Posted on 11/01/2004 11:39:46 PM PST by AM2000
DAYTON, Ohio, Nov 1 (AFP) - Voters in the battleground state of Ohio were poised to approve a measure banning gay marriage so sweeping it is opposed by prominent businessmen as well as the state's Republican governor and Republican senators.
State voters on Tuesday will choose between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat John Kerry for president, and also vote on a state constitutional amendment forbidding gay marriage and same-sex civil unions.
According to opinion polls the amendment has overwhelming support.
The measure defines marriage as between a man and a woman -- but also bans any "legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage."
The amendment has solid support among evangelical Christians, many of whom are conservative, politically active, and regard homosexuality as a perversion.
Many evangelicals see the battle over gay rights as part of the larger struggle over the role of Christian values in US society.
"We will be voting the strongest defense of marriage of any state in the country," Gregory Quinlan told a class of evangelical bible study students at the Solid Rock Church in Monroe, Ohio, on Sunday.
"Homosexuality is a gender, identity disorder," said Quinlan, and the government "should not be enabling it. It should be enabling one man, one woman households."
According to Quinlan, a former homosexual-cum-evangelical Christian, homosexuality is a lifestyle of choice.
"Don't let anybody tell you that they were born that way," he told his students. "It's a belief that can change. Just look at me."
Evangelicals have openly campaigned openly for the measure, known as Proposal 1.
But Republican Governor Bob Taft and the state's two Republican senators, Mike DeWine and George Voinovich, have all come out against it, fearing that it is so broad it could harm unmarried couples living together and ultimately hurt businesses.
The Ohio-based Nationwide Insurance, one of the largest insurance companies in the United States, has mobilized against the measure, along with Limited Brands, the Ohio-based corporation that owns The Limited, Chloe and Victoria's Secret retail chains.
"The ability to offer domestic partnership benefits is an important recruiting tool as Ohio companies seek to grow," the companies wrote in a letter to Ohio state business leaders.
For conservative evangelicals, there is far more at stake in the presidential elections than just gay marriage.
"The right to be a Christian in this country is at stake," said Quinlan.
Liberal activists who believe in a constitutional separation of church and state are wrong, said Jamie Painter.
"Separation of church and state -- that's the first problem right there," Painter said. "The government should go back to the principle of 'In God we trust,' and make that the foundation of our state."
Painter, a mother of three, is anxious about what she views as widespread moral backsliding and wants to see a return to 'Biblical values' -- and on Tuesday plans to vote for Bush.
Carol McCay is equally perturbed by the perceived loss of morality in US society. "It's like a slow leak in a tyre," she said, "but they call it tolerance."
McCay wants a president who will take a strong stand on issues of principle like gay marriage, which she is convinced is "wrong."
"We have to have some moral absolutes," she said.
I always love these headlines. In every state so far, Gay Marriage has been shot down by 40 points, and yet they insist on calling it "controversial" or a "wedge issue" that "closely divides" the electorate.
I find this to be fairly incredible. Indeed, the whole gay marriage nonsense has done nothing but energize the Evangelical voting bloc of the Republican Party.
Let's be candid here: nobody wants their state to be the next Massachusetts. The gay marriage measure will go down in flames (no pun intended).
It'll go down on who?????
John Kerry, if everything goes right.
And no, I don't think anyone wants to see the pictures...
The sad part is, that it will likely pass and then some liberal judge will consider it unconstitutional and void it. It's beyond me how a sitting judge can be empowered to do this, but it seems to happen quite often.
I know, that is the only reason I favor the constitutional ammendment because the courts don't want to uphold what the people have decided. Instead one person decides and that is NOT what democracy is about.
the only thing about all this that Im getting tired of is how this is always played as a religious christian right thing, I'm not religious by any measure of the word and I'm still against gay marriage from the purely sociological view that it will only further destabalize a culture already crippled by high divorce rates and fatherless homes.
That's because it gives DemocRAT candidates wedgies.
---The sad part is, that it will likely pass and then some liberal judge will consider it unconstitutional and void it. ---
It's an amendment to the state constitution. The judges can't do anything about it. That's the point.
Remember that Liberals do not care anything about the real Constitution, they only care about getting their policies rammed down your throat. After all they are much "smarter and wiser" than you.
They can step in and rule a state amendment unconstitutional (not caring a whit about truth) by perverting the intent of the 14th amendment.
They do it all the time.
This the method that the ACLU has used to destroy America since they crawled out from under that brimstone rock.
So, you think we need the US constitutional amandement?
-A Gay ( or not! ) Old Time- GM links--
...to me, you either "get it," or you don't. I think it's a dagger aimed at the heart of a civil society.
They will also vote for GWB in the WH. :)
Tyre? Tyre?? Couldn't the AFP reporter just run a spell check once in a while? I mean, I know it is important to get all the Christian bashing out as fast as possible, but still....
The biggest suprise of the night would be any state the passes No Gay Marriage laws and votes for Kerry.
Unlike many here I have no objection to gay marriage, but unlike the press and pollsters I have never deluded myself that this issue won't be be utterly devestating to Kerry's campaign. The polls consistantly underestimate the opposition to this ballot proposal. In any state with this on the ballot, add a few points for Bush that are below Zogby's radar.
It will be what energizes the extra votes Bush needs in Ohio and other states. I just regret that the memory of 9/11 doesn't seem to be enough on its own.
And btw, expect the gay marriage bans ultimately to be declared unconstitutional. Unless a federal amendment is passed and approved by the states, which I think is unlikely regardless of who wins, this is all for nothing beyond its immediate effect on the 2004 election.
Why would a ban with "overwhelming" support "go down in flames" unless the SCOOH goes looey.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.