I've always felt it important, whether pro- or con, to know a candidate's position on issues important to the glbt community. How a candidate is likely to vote can often be misconstrued, so until a candidate signals a strong affinity for one position or another, it can sometimes be self-defeating to characterize that candidate's position. On the other hand, if a candidate is forthright about a position, whether pro or con, it is important for the community to know that, and a candidate won't necessarily view it a disservice to promulgate that candidate's views. Who occupies a seat is unimportant; what the occupant's inclinations are in public policy can be paramount. Voters certainly have a right to make a decision on a candidate based on that candidate's positions impacting public policy.
With that in mind, I think it is important to understand that Kathryn Densborn characterizes herself as a social conservative, and that this conservatism has ramifications in how she will vote on some issues, and is likely to vote on others. Regarding an amendment to the Constitution defining marriage as between a man and a woman, and banning any of its legal protections from being applied to same sex couples, Kathryn Densborn has signalled convincingly in several different civic contexts that whatever its problems, this amendment is a project of the current House Republican leadership, that by her religious convictions she identifies with the ban, and that she is not one who would challenge its momentum.
On the topic of nondiscrimination, although it is possible she could one day be persuaded that gays should be protected legally from discrimation in the work place just as (for instance) women, caucasians, and religious conservatives are, she is not of that view today. To her credit, she seems open to discussion and to building bridges, but her views are more conservative than the majority of the American population and the majority of Hoosiers, and reflect the views of the social conservative wing of the Republican Party. In my opinion, and probably in hers, she is no Scott Keller, no Lance Langford, no Mitch Daniels, no Carl Brizzi, no Donna Edgar, and no Todd Rokita.
While Densborn may seek endorsement or identity with any of these personages, and while she may run on an economic program (with which I agree), it seems to me it would be a disservice to her views, and contrary to the understanding of her base of support, to characterize her as moderate on matters important to the glbt community. Both fiscally and socially, Kathryn Densborn is conservative, and is proud to say so.
Those who favor banning same sex couples from any of the legal protections that civil marriage provides; those who favor making this ban a Constitutional one to ensure that the Constitution's guarantees of equal protection and religious freedom will not apply to same sex couples; and those who are uneasy with providing to glbt citizens the same protection from discrimination in the workplace, in housing, and in public accomodation enjoyed by other Americans can vote for Kathryn Densborn in good conscience. Whether or not she agrees with the full ramifications of the amendment, she has made clear that her vote would be in its favor.