Indiana - The Next Gay Marriage Battleground

With all the excitement over recent court rulings in Ohio, New Mexico and Utah it is easy to overlook the coming battle in Indian where the Christofascists and their political prostitutes in the Indiana GOP are finding themselves pitted against the business community (not to mention non-religious extremists) in the battle over passage of an anti-gay state constitutional amendment.  The business community recognizes that making Indiana more anti-gay is not a winning formula for economic prosperity, especially with more and more states providing marriage equality.  An article in the New York Times looks at the battle between the business community and the spittle flecked, knuckle dragging Neanderthals of the GOP base in Indiana.  Here are highlights:

INDIANAPOLIS — Dominated by Republicans and steeped in traditional values, Indiana seemed among the least likely places to become a battleground in the nation’s debate over same-sex marriage when the legislature overwhelmingly chose in 2011 to push forward a state constitutional amendment barring gay couples from marrying.

But in the two years since, the landscape has shifted as voters, lawmakers and courts began recognizing same-sex marriage in places like Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey and New Mexico and as the United States Supreme Court declared parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. In just the past few days, a federal judge struck down a ban on same-sex marriage in Utah, home of the Mormon Church, and a federal appeals court rejected a request to halt the marriages on Tuesday. A federal judge in Ohio found that same-sex marriages should be recognized on death certificates. 

So suddenly Indiana, where lawmakers in the coming weeks are expected to call for the second vote needed to put a ban before voters in the fall elections, is now in a far more tense, unpredictable and closely watched spot than anyone here had imagined — a test case in whether a state will impose new limits on same-sex marriage in this fast-moving political and legal environment.

“What happens in Indiana is critical,” said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage,  . . . . Supporters of same-sex marriage, however, are pouring money and effort into defeating the measure in Indiana, a possibility that seemed unthinkable not long ago but one that advocates now insist is conceivable.

As lawmakers prepare to return for a new legislative session in January, it is an especially awkward spot for Republicans, who dominate both chambers of the General Assembly. With an election year ahead and the risk of primaries in May, the issue is pitting socially conservative groups, who are urging a constitutional ban, against sometime allies in the state’s business community, who say a ban could cause Indiana economic harm. 

Few Republicans now seem eager to talk about the issue, and some legislative aides said it was not entirely certain who would formally file the legislation in January.

To hear some Democrats tell it, many Republicans here would just as soon see the issue fade away, as they ponder navigating between socially conservative primary voters and a broader array of voters in a general election. 

“The tables have turned on this issue, and the Republican members are at a loss about what to do about it,” said Representative Scott Pelath, the House minority leader. “They’re quaking in their boots about what will happen if they don’t pass this thing. But they’re fearful about what will happen down the road if they do.”

Complicating matters is the language of the proposed amendment itself, which opponents say goes beyond banning marriage to threatening all legal arrangements allowing rights to same-sex couples. In addition to defining marriage as between a man and a woman, Indiana’s amendment says, “A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.” 

On the ground here, the fight is already fierce. More than 30 paid field workers from Freedom Indiana, an anti-ban campaign supported in part by business interests like Eli Lilly and Company and Cummins Inc., are pressing voters to contact their lawmakers, even as conservative groups have issued leaflets aimed at churchgoers.

[N]o one on either side can be certain what Indiana voters would do. While constitutional bans easily passed in many states years ago, public opinion has shifted.

Here, polling on the issue is mixed. At least one recent poll, a WISH-TV/Ball State Hoosier Survey, suggested that 58 percent of state residents polled were opposed to the idea of amending the Indiana Constitution but that people were nearly equally split on whether to legalize same-sex marriage. 

 Ultimately,if the Indiana GOP passes the measure this year, the voters in Indiana will have to decide between (i) modernity and equality under the U.S. Constitution or (ii) religious based bigotry and the embrace of hate and bigotry.  Should they choose the latter, it will not enhance the states image in the business community and in the eyes of large progressive corporations.