ILNews

In-box: Don't we have more pressing business?

April 27, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Letters to the Editor

Dear Mickey

Thanks for saying in your column (Indiana Lawyer March 30-April 12, 2011) what I hope many of us Hoosiers are thinking and feeling about the proposed immigration and same-sex marriage legislation. In particular, as a married father of two, I am puzzled regarding why our legislators feel compelled to spend valuable time working to enact more same-sex marriage laws that we do not need. Don’t we have more pressing business at hand? I have to conclude, as you do, that blatant prejudice, homophobia and intolerance are driving these efforts. I have not heard or read of any compelling legal justification for more regulation of same-sex marriage, and morality is not an area where lawmakers should intrude. I would rather see our General Assembly work on a law providing same-sex couples access to the rights and privileges that married couples enjoy by legalizing same-sex marriage, or civil union, etc., whatever label will avoid the most controversy and provide dissolution, custody, child support and related rights to these Hoosiers.

Unfortunately, your column reinforces for me how shameful and embarrassing it will be if Indiana passes an Arizona-like immigration law and even more anti-same-sex marriage laws. The jokes I hear about Indiana being so backward and unsophisticated will, I suppose, be appropriate. The negative impact on Indiana in terms of attracting and keeping businesses just makes the shame and embarrassment costly, too. I have become a supporter of Gov. Daniels, despite being a longtime Democratic voter, because of his shrewd, business-like approach to running this state; he seems genuinely earnest in his belief that Indiana needs to reinvent itself as a state where businesses want to be. I just wonder why he cannot prevail upon the legislators pushing these issues to leave well enough alone. I am proud to have been a Hoosier my entire life, but nothing about these proposed laws makes me proud.

Alan J. Irvin
Donahoe/Irvin, Indianapolis

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  2. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  3. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  4. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

  5. Baer filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals Seventh Circuit on April 30 2015. When will this be decided? How many more appeals does this guy have? Unbelievable this is dragging on like this.

ADVERTISEMENT