To: WOSG
The simple amendment, simply defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, was defeated soundly in the joint session of the Legislature.
Yeas 44 - Nays 153
To: george wythe
That's just sad!
I am sure the 'compromise' just let all the RINOs and 'pro-family' Dems to be 'against gay marriage' but for 95% of its effect.
44 posted on
03/12/2004 3:46:03 PM PST by
WOSG
(http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com - Disturb, manipulate, demonstrate for the right thing)
To: george wythe; WOSG
That was not a vote on the amendment proposal. From the link: "During consideration, Mr. Kelly of Dalton moved to adjourn the Joint Session, and the question on adjourning the Joint Session was determined by a call of the yeas and nays at a quarter before one o'clock P.M., as follows to wit (Yeas 44 - Nays 153)"
Back in February, the vote on a very similar amendment (no gay marriages, but neutral on the issue of civil unions) was rejected only by two votes.
47 posted on
03/12/2004 4:50:29 PM PST by
inquest
(The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson