Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

US state of Indiana will jail gay couples who attempt to marry for 18 months

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. But really, US, please do lecture us some more about freedom and liberty and all those concepts people there pretend to worship, but wipe their backsides on at the first possible opportunity.

    1. Do not confuse the citizens with the assholes who have bought their way into power.
      Your Witch just died: who’s in power now? Do your politicians represent the working stiff or the monied?

      1. The difference is, Margret thatcher was prime minister when being gay was still seen by authorities as a bad thing e.g. in the 70’s. She has been disregarded and ignored as an authority ever since then. This is now nearly 40 years later. Get your facts right, this is the 21st century now, being gay is no longer a hidden issue. For a whole state to outlaw love is ridiculous!

      2. It’s fine to have principles, but you must be vigilant and fight to protect them. You assume that the electorate is powerless, that’s really not so. With a collective will in play, things can and do change. I am well aware that the US has a notable history of civil activism – but people have begun to sit it out and this is the consequence. Act up and live up to that extraordinary document – protect it, or accept the consequences.

      3. It’s fine to have principles, but you must be vigilant and fight to protect them. You assume that the electorate is powerless, that’s really not so. With a collective will in play, things can and do change. I am well aware that the US has a notable history of civil activism – but people have begun to sit it out and this is the consequence. Act up and live up to that extraordinary document – protect it, or accept the consequences.

      4. ‘Do not confuse the citizens with the assholes who have bought their way into power’.

        Enough of those citizens voted for this moron of a Governor and with their support he gained enough power to make these changes.

        I have visited Indiana many times from the UK, but won’t be back spending any of my money in that state while this disgrace is allowed to continue.

    2. Our government is trying to convince us to give up our basic rights and trample our constitution in order to give us a little personal security. Not everyone is buying this and our numbers are growing. The running joke is “they hate us for our freedom” because we know we are losing it daily.

      -Indiana resident

  2. Hopefully a number of these idiots will be voted out of office in the next elections. I can see a possible clash with the federal authority’s on this one, and would not be surprised to hear that ‘The Southern poverty law centre’ is taking them to court.

    For ‘Republican’ read ‘Tory’. There are many in the Tory party who wnat to turn the clock back. Don’t forget Cameron is going against the majority of his own party on SSM.

    1. That There Other David 10 Jul 2013, 11:22am

      The Tories are not even in the same league as the Republicans when it comes to basic nastiness. As our right-wing has moved towards the centre theirs has been infiltrated by the Tea Party crazy types.

      1. Staircase2 10 Jul 2013, 2:35pm

        Oh yes they are actually…

        Not sure what planet you’re on to believe that the UK Right-Wing have become more centre to be honest..

        You only have to look at every single action they’ve taken in office (with the notable exception of Marriage Equality) to see that they’re out Thatchering Thatcher…

        Even with the issue of Marriage Equality they’re still largely a bunch of kneejerk baggage carriers intent on destroying any notion of Equality. If it weren’t for the more grown up elements inside the Tory Party we’d still be languishing inside Section 28…

        There is very little in real terms to distinguish between the US Tea Party and the UK’s Tory Party…

        Both are full of wide eyed zealots stuffed full of fear and bigotry, desperate to ensure that the world reflects only themselves and their fanatical fear of ‘other’…

    2. Actually, Tories are more analogous to U.S. Democrats. U.S. Republicans are more like UKIP. The U.S. currently lacks a viable party left of center. There’s only one democratic socialist elected to the House of Representatives (from Vermont), and he runs as an independent.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jul 2013, 2:09pm

        Yes, I would have to agree with that analogy. The Tories most definitely are like centrist Democrats.

        The hypocrisy of the U.S. system is breath-taking. Before DOMA was struck down, same-sex marriage couples had to lie about their marriages and tick the box saying they were single when completing their income tax returns because the federal government didn’t recognise SSM. Essentially, the federal government was sanctioning their lying.Thankfully, that’s been overturned and they can now file jointly as a married couple just like their heterosexual counterparts always have.

        For a country that prides itself of being the freest, it still hasn’t yet passed ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act), lingering for years without any resolution.

