MO anti-gay marriage amendment

[opebo]

It looks like Missouri's amendment to the state constitution to ban gay marriage has passed by about 72% to 28%.

I'm embarrassed, but not surprised.

[Keystone Phil]

It looks like Missouri's amendment to the state constitution to ban gay marriage has passed by about 72% to 28%.

I'm embarrassed, but not surprised.

I'm surprised it passed by that much.

Off topic: It also looks like your Governor won't make it to the November election.

[Josh/Devilman88]

It looks like Missouri's amendment to the state constitution to ban gay marriage has passed by about 72% to 28%.

I'm embarrassed, but not surprised.

YAY... NC votes in Nov.   And if you gets got that results then NC will be like 95 to 5

[So the Heroes Fall]

luckily this was blocked by the State Senate here, so we won't have this piece of crap on the ballot. The main sponsor practically broke into tears when the Senate President announced the session was was over and that her amendment would not be voted on.

[So the Heroes Fall]

I just looked up the results. Passed by a suprisingly high margin in Jackson county (Kansas City). It didn't pass in St. Louis city though.

[Lunar]

If it passed in California (a proposition anyway), it'll pass almost everywhere else.

[Josh/Devilman88]

10 years from now the states in Blue will ban gay marriages. States in red has a chance of doing it but more then likely wont. And states in Grey, no chance of it happening....

[opebo]

I just looked up the results. Passed by a suprisingly high margin in Jackson county (Kansas City). It didn't pass in St. Louis city though.

Link?

[bejkuy]

10 years from now the states in Blue will ban gay marriages. States in red has a chance of doing it but more then likely wont. And states in Grey, no chance of it happening....

Washington state, not exactly a bastion of social conservatism, has already defined marriage as a union of a man and a woman.

[Josh/Devilman88]

10 years from now the states in Blue will ban gay marriages. States in red has a chance of doing it but more then likely wont. And states in Grey, no chance of it happening....

Washington state, not exactly a bastion of social conservatism, has already defined marriage as a union of a man and a woman.

So has Cal. But that don't mean they will ban gay marriages.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

10 years from now the states in Blue will ban gay marriages. States in red has a chance of doing it but more then likely wont. And states in Grey, no chance of it happening....

Gay marriage is actually less popular in he Democratic states than you think....Hawaii banned gay marriage by constitutional amendment a number of years ago.

[Josh/Devilman88]

10 years from now the states in Blue will ban gay marriages. States in red has a chance of doing it but more then likely wont. And states in Grey, no chance of it happening....

Gay marriage is actually less popular in he Democratic states than you think....Hawaii banned gay marriage by constitutional amendment a number of years ago.

Really? I thought Gay people can get married in HI

[ATFFL]

Really? I thought Gay people can get married in HI

http://usmarriagelaws.com/search/alternative_lifestyles/same_sex_marriage/index.shtml

"The Hawaii Legislature in 1994 amended the state's marriage law to provide that only marriages between a man and a woman are valid. And in November 1998, Hawaii citizens voted to give the state legislature the power to decide the same-sex marriage issue. In December 1999, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the 1998 amendment ratified by the voters of Hawaii rendered the plaintiff's argument moot, with the result that same-sex marriage remains illegal in Hawaii."

[Josh/Devilman88]

Really? I thought Gay people can get married in HI

http://usmarriagelaws.com/search/alternative_lifestyles/same_sex_marriage/index.shtml

"The Hawaii Legislature in 1994 amended the state's marriage law to provide that only marriages between a man and a woman are valid. And in November 1998, Hawaii citizens voted to give the state legislature the power to decide the same-sex marriage issue. In December 1999, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the 1998 amendment ratified by the voters of Hawaii rendered the plaintiff's argument moot, with the result that same-sex marriage remains illegal in Hawaii."

Oh ok...

[So the Heroes Fall]

I just looked up the results. Passed by a suprisingly high margin in Jackson county (Kansas City). It didn't pass in St. Louis city though.

Link?

