Posted on 04/05/2005 8:57:52 PM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at kansascity.com ...
I may be wrong.
It certainly wouldn't be the first time.
But, at least up until the amendment, Kansas was one of the few states with legal common law marriage.
If it is gone, I am not upset about it.
See post #87.
"They will just try to find a tyrannical judge to over rule that amendment, and trow out the elections of the people."
But, don't forget, the people have spoken, and it will have at least some clout. I believe it will have a lot of clout, actually.
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.