<$BlogRSDUrl$>

My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.

2005-04-05

Another State Speaks Firmly

Voters in Kansas overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment Tuesday banning same-sex couples from marrying or entering into civil unions.

With 97 percent of the vote reported, 395,468, or 71 percent, voted ``yes,'' and 163,766, or 29 percent, voted ``no.''

That keeps the perfect streak for marriage amendments alive at 18 now. And, once again, not by a close margin.

Look, do I think something like this is a good idea, or even necessary? No--the Constitution grants power to the several state legislatures to determine the means and methods by which they will grant licenses and permits for various activities, and that should be sufficient. Let each state legislature decide who gets what type of licenses--marriage or otherwise. But, as one Kansan put it:

the amendment was ``an unfortunate, necessary reaction to activist courts.''


This story is underscored by a proposed Concurrent Resolution introduced by Rep Kevin Lundberg in the Colorado legislature last week. His resolution defines marriage as only being valid between one man and one woman. Given that this would need the support of two-thirds majorities in both chambers to make it to the fall ballot as an Amendment, I don't expect anybody will have to vote on this anytime soon. But that doesn't preclude the initiative process . . . And simply getting any kind of a vote on this issue in the legislature this term would pin some of those who are positioning themselves as "mainstream moderates" (read: Democrats) in the uncomfortable position of voting against the vast majority of public opinion.
Posted by: Michael / 4/05/2005 11:46:00 PM

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?