New ballot language starts a new fight over marriage amendment

  • Article by: BAIRD HELGESON , Star Tribune
  • Updated: June 29, 2012 - 8:57 AM

Proponents say secretary of state overstepped bounds.

  • 137
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
mn_cameraJun. 28, 1212:31 PM

Better still would have been "Enshrining discrimination in the Minnesota constitution".

250
59
buzzard23Jun. 28, 1212:39 PM

What a waste of time this amendment churn is! There is already a law on the books that prevents same-sex couples from legally marrying in the state of MN. If there wasn't, I could possibly understand the energy on both sides of this issue. But, we already have the law. If the Republicans want to be provocative and gain some more support, back off the amendment and be 'for' something, like early childhood education or something their Democratic foes can't argue against. For the Democrats, if you feel so strongly that same-sex couples should be able to legally marry in MN, then go after the existing law. Everything else is a waste of taxpayer dollars, time and attention.

161
35
msfb99Jun. 28, 1212:39 PM

"Limiting the Status of Marriage to Opposite Sex Couples." how confusing is that title?! Just leave the Rep title. Then I can easily vote no.

41
97
dumbvikingsJun. 28, 12 1:15 PM

Well done Mr. Secretