Whjy attack Austin - I put this tothe Herald - Bulletin Comments

Gee, why is it that the comments attacking Austin cannot say anything of substance, nothing more than we are going to get you? Maybe some of you have been living under a rock - which does not explain why you have an internet connection - but none of you explain what was so good about this amendment. It was constitutional amendment that served nothing more than to excite your homophobic fears without looking at the problems similar provisions caused in other states. Time and events show that this was not a good amendment in its particulars. That it was not a good thing to enshrine bigotry in our state constitution probably does not make much sense to your sort.

For those who think that Mrs. Austin did not do her job, please read the state constitution. Read the Indiana Supreme Court case of Ellingham v. Dye (written by a bunch of Republicans in or about 1917). We do not live in a democracy, we do not have constitutional referendums, we are a representative democracy. The General Assembly acts as a filter for constitutional amendments and not as a rubber stamp. Austin did her job.

Nothing she did permitted same-sex marriage in this state. Not that the whackos rabidly attacking her for this will admit that. The statute has been upheld by the Indiana Supreme Court. Anyone thinking they lightly overturning legislation needs to read the cases from our Supreme Court.