to justify discrimination against people based on race and gender in the name of "protecting the family." This testimony from the Prop 8 proponents' own witnesses powerfully refutes the defendants' claims. Full Story from Pam's House Blend

Click here for gay marriage resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

IN: Senate Committee Sends Anti Gay Marriage Bill to Full Senate

Earlier this week I posted that Indiana was set to discuss a Senate Joint Resolution regarding marriage equality, SJR-13. Well that happened this morning and it's not good news. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed it by a vote of 6 to 4. Which means that it is now eligible for consideration by the full Senate. Here's more information from the Indiana Equality message boards: Breaking Legislative News- Amendment to go to Full Senate: SJR-13 - Marriage Discrimination Amendment Moves to Full Senate This morning, Wednesday, January 20, 2010, the Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee passed Senate Joint Resolution 13 (SJR-13) by a vote of 6 to 4. Approving the bill were Senators Bray, Zakas, Head, Holman, Schneider, and Steele. Voting no were Senators Lanane, Randolph, Taylor, and Broden. Senator Alting was not in the room for the vote. The Marriage Discrimination Amendment is now eligible for consideration by the full Senate. Full Story from What's a Boy to Do

Click here for gay marriage resourcesinin.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

IN: Senate to Debate Gay Marriage Ban Tomorrow

Although this is a Chicago based blog, I can't help but share with you news about debate that will be going on in Indiana to ban gay marriage this Wednesday. Indiana's Marriage Discrimination Amendment, Senate Joint Resolution 13 (SJR-13) authored by Senator Carlin Yoder will be considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, January 20th, 2010, at 9:00 am in the Senate Chambers at the Indiana State House. "The Marriage Discrimination Amendment violates every Hoosier's basic right to fairness and equality. It's just an attempt to distract Hoosiers from the greater issues facing Indiana, threatening our state's current and future economic development" stated Indiana Equality Action President Randy Studt." Full Story from What's a Boy to Do

Click here for gay marriage resources in Indiana.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Lesbian Couple in Indiana Denied Divorce

Trapped in a bad marriage?  Sorry, really. But you've got nothing on Larissa Chism and Tara Ranzy, a divorce-seeking Indiana couple doomed to live unhappily ever after and after and after by a legal Catch-22. Chism, a psychiatrist, and Ranzy, an educator, wed in Toronto in January 2005. In March of this year, they filed a divorce petition. In many respects, their case was rubber-stamp simple. They had no children; they had already divided their property; neither was pregnant. Unfortunately, an eagle-eyed court employee noticed the one complicating fact in their one-page joint submission: Larissa and Tara are both women's names. Indiana does not grant or recognize same-sex marriages. Full Story from The Star: http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/699523

Planning to marry your partner? Click here for gay marriage resources in Indiana.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com with "subscribe blog" as the subject. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.