Kansans Approve Gay Marriage Amendment By Wide Margin

Kansas City Star ^ | April 5, 2005 | Diane Carroll

[srm913]

Kansas voters gave a resounding yes Tuesday to a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage, providing what supporters hope is momentum for more bans nationwide.

With 133 of 210 precincts reporting statewide, the measure was leading with 70 percent of the vote. In Johnson County, with all precincts counted, the measure passed with 60.14 percent of the vote.

The Rev. Jerry Johnston of Overland Park, who pushed for the ban, said the amendment was not about discrimination, as opponents claimed.

“This was about being pro-family,” he said, as he monitored results with a small group at his First Family Church.

Archbishop Joseph Naumann of the Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas, another supporter, said he believed opponents would have been highly motivated to vote.

“That's why I think these numbers are very good,” Naumann said. “Marriage has always been understood as between a man and a woman and I think people understand that today and feel strongly about it.”

Opponents who gathered near the state Capitol in Topeka were disappointed but not surprised by the outcome.

The vote is not reflective of the typical Kansan, said Steve Brown of Prairie Village, a member of Kansans for Fairness, a group that worked to defeat the amendment.

“Eventually, moderate Kansans are going to stand up and say they've had enough,” Brown said.

With the victory, Kansas becomes the 18th state to incorporate such a ban in its constitution. Thirteen of those states, including Missouri, passed similar amendments just last year. Alabama, South Dakota and Tennessee have votes scheduled for 2006, and legislation has been introduced in 14 other states to put such a measure on the ballot, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

[Maigrey]

Eventually, moderate Kansans are going to stand up and say they've had enough,” Brown said.

Hate to tell you this, bucko, but the moderates have spoken....

[Kozak]

Tut tut. Some how our Judicial Dictorship will find a way to nullify it. I have no doubt in that.

[Rebelr]

There has been letter after letter in my local paper, the Manhattan Mercury, warning of the devistation to our local economy if this law were passed. (Manhattan is another college town - lots of liberals) I chuckled to myself on the way to vote yesterday - thinking BOTH of them may want to "get out of Dodge" ;) Nearly everyone I spoke to in town was against the amendment but as usual, the liberals were "too busy" to vote yesterday - thank God!

[RedEyeJack]

Unfortunately among the 30% will be at least one infallible federal judge who will now rule that the people of Kansas are being "unconstitutional" under some "penumbra" that he perceives and therefore they cannot have such a law...

[SeaBiscuit]

Come on Dorthy, were off to Kansas.

[redgolum]

This amendment does more than just ban gay marriage, it also limits "the rights and privileges of marriage" to those who have been legally married. In other words, no more common law type marriages, and no health benefits for people living together without benefit of marriage.

A good amendment, but I just hope some nutty federal judge doesn't reverse it. But I bet that will happen.

[mathluv]

The title scared me! I thought that it meant Kansas SUPPORTED gay marriage.

[prairiebreeze]

I used to read the Manhattan Mercury. Haven't thought about that paper in years, LOL!

[redgolum]

When a bill was voted on in Nebraska banning gay marriage, many of the MSM and in the universities said it would destroy the states economy.

I heard one person say "We are fighting for something a bit more important than how many gay bars are in Omaha".

Still, a federal judge will overturn this. I imagine that the ACLU is already shopping for one now.

[azhenfud]

Maybe queers and their advocates will learn there is no such thing as Same Sex Marriage.

[Let's Roll]

The vote is not reflective of the typical Kansan, said Steve Brown of Prairie Village, a member of Kansans for Fairness, a group that worked to defeat the amendment.

“Eventually, moderate Kansans are going to stand up and say they've had enough,” Brown said.

And black is white and up is down.

[dfwgator]

But will it survive the courts?

[Rebelr]

Let me assure you - you've not missed ONE thing! Poorest excuse for a newspaper I've ever seen....

[Allosaurs_r_us]

"With the victory, Kansas becomes the 18th state to incorporate such a ban in its constitution. Thirteen of those states, including Missouri, passed similar amendments just last year. Alabama, South Dakota and Tennessee have votes scheduled for 2006, and legislation has been introduced in 14 other states to put such a measure on the ballot, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures."

 

Oh man, this is going to drive 'em nuts over at the DU. LOL. PJ is going to have plenty of material to work with this morning.

 

When do ya s'pose they will get the hint? Never most likely. Not as long as we have upstanding judges, like the recent one in Calif that ruled same sex contracts did not interfere with their states constitutional amendment on marriage passed last year. Still ya gotta love it when they take one in the shorts.

[RetiredArmy]

I may decide to move to Kansas. You guys got a conservative governor, reps, senators? Ain't got no liberals do you? Well, a minority few for fun I guess, but not a majority like commie WA state here where I am now.

[srm913]

Our two senators (Brownback and Roberts) are terrific. Most of the state's representatives are conservative, as well.
The sole blemish is Governor Sebelius, a Democrat. I can't stand her, but at least she is inclined to be fiscally conservative.
A well-kept secret about Kansas is that we achieved the #1 ranking among all 50 states for economic freedom last year.
Move on over!

[Heartofsong83]

I think that a constitutional amendment in California will end up with about 57% support. The harder words may scare a few away, but it won't scare too many people away, especially among moderates.

I can't see any state where it would fail. Even in Massachusetts, I think such would (marginally) pass.

[Redbob]

Headline is just a LITTLE misleading.

[srm913]

Agreed.

[tatsmom]

Does Rosie know about this? :)