Gay Rights Advocates Predict National Victory by 2018
LOS ANGELES TIMES
By By David Lauter
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Advocates for same-sex marriage set an ambitious timetable Wednesday for a nationwide victory, laying out a plan for a rapid series of campaigns to win over additional states to achieve that goal. "Within five years, we will bring marriage equality to all 50 states," Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, pledged to supporters massed on the sidewalk outside the Supreme Court shortly after the court's decisions Wednesday. The rulings bring to 13 the number of states, along with the District of Columbia, allowing gay marriage. Over the next 18 months, gay rights groups plan legislative or ballot campaigns in at least five states — Illinois, New Jersey, Nevada, Oregon and Hawaii — aimed at lengthening the list on their side. Same-sex marriage is also before the courts in New Mexico, where the state law is unclear. Ultimately, however, advocates of same-sex marriage believe that they will have to argue the issue once again before the high court. [link]
By By David Lauter
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Advocates for same-sex marriage set an ambitious timetable Wednesday for a nationwide victory, laying out a plan for a rapid series of campaigns to win over additional states to achieve that goal. "Within five years, we will bring marriage equality to all 50 states," Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, pledged to supporters massed on the sidewalk outside the Supreme Court shortly after the court's decisions Wednesday. The rulings bring to 13 the number of states, along with the District of Columbia, allowing gay marriage. Over the next 18 months, gay rights groups plan legislative or ballot campaigns in at least five states — Illinois, New Jersey, Nevada, Oregon and Hawaii — aimed at lengthening the list on their side. Same-sex marriage is also before the courts in New Mexico, where the state law is unclear. Ultimately, however, advocates of same-sex marriage believe that they will have to argue the issue once again before the high court. [link]
Comments