From Deseret News archives:

Voters in 10 states approve ban on same-sex marriage

Published: Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2004 10:31 p.m. MST
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
Voters in 10 states approved constitutional amendments Tuesday to ban same-sex marriage, in most cases by overwhelming margins. Opponents of the bans held out hope that Oregon, where results were not yet in, would buck the trend.

The amendments — on the ballots in 11 states — won easy approval in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio and Utah. The bans won by 3-to-1 margins in Kentucky and Georgia, 3-to-2 in Ohio, and 6-to-1 in Mississippi.

The Ohio measure, considered the broadest of the 11 because it barred any legal status that "intends to approximate marriage," gathered equal support from men and women, blacks and whites.

In Georgia, Ohio and Mississippi, gay-rights activists were considering court challenges of the newly approved amendments. But supporters of the bans were jubilant.

"I've said all along that this crossed party lines, color lines and socio-economic lines," said Sadie Fields of the Georgia Christian Coalition. "The people in this state realized that we're talking about the future of our country here."

Story continues below
Conservatives hoped the amendments would prevail in all 11 states, sending a signal that the American public disapproved of gay marriage. National and local gay-rights groups campaigned vigorously in Oregon, where polls showed a close race, to try to prevent a sweep, but the results — though expected — were dismaying.

"That certainly is disappointing news that many Kentucky voters would think it's appropriate to write discrimination into our constitution," said Beth Wilson of the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky. "People get harmed when their relationships are not respected, and this means that relationships won't be respected."

None of the 11 states allow gay marriage now, though officials in Portland, Ore., married more than 3,000 same-sex couples last year before a judge halted the practice. Supporters of the amendments contend the measures are needed as an extra guard against state court rulings like the one in Massachusetts a year ago that legalized same-sex marriage there.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

Related content
previousnext

Latest comments

Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing

To Moderate 2:54pm I agree with the need for more moderation. It is nice...

TCU v BSU welcome to the Fiesta Seperate But Equal Bowl. After two...

Yet again, we learn that BYU is a big joke...of all the summer talks of BCS...

There's one thing I want to know. Who won the matchup?

BCS reform still needed

it does not affect BYU since BYU will never get an invite. So, why Provo...

Attitude reflects leadership - Bronco Mendenhall - Assistant coach - Max...

Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil

That is absolutely incorrect. The behavior of others cannot determine our...

Generations to come are going to suffer from his policies. Heaven help us.

Only a handful of practices? Sounds like the coaches were deflated, too....

Big storm targets Midwest

Global Ice Age began in 1975 (Government Forecasters -- probably even then...

Advertisements