Gay marriage ban advances

INDIANAPOLIS -- A polarized Senate Committee passed an amendment to the state constitution onto the Senate floor Tuesday, which, if passed, would effectively ban same-sex marriage in Indiana. \nThe committee passed the proposed amendment by a vote of 7-4 after more than two hours of emotional testimony from both sides of the issue, which included religious leaders, professors, citizens and the Indiana Civil Liberties Union. If the General Assembly passes the amendment in this session, it will face one more legislative session in the future, then be put on a ballot to be voted on by Indiana residents. If approved, the amendment would be put into the state constitution.\nThe proposed amendment would add a definition of marriage specifying it as a union between a man and a woman; the constitution does not currently have a definition of marriage.\n"This bill will allow Indiana to stay in line with other states that want to preserve traditional marriages," said Sen. Brandt Hershman (R-Wheatfield), the author of the bill. "(The proposed amendment) will place the issue in the hands of the legislature and people. ... With malice toward no one, this bill would be in keeping with history."\nAlthough the bill was passed, it was not passed without stinging criticism from Committee members, one of whom being Sen. Anita Bowser (D-Michigan City). Bowser repeatedly questioned both the proponents of the bill who spoke as well as the senators who authored the bill.\n"I need one concrete answer," Bowser said in a steadily rising voice. "Why is this important? Why do we need to do this?" \nProponents of the amendment, who spoke in the first hour of the committee session, cited traditional marriage values and protecting the decision from being made by "activist judges" as primary reasons for the amendments passage. \nOpponents of the legislation argued against the bill on the principles of human rights, concern for the financial impact of the bill and fear that the bill would also regulate private businesses giving benefits to same-sex couples.\nThe first hour of the committee meeting consisted of supporters of the band. One proponent of the ban was Eric Miller, representing Advance America, who wanted to keep the decision in "the people's hands."\n"People in America deserve the right to vote (on issues such as the amendment)," Miller said. "(If the amendment isn't passed) all it takes is one judge or supreme court."\nAnother advocate of the bill, Rev. Andy Hunt, said there was no correlation between prejudice because of skin color and the "human learned perversion" of gay men and lesbians.\nThe next hour consisted of speakers against the amendment; so many people signed up to voice their opinions that about 10 couldn't speak because of time constraints. Religious leaders showed on this side of the bill as well, citing human rights issues.\n"When Alabama's Gov. George Wallace stood on those schoolhouse steps and declared 'segregation forever,' he probably thought this would be his finest moment," said Rev. Jeff Miner, senior pastor of Jesus Metropolitan Community Church in Indianapolis. "History has not been kind to Governor Wallace. History is never kind to those who discriminate."\n-- Contact City & State Editor Mike Wilson at mhwilson@indiana.edu.