        I know we have our own problems in the UK, but we’re far better off and enjoy far more rights and freedoms than our gay American counterparts. The Marriage Bill passing will be the icing on the cake.

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jul 2013, 2:36pm

      No way. The fact that the Marriage Bill was introduced by Cameron proves that the Tories are in no way comparable to the Republicans. Who among the republican candidates for the 2016 campaign are equal marriage proponents? You can count on four hands the number of supportive republicans there are in both Houses of Congress compared to just under half of the Tories. 53% of Tories polled in 2012 said they will continue to vote Tory in spite of the Marriage Bill which many of those same voters support anyway. Not much can be said for the republicans.

  3. There are parts of the US where they have more in common with Tehran than they do with the rest of the Western Hemisphere.

    I say go for it. Jail them. And then watch the backlash. If they thought the prop 8 response was big, they haven’t seen anything yet.

  4. I believe I should quickly call a doctor, for some reason I’m hallucinating while reading this article and misreading every instance of the word “Nigeria” as “Indiana”.

  5. I always thought Indiana was in the US not Uganda /s.

    So effectively the right of protest is being withdrawn from gay couples. Archaic bigots. I will never understand State constitutions, to my mind there should be one law of the land.

  6. License, license, license? Come on Pink News, this is a U.K. site; it’s LICENCE.

    1. Why take offense centering on such lexical hiccups? It’s a practice in futile endeavor.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jul 2013, 2:11pm

      PN is quoting verbatim from an American article, correctly so.

      1. Frank Boulton 10 Jul 2013, 3:49pm

        Yes, I agree with quoting verbatim. My word-processor really pisses me off, when it keeps correcting “Defense of Marriage Act” to “Defence of Marriage Act.”

    3. dharmapupil 10 Jul 2013, 2:45pm

      Last I heard, Indiana was a US state. They issue licenses….

      1. Paul Brownsey 10 Jul 2013, 5:00pm

        No, they issue licences but spell the word differently.

  7. Robert (Kettering) 10 Jul 2013, 11:32am

    I know several people have already made similar comments to mine but when I too read this I thought surely not in the USA? Surely this is some backward African country like Nigeria or Uganda or even Iran, not the US?

    I personally am sick to death of the US Crusades around the world telling other countries to change their ways, e.g. Iran, North Korea, even China, when it comes to human rights. This simply stinks and smells badly of Hypocrisy!

  8. Can’t see this surviving appeal if they try to enforce it.

    1. Christopher Hobe Morrison 10 Jul 2013, 6:24pm

      They probably don’t care if it survives appeal or not as long as they are standing up for God’s Word Revealed in the Bahble. If God doesn’t come through for them, who will they blame?

  9. Talk about moving the goalposts down to the other end of the field Indiana.

  10. Mike in Indiana 10 Jul 2013, 11:46am

    As I am not out at work (already a hostile environment), I now have even more reason to fear for my job, that I can be fired, without recourse, just for being who I am. And now I can go to jail just for wanting to get married. Unless, by some miracle, there is a radical shift in thinking, it appears that the constitutional amendment is certain to pass at next year’s election. And when it does, it will take years to undo it, once marriage equality becomes commonplace. While the rest of the country is taking giant strides for the future, Indiana is making a return to the stone age. And I am truly ashamed of the state I call home.

    1. Mikey in Indiana 11 Jul 2013, 12:04pm

      I did a little more research on the matter. It seems that the “go to jail” law has been on the books since at least the mid 90’s. And the penalty is currently 3 years in prison and a fine of $10,000. So the revised law is actually an easing of the current law. Law of the land or not, it’s still a bad law.

  11. I hope the good people of PinkNews will have a travel boycott against the state of Indiana like they said they would with other parts of the world (some posters anyway).

    Or is that only reserved for “lesser” and “backward” parts of the world which aren’t in the Western world”?

  12. Red rag to a Buffalo

  13. Jock S. Trap 10 Jul 2013, 12:01pm

    Absolutely disgusting…. this serves no other purpose other to hate and discriminate whilst making them same people they refuse to protect pay the equal tax bills.

  14. I knew this would happen: most people are more than happy with same financial rights, equal rights as regards employment and civil unions.

    Marriage, though, was a step too far and so the backlash begins. Inevitable.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jul 2013, 2:43pm

      Yes, arsehole, the backlash begins against loons like you with the striking down of DOMA in thirteen states and Prop. H8te in California and the Marriage Bill about to pass in the UK. Suck on it!

      1. You know, Robert, gay people in the USA have something to moan about: no equivalent of civil partnerships, perhaps little equality in terms of employment.

        They’ve damned good reason to complain: you, on the other hand, come over as a rich white male petulantly stamping his foot because he can’t call himself married.

        I mean wtf?! Why is ANY bloke-gay or straight- so hung up on not being able to call himself married? Pathetic really. I mean I DO get the desire for financial rights and all, course I do, but married? Strange.

        PS.Suck on what? You do realise that marriage=fidelity, don’t you?

        1. Ja moron

          1. Another petulant rich white male, no doubt.

    2. Few states offers civil unions, and even in the ones that do, they are fundamentally different from marriage, and at any rate, are still not recognized at the federal level. Also, equal protection and all that…

  15. This is a court challenge imminently waiting to happen. Why do panicking homophobes always like to overreach in ways that will hasten their failure? It’s like a temper tantrum.

  16. I’m a bit confused, how is applying for a marriage licence as two men or women furnishing false information, it is correct, they may not accept it but it is not false information.

    Is it because the boxes on the forms are gender bound so putting a mans name in a womans box makes it false. Can someone explain please?

    How increadibly petty and childish to rush something like this through. Arn’t they going to trap straight couples who simply make a mistake on the form as well.

    1. Putting a man’s name in the box for the wife’s details would be intentionally supplying false information. Making a mistake would be unintentional.

      It’s a joke and I don’t see how it can be justified,

        1. Thank you, I thought it appeared strange.

  17. I know this is just awful for LGBT people in this state but whilst there is a constitutional ban in force in the state stopping SSM it was only a political gesture on the part of the couple to highlight the inequality- it was not going to change the minds of those who see us as a threat.
    The tide of opinion is changing as people become more aware of LGBT community through the media coverage of our hard earned equality wins in other areas.
    It is only a matter of time before all states have to recognise SSM even if they don’t conduct them in that state.
    These stupid and hurtful attempts to make our lives as awful as possible will one day backfire until then please don’t risk jail to make a point that they won’t understand and will only cause individual pain.
    Use other methods such as the ballot box and awareness campaigns rather than give these disgusting human beings the satisfaction of sending you to jail.

    1. Equality in terms of gay couples having same financial status as straight ones is just fine, medical insurance, nok, as is same rights as employment or any other area of life.

      But what SSM does is fundamentally violate a uniquely heterosexual institution and turn it into something else: basically, SSM is a lie as no amount of propaganda can change the fact that same sex couples serve a different purpose to opposite sex ones.

      The backlash is utterly inevitable: civil rights in terms of finances are one thing; and something most reasonable people can wholly accept.

      Ripping apart marriage is quite another.

      1. I wont bother with the ‘uniquely heterosexual’ part of your comment as historical evidence proves otherwise, a simple google church will show you. However could you explain how SSM is a lie? All those SSMs in dozens of countries around the world are a fact. They exist so cant be a lie. How does SSM rip apart marriage? Does it deny the rights of heterosexuals to marriage? Does it make heterosexual marriage void? Also what role does a same sex couples serve compared to heterosexual couples? Id like to know so I can make sure I live my life accordingly. Many thanks.

        1. Sorry shouldve said google search! Freudian slip.

      2. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jul 2013, 2:15pm

        Since procreation isn’t possible for infertile hetero couples who marry or those beyond child-bearing years, some of whom never had children in their earlier years, then what would the purpose be for their marrying? What if an hetero male married and suffered from incurable erectile dysfunction? What would be his purpose for marriage?

        1. It doesn’t matter if a few straight married couples fail to have children; same sex couples can never be treated exactly the same as straight ones: a concession to this has already been made in the uk same sex marriage bill whereby the wife of a lesbian who has given birth will NOT be automatically assumed to be parent of her baby (as is same with opposite sex married couple).

          So why the farce of marriage? It serves no purpose at all. Clearly, there are differences.

          I don’t mind/care one jot if same sex couples have same financial rights as straight couples and nobody should be discriminated against when it comes to jobs or whatever other area but, clearly, there are differences and to call gay couples married is just plain stupid.

          1. Jane McQueen 10 Jul 2013, 10:38pm

            Actually if the baby is conceived via IVF, which it would be in 99% of cases, then the second parent slot on the birth certificate would be for the woman’s partner just like it already is now.

      3. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jul 2013, 2:23pm

        Please contact the governments of 14 countries where SSM is legal and provide us with their official reports as to how exactly marriage has been negatively impacted and ripped apart? Who was responsible for divorce and adultery around the world prior to 2001 when the Netherlands became the first country to introduce SSM? Who caused the adultery committed by Tory MPs Nadine Dorries, Bob Blackman and serial adulterer Sir Roger Gale who is currently in his third marriage? Facts please.

        1. Oh go and get a dress fitted for your ‘big day’ or something. Men-gay OR straight- who obsess over marriage are just plain odd. Yeah, I truly understand the desire for financial equality, nok rights etc, but marriage, I mean that’s odd.

          1. To be honest, the rubbish YOU spew out is pretty odd to me. As is the fact that you think that anyone actually cares whether you think our desire for marriage is valid or not.

  18. No problem getting a gun licence though?

  19. In protest, and before this law comes into effect, people should go and apply for marriage licences on mass as same sex couples, whether they’re really couples or not.

    1. Christopher Hobe Morrison 10 Jul 2013, 6:34pm

      There are probably a lot of people willing to go to jail to stand up for the rights of LGBT people, but it is also necessary to think of what the people who run these jails will arrange for those who do so. Remember (I think) Freddy Krueger in one of those old movies when someone was going to move into his house (“Fresh meat!”.

      1. Did you read the part of the comment that said “before this law comes into effect”?

  20. The US really needs to sort this out; it’s becoming even more of a global laughing stock. To see an issue like this send the country into hysteria and tear it apart state by state is a testament to the importance of education on sexuality and the refuses to allow fundamentalists to twist arms…

  21. Staircase2 10 Jul 2013, 2:28pm

    More information please Pink News

  22. Tom Cotner 10 Jul 2013, 2:28pm

    This article is not true, and if you had only taken the time to read the law you would know that. I suggest you do so.

  23. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jul 2013, 2:30pm

    So freedom of assembly and expression according to the American Consitution’s first amendment don’t apply if you’re gay? So much for the land of the free. Yet, the U.S. lectures the rest of the world on Human Rights and freedom, bloody arrogance of it all.

    1. SilenceIsGolden 11 Jul 2013, 12:44am

      Thank you for that! I hope somebody at PinkNews will read the linked article.

  24. This is the type of case where violence will solve everything. Start brutally murdering the Religious nuts who are in office and make them live in fear of the positions. One of ‘em wants to get big balls and say they’re not afraid? Kill their family, etc.

    1. Christopher Hobe Morrison 10 Jul 2013, 6:37pm

      That way gay people will be described as terrorists and it will be open season.

  25. allwaysniceman 10 Jul 2013, 2:55pm

    Its very sad, but understandable: every violation of law must be punished by authorities. And gay marriage still is illegal under law of state of Indiana, at least for now. Dura lex, sed lex.

  26. Jack Chang 10 Jul 2013, 3:34pm

    Oh great. Indiana has just become the new avant garde of the backwards America for the day.

  27. This is a serious question, please don’t respond harshly:
    If what’s actually illegal is giving false information (lying) on a federal form, then what is the impact to gay couples? Is there something that needs to be filled out “falsely” in order to get a license?

  28. Wake up and smell the Tyranny.

  29. I don’t usually comment on these stories but I thought some of you might find my opinion interesting because I live in Indiana. I wanted to write a comment about life here but it was too long for the comment section. So instead I will just try to answer your questions directly. Ask away!

    Indiana is in what is known as the “bible belt,” a lot of folks won’t be up in arms over this law because they believe it is the law of God, not man. I personally believe that the government should stay out of everyone’s marriage. We don’t need “marriage benefits.” A very small percentage of us just want to marry for love, not what we can get from our government.

  30. I bet this could be a great test case.

  31. Frank Boulton 10 Jul 2013, 3:57pm

    Let’s keep things in perspective. US federal law now permits and recognises same-sex marriage. What’s happening in Indiana is a bunch of rednecks showing what bad losers they are.

    Barack Obama, the President of the United States, has given the cause of same-sex marriage tremendous impetus in the western world. The Prime Minister of New Zealand was rather opposed to same-sex marriage in early 2012. After a meeting with Obama, he was all for it.

  32. Y’all are missin’ da point of da article. The Seal of the State of Indiana is false advertising. Have you ever been there? (I live near it in Illinois.) Contrary to the seal, Indiana has no hills, no trees and definitely no buffalos. It is 36,418 sq miles of very flat corn fields with a small city stuck in the middle. If you drive through the state, it has miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles. There is one truth in the seal; their current advancement in technology is an axe… as he chops down the last tree to make room for another corn field. They did one smart thing and charge people a toll ($9.40/£6.29) if they wanted to cross the state’s 156 miles of barren interstate (I-90) road as quickly as possible.

  33. When our Human Rights Orgs. tell everyone that we have a lot of work to do this is what they mean. This is just abominable behavior on the part of the Republicans who think they can turn the clock back to the “Not So Good All Days”! Times are changing and these “Angry Old White Men” are on the way out until then they are dangerous.

  34. Welcome to Indiana. I understand their new state emblem to be proudly displayed on the state flag is a troglodyte.

  35. GingerlyColors 10 Jul 2013, 4:47pm

    I hope that SCOTUS strikes down that law immediately. I expect laws threatening people who enter into same-sex marriages with imprisonment to come out of the likes of Nigeria, not the USA. The law, which already exists against ‘furnishing false information on a marriage license’ is now being specifically targeted at preventing gay couples from marrying.
    Indiana must have a low crime rate if they seem to have nothing to worry about except gay marriages. Perhaps they should concern themselves with more important things like gun control.

  36. Paul Brownsey 10 Jul 2013, 5:03pm

    “US state of Indiana will jail gay couples who attempt to marry for 18 months”

    Sloppy English here. They are trying to marry for life, not for 18 months.

  37. Adam Stewart 10 Jul 2013, 6:05pm

    The US is rapidly going backwards despite having a forward looking President. Shame on the legislators of Indiana. What are they so afraif of? It’s time they realised we are now living in the 21st century.

  38. Art Pearson 10 Jul 2013, 6:35pm

    This is OUTRAGEOUS! Every gay/lesbian couple in Indiana needs to get together and mount a class action lawsuit against the state and if necessary, have it taken right up to the Supreme Court.

    1. Christopher Hobe Morrison 10 Jul 2013, 6:42pm

      Not just gay couples. Every human being’s rights are being violated when another human being’s rights are violated.

  39. Presume given this appalling assault on civil rights, the Indiana state government will soon be rebranding car licence plates thus: ” Indiana -The Taliban State “

  40. This is why the president needs to step up and make it legal or how about the supreme court making it legal all across the US. It’s about freakin time it happens. Enough with this “I don’t like nor agree with how someone lives so I am going to put a stop to it” bull crap. If you don’t like it, fine but stop trying to make every live they way you believe.

  41. keith francis farrell 11 Jul 2013, 12:02am

    I think that it is time these bigots were removed from power. also about time that the US made the changes nationally

  42. This reeks of panic. Criminalizing open attempts by same-sex couples to apply for licenses instead of just turning them away is plainly an attempt to deter symbolic protests. It is basically a legal attack on freedom of expression. I suspect – and hope – that it will provoke one hell of a reaction.

  43. There is nothing to stop non Arizonians or non Americans from submitting applications in protest by the thousands – I would like to see Arizona attempt to extradite people fro prosecution.

  44. troglodyte idiots!!! Uggha Uggha!

  45. reminds me of how the police treated black people in the civil rights movement. seriously, these lawmakers and lawenforcers cannot think of more important things to focus on, like nutters walking around with guns? oh no sorry, that’s LEGAL! shameful country full of rhetoric.

  46. Just one more reason I am SO glad I finally moved out of the cesspool of a state in 2007.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all