RECENT  POSTS:  » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs » The religious anti-gay crowd: They never understood the marriage fight; now they don't understand their loss  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

01/02/2013

Protecting marriage in Illinois, 1937 style

by Jeremy Hooper

The bill was actually proposed by an Indiana legislator, but his stated intent was to "protect Illinois." And while that phrase is now shouted around by folks wanting to stop gays from marrying in the state, the scourge at the time involved heterosexuals crossing state lines in order to get around the medical exams and three day waiting requirements that were required of couples at the time:

201301021245

Somehow, the "protect Illinois" crowd coped with couples' freedom to marry, in-state or out. And they will again.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails