jump to navigation

Gay Marriage Ballot Issue Rejected August 11, 2006

Posted by j-dub in Politics.
trackback

Here’s the story.

And the most notable quote:

“Unless they pull a rabbit out of a hat in federal court, it’s not going to be on the ballot,” said Patricia Logue, senior counsel for the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund.

For starters, I didn’t know that Illinois already prohibited same-sex marriages. You might be wondering why put an issue on the ballot if it’s already prohibited. Well they (llinois Family Institute and Protect Marriage Illinois) were trying to amend the state’s constitution by putting this gay marriage ban in the Illinois constitution so it wouldn’t be able to be overturned.

The website www.protectmarriageillinois.org has this listed as their proposed changes (what they were trying to get on the ballot in November):

Shall the Illinois General Assembly submit an amendment to Article IX of the Illinois State Constitution to the voters of the state of Illinois at large at the next general election stating as follows:

“To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, a marriage between a man and a woman is the only legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state.”

Well, I’m surprised this hasn’t garnered more attention. Especially considering the slowness of the election news at this point. It sounds as if the protect marriage people will try and fight to still get it on the ballot, but their sample of required signatures was not meeting the specifications required by law; they could be out of luck at this point.

Any thoughts?

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Anonymous - August 12, 2006

‘Civil Unions’ were supposed to take care of gays wanting to have a partner. The problem became when ‘civil unions’ weren’t recognized as traditional marriage (benefits) so the gay lobby went after marriage rather than lobby civil unions be recognized as a traditional marriage. We probably wouldn’t be where we are now if ‘civil unions’ were recognized as gay ‘marriage’. This has ‘can of worms’ written all over it.

2. Matt - August 12, 2006

“… they (llinois Family Institute and Protect Marriage Illinois) were trying to amend the state’s constitution by putting this gay marriage ban in the Illinois constitution so it wouldn’t be able to be overturned.”

While there’s little doubt that is their ultimate goal, as I understand the ballot measure to which you refer, it would have actually been a non-binding referendum this time around.

In other words, it would supposedly have done two things:

1) sent a message (one way or the other) to the IL legislature regarding marriage rights for gays

and

2) brought out the ultra-conservatives in droves, thus lifting the statewide GOP ticket

But it looks like that won’t be happening now.

3. j-dub - August 13, 2006

Anon,

I agree, these issues are always very touchy.

Matt,

Thanks for the correction on the non-binding referendum.

Your 2nd point is interesting. I always like it (NOT) when other issues are brought up in order to help “the ticket”.

If this is really true, it makes me sad they feel that way about the GOP candidates. It signals to me that they obviously don’t think they’re good enough to win without some extra ammunition.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: