Odds and ends: Marriage amendment continues to spur debateby Andy Birkey February 29, 2012 0 comments
An update on news and community events related to the anti-gay marriage amendment.
Sponsored by Jewish Community Action, the 2 p.m. rally will be held at Adath Jeshurun Congregation, 10500 Hillside Lane W., Minnetonka.
The goal is to “bring together Jewish people from diverse traditions and perspectives to promote understanding and take action on social and economic justice issues in Minnesota.”
Ever wondered what Minensota for Marriage’s anti-gay marriage events look like? Wonder no more thanks to a new flickr account!
The law firm of Lockridge Grindal Nauen has become the first law firm to come out against the amendment.
Speaking of lawyers, the Hennepin County Bar Association has signed on to oppose the amendment.
If you ask those members of the MN Legislature who voted in favor of placing an amendment to ban same sex marriage on the 2012 ballot in Minnesota, most would say that they do not hate people who are GLBT. Many would likely say that they actually like people who identify as GLBT. Several members might even say, “Some of my closest friends are gay.” Really. Hmm. (“With friends like that….”) These same individuals, while being either clever (in their own minds, I assure you) or simply obtuse, would also say, “This amendment is not discriminatory. Legal marriage is just as available to people who are GLBT as it is to anyone else. They just have to marry someone of the opposite sex.” Again. Really?
Former Strib editor Robert Franklin has a few choice words for the anti-gay marriage amendment supporters: It’s not about protecting marriage, it’s about not supporting rights for gay people.
The focus on defining marriage in the face of all this suggests that the constitutional amendment isn’t so much about preserving the institution as it is a revolt against a growing acceptance of gays and lesbians in American culture (and, cynics might say, about getting out the social-conservative vote).
It’s like: “The house is on fire! Call an architect!”
Sincere defenders of marriage might want to call on the spirit of Judge Rosenbloom instead and harness their legislative zeal to enact his approach into law. Not just for court probationers, but for everybody.
The lawsuit against Hennepin County for marriage equality might be heard by the Minnesota Supreme Court on a technicality.
In January, the Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s decision to dismiss the state of Minnesota as a party to the lawsuit. Hennepin County is asking the Supreme Court to bring the state back into the case.
A spokesman for the Hennepin County Attorney’s office said the county believes the state, through the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office, is best suited to defend the state statute which prohibits same-sex couples from marrying.
David Mindeman of mnpACT says voters should leave the marriage equality question to future generations.
Seniors oppose same sex marriage by a 56-39 margin.
Younger voters flip it and support it by a 63-32 margin.
Shouldn’t that tell us something?
Shouldn’t we allow the future to decide this for themselves?
The Minnesota Constitution is supposed to be our long term guide and reference for our future. How can we, in all good conscience, establish a precedent on an issue with such a huge divide generationally? How can we do that?
We are only adding an unnecessary hurdle to what the future wants in this regard. So let’s leave it alone.
Just Vote NO.
OutFront Minnesota’s Lobby Day will be on March 29 this year.
Truth Wins Out has a letter written by a 6-year old to Sen. Warren Limmer, the Republican lead on the anti-gay marriage amendment that passed the Legislature last year.
I am Ian. I am 6. I have 2 moms. I care about other people who have 2 moms or 2 dads, not just about myself. I care about other people! And the communities!
It’s not fair to other people. If I voted on it, I would say no. What I’m saying is people who have 2 moms or dads will be mad and also sad.
The Constitution says that everyone is equal. You are not being equal. You should know it’s unfair. You are not being nice to us or to other families with two dads or two moms. It would not be fair.
Chuck Darrell of Minnesota for Marriage writes to the Rochester Post-Bulletin to say:
“In other words, marriage is more than just the love and commitment of two adults. It is about what kids need, not what adults want. Marriage predates government and has served as the foundation of the family and society for thousands of years. Virtually every society throughout history has recognized and supported marriage as the union of one man and one woman because it is in everyone’s interest to protect the best interests of children.”
He doesn’t mention that many same-sex couples are raising children.
On Feb. 22, the United Jewish Fund and Council of St. Paul (UJFC) board of directors voted to oppose the proposed amendment to the Minnesota Constitution, which would recognize marriage solely as a union between a man and a woman (the “Marriage Amendment”). With the vote, the board approved the following statement:
“The United Jewish Fund and Council of St. Paul opposes the passage of the Minnesota Marriage Amendment, scheduled for a vote on the State of Minnesota General Election ballot in November 2012, on the grounds that marriage is a fundamental human right and that the Minnesota Constitution should not be used as a vehicle for restricting rights and civil liberties.”
How will you vote? Like Washington state to make same-sex marriage acceptable? If that had been God’s plan, we would have an unpopulated planet.
And you would not need to vote because there would be no you!
Of course, she makes two faulty assumptions. One, that the vote in November would legalize gay marriage and that if gay marriage is legal, there will be no more heterosexuals.