RECENT  POSTS:  » Ruth Institute (former NOM affiliate): Same-sex marriage is as much of a wedge as interracial marriage bans » NOM finally admitting that marriage amendments are, in fact, bans » Kentucky's big anti-LGBT org hopes to pray away a fair court ruling on civil marriage » Iowa's governor sponsoring anti-gay Family Leader summit? » Head of Virginia's top anti-gay org: One mean email proves 'the left' is sexist, intolerant » Video: Ohio should be so lucky to have married couples as adorable as George Henry » GLAAD: Q&A with former 'ex-gay' activist Yvette Schneider: 'I’ve never met an 'ex-gay' man I thought was not still attracted to men' » Head of Virginia's anti-equality org: 'open season to discriminate against anyone who believes that children deserve a mom and a dad' » Force behind Virginia's marriage ban ably demonstrates animus behind it » NOM to show rest of world its impressive ability to exacerbate 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