Texas Voters approve gay marriage "ban"
 

Voters just approved Constitutional language defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051109/...allot_measures

Here's an article about it that appeared today in the Austin American-Statesman:

http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/...ymarriage.html

Voters add gay marriage ban to constitution
Texas set to become the 19th state to place such a limit in its constitution.
By W. Gardner Selby
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Voters tied the knot Tuesday with a constitutional amendment cementing marriage in Texas as being solely between a man and a woman and barring communities from legalizing same-sex unions.

With close to one in five voters turning out, Proposition 2 won approval by about a three-to-one ratio. Travis County, home to a leading anti-amendment group, appeared to be the only county where passage wasn't assured, according to incomplete returns.

The Lone Star State becomes the 19th state in which voters have inserted a marriage definition into their state constitution. The amendment landed on the ballot after being approved by a two-thirds ratio in both the Texas House and the Senate in the spring.

Fourteen of those other states have added gay marriage bans since last year, with anywhere from 57 percent to 78 percent approval, in the wake of court and legislative actions in some states — including Vermont, Massachusetts and California — permitting gay couples to receive legal recognition of their pairings.

"That's overwhelming," said the amendment's author, Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa. "We could have gone home and sat down and still won," he said as he watched election returns with about 100 Propposition 2 supporters at Great Hills Baptist Church in Austin.

Glen Maxey, a former Democratic legislator from Austin who headed the anti-amendment No Nonsense in November group, said the losing side stirred debate that is sure to linger.

Maxey, speaking from a gathering with University of Texas students opposed to the proposal, said: "We have a long way to go on this issue. There's hope. I have a great amount of hope for the next generation."

Lanell Coultas, 30, and Lucy Anderson, 44, showed up to the No Nonsense election watch party at Scholz Garten in clothes they wore to their wedding Saturday: Coultas in a strapless slate blue dress and matching satin shawl, Anderson in a white laced tunic, white pants and cowboy boots.

"We're just two normal people who love each other," Anderson said, calling the amendment's adoption "a bump in the road for the fight to legalize gay marriage. We're still going to fight for that right."

Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican seeking re-election next year, issued no comment, though he's been an amendment backer, signing a copy of the proposal at a Fort Worth church in June, speaking privately to supportive ministers and recording an election-eve telephone message sent to 1 million households calling Tuesday a "last chance to save marriage" in the state.

Advocates were divided on whether the proposal's approval could fuel restrictions on gay couples.

Julie Drenner, a lobbyist for the Texans for Family Values political action committee, said the lopsided results could hasten a ban on gay residents being foster parents, an idea that won House approval in the spring but did not reach the Senate floor.

Chisum disagreed, saying: "I'm not about to go out and beat up on the homosexual community. Some of them do a fabulous job of stepping in (as foster parents) when no one else will."

The results followed about $1 million in campaign spending for and against the proposal, the only gay marriage ban on a state ballot this month.

Through Oct. 31, according to campaign finance reports, pro-amendment groups had raised more than $350,000, and anti-amendment groups had raised more than $500,000. The money was spent mostly on direct mailings and targeted telephone calls and TV spots.

What started as a somewhat legalistic tussle between conservative pastors and gay rights activists over reinforcing a 2003 law voiding gay marriage became a full-throated spectacle involving religious leaders on both sides and a pro-amendment rally over the weekend at Austin City Hall by Ku Klux Klan members, who were outnumbered by anti-amendment marchers.

Two weeks ago, a spinoff from the No Nonsense group sponsored automated phone calls to nearly 2 million households saying language in the proposal might be interpreted by a judge to invalidate all marriages, a possibility most legal observers deemed unlikely.

A sentence in the amendment outlaws anything "identical or similar to marriage."

Pro-amendment activists said the "robo-calls" upset recipients, prompting many to galvanize behind the proposal. Amendment backers answered the anti-amendment calls with calls featuring Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican who said Texas judges wouldn't leap to throwing out all marriages based on the wording of the amendment.

Kelly Shackelford, president of the Plano-based Free Enterprise Foundation, steered the pro-amendment Texans For Marriage, tapping conservative evangelical pastors, including minority ministers.

Texans resoundingly believe in marriage remaining between a man and a woman, he said Tuesday night. "It's going to be hard to unhinge that. Texans know that deep from their soul, across the board."

As of late Tuesday, voter turnout appeared to exceed the 16 percent that had been projected by Secretary of State Roger Williams.

wgselby@statesman.com; 445-3644


Not sure if these numbers are true, it's just what I heard on the radio: But apparently state-wide it was approved 70% to 30%. But, in Travis county (the county that Austin is in and where I live), the vote was 60% to 40% against passing the amendment.

If only abortion hadn't been made a national issue...

-Rudey

Are you saying that if abortion had not been made a national issue, then gay marriage wouldn't be one either?

No. That gay marriage should be handle through the states, just like abortion should have been (but wasn't).

That way a nation wouldn't have been so divided and religion wouldn't be such a huge issue in national politics.

-Rudey

I find myself agreeing with Rudey (imagine that!)

I'm still trying to figure out how gay marriages is going to ruin other people's marriage?

This is really sad. I hope none of those people who voted "yes" end up having gay children...but then, how would that be for poetic justice if they did!

Aren't we all.

Exactly! How is it on the one hand "conservatives" cry out SMALL GOVERNMENT!!! then out of the other side of their mouth: "GOVERNMENT CAN TELL YOU WHO TO MARRY!!! ?

Hypocracy?

haha so true!

I'm a conservative. I avoid such inconsistancies by not being a knuckle dragging moron.

That said, you do NOT want this as a national issue. Look what abortion has done to empower the bible-thumping folk.

They want the issues in these cases, not the solutions. I'm surprised that they've already played this card... But of course, that sinister gay conspiracy was getting too close to seizing the reigns of power.

I am relatively conservative as well, but I am the kind of person who thinks that the government should stay out of the personal lives of the people (such as who can and can't get married).

I definitely don't think this should be a national issue. I honestly don't even think it should be a state issue. I don't see how it makes any difference to anyone whether or not gay people get married.

You're misusing terminology - which isn't surprising, because this confusion has been the greatest victory for the Christian Right in modern times.

Essentially, the vocal minority that comprises the various Fundamentalist Christian and so-called "Christian Conservatives" push this sort of agenda - not true conservatives.

Remember, though - no matter who pushed this, it passed a popular vote. For better or worse, majority rules in this case - even if I vehemently disagree. It's a beautiful thing.

-RC
--"'The people' is stupid." -Alexander Hamilton