Illinois: Gay marriage amendment will not be on the ballot
The Illinois Board of Elections determined "there weren't enough valid signatures to put on the ballot an advisory referendum asking voters if the state constitution should be amended to ban gay marriage."
"Organizers of the gay marriage referendum are claiming in federal court that getting a referendum on the Illinois ballot is both burdensome and unconstitutional because of the complicated process to gather and verify petition signatures, said Peter LaBarbera, executive director of the conservative Illinois Family Institute and Protect Marriage Illinois.
"But Labarbera and other gay marriage opponents were rebuffed earlier this month when a district court judge dismissed their claim so now they want a federal appellate court to intervene."
Is it just me or do others find it ironic that, after bashing gays use of the courts, that the anti-gay marriage groups are trying to overcome their lack of support by an appeal to state court, and having lost are now going to federal court?
__________________
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb.
-- Unknown
The Illinois Board of Elections determined "there weren't enough valid signatures to put on the ballot an advisory referendum asking voters if the state constitution should be amended to ban gay marriage."
"Organizers of the gay marriage referendum are claiming in federal court that getting a referendum on the Illinois ballot is both burdensome and unconstitutional because of the complicated process to gather and verify petition signatures, said Peter LaBarbera, executive director of the conservative Illinois Family Institute and Protect Marriage Illinois.
"But Labarbera and other gay marriage opponents were rebuffed earlier this month when a district court judge dismissed their claim so now they want a federal appellate court to intervene."
Is it just me or do others find it ironic that, after bashing gays use of the courts, that the anti-gay marriage groups are trying to overcome their lack of support by an appeal to state court, and having lost are now going to federal court?
Ummmmmm apparently you have never met a hypocrite before?
On another note I find it curious that the Anti-gay group in question would challenge Illinois's ballot law as being unconstitutional since the whole Citizen Led Ballot initiative process is Unconstitutional on its face. Though it does technically fall under the 10th Amendment:
Amendment X.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
States have a right to institute ballot initiatives since they are not prohibited by the Constitution. They can make any law they want in regards to what ballot initiatives can qualify. In this case Illinois law requires that of Ballot Initiative signatures 95% of a test number of signatures be valid. In this case only 91% were. Sorry, that's the law.
Last edited by Pinp; 11th August 2006 at 11:52 PM.
Is it just me or do others find it ironic that, after bashing gays use of the courts, that the anti-gay marriage groups are trying to overcome their lack of support by an appeal to state court, and having lost are now going to federal court?[/font]
The majority of the nation is opposed to gay marriage, and about a quarter favor it.
It's hardly a case of minority rights. It's reaffirming the definition of the right. Forbidding blacks to marry would be a violation of minority rights. Forbidding homosexuals to marry would be a violation of minority rights, but that is not what is happening here. Marriage is being defined as unity between a man and a woman and people can enter it irregardless of race or sexual preference, but they cannot marry someone of their own sex.
Defined as unity between a man and a woman only in the states that have passed marriage amendments. Clearly, Illinois has not already passed such an amendment.
You're skirting the issue by bringing up the arbitrary definition of marriage that has been agreed upon in certain spots on a map. Such a definition is not universal, so it has no bearing on the concept of "minority right."
Linear Mode