You can look up the results for any county here:

http://www.sos.mo.gov/enrweb/countyselect.asp?eid=116&arc=

I see now that it has Kansas City as a choice, so Jackson might mean Jackson county outside of Kansas City. That would make sense. It very marginally passed in Kansas City.

[??????????]

Florida should be blue. They would DEFINATELY ban gay marriages as things stand now.

[English]

Don't understand the commotion about this subject. The UK doesn't recognise gay marriage, however many cities perform civil unions and no-one bats an eyelid. I'm sure if they legalized it here no-one would care! Why are people so bothered by it? It's a non-issue in my opinion. Let states do as they wish. If Massachussetts and Vermont have it, why is Texas or South Carolina bothered?

[??????????]

Don't understand the commotion about this subject. The UK doesn't recognise gay marriage, however many cities perform civil unions and no-one bats an eyelid. I'm sure if they legalized it here no-one would care! Why are people so bothered by it? It's a non-issue in my opinion. Let states do as they wish. If Massachussetts and Vermont have it, why is Texas or South Carolina bothered?

Because as it stands now Homosexual marriage is illegal and judges are issuing liscenses illegally.

[Josh/Devilman88]

Don't understand the commotion about this subject. The UK doesn't recognise gay marriage, however many cities perform civil unions and no-one bats an eyelid. I'm sure if they legalized it here no-one would care! Why are people so bothered by it? It's a non-issue in my opinion. Let states do as they wish. If Massachussetts and Vermont have it, why is Texas or South Carolina bothered?

Because as it stands now Homosexual marriage is illegal and judges are issuing liscenses illegally.

Yes, and plus a lot of Americans are Christians, and the bible plainly preaches against homosexual.

[??????????]

Don't understand the commotion about this subject. The UK doesn't recognise gay marriage, however many cities perform civil unions and no-one bats an eyelid. I'm sure if they legalized it here no-one would care! Why are people so bothered by it? It's a non-issue in my opinion. Let states do as they wish. If Massachussetts and Vermont have it, why is Texas or South Carolina bothered?

Because as it stands now Homosexual marriage is illegal and judges are issuing liscenses illegally.

Yes, and plus a lot of Americans are Christians, and the bible plainly preaches against homosexual.

I am looking at it from a governmental point of view. Not so much a Christian view. Though I agree with you 150%.

[Nation]

Maryland would also probably ban gay marriage, if the voters were given a chance to vote. The eastern shore, etc, would vote for a ban, while the heavily African-American/Religious areas like Baltimore City and Prince George's do not exactly condone gay marriage.

[??????????]

Maryland would also probably ban gay marriage, if the voters were given a chance to vote. The eastern shore, etc, would vote for a ban, while the heavily African-American/Religious areas like Baltimore City and Prince George's do not exactly condone gay marriage.

I can imagine most liberals would be shocked about how many "solid dem" states would vote against gay marriage.

[??????????]

Here is my map :



Red - Ban
Blue - Allow
Gray - Unsure

[English]

Maryland would also probably ban gay marriage, if the voters were given a chance to vote. The eastern shore, etc, would vote for a ban, while the heavily African-American/Religious areas like Baltimore City and Prince George's do not exactly condone gay marriage.

I can imagine most liberals would be shocked about how many "solid dem" states would vote against gay marriage.

I wouldn't be shocked. The only state which might vote for gay marriage is Massachussetts and even then by a small margin.
In the UK gay marriage would never get through on a public vote and most of Europe would be the same.
I reckon Britain would vote 60-40% against. That said, if Britain forced it through, no-one would bother about it, just like they didn't in Canada.

[migrendel]

I feel your pain, opebo. I would be embarrassed if Massachusetts votes to ban it in 2006, when it will finally be on the ballot, provided the legislature re-approves it. But around the country, we understand that 28% of the people in Missouri opposed this, and that people of goodwill like yourself did what they could to say no to this.

Vermont does not have same-sex marriage. They have civil unions.

And Josh, I know I've explained this before, but what the hell, I'll do it again. The percentage of Christians is not relevant to their effect on the government. That is because we have a Constitution which has been interpreted as making religion and the state discrete entities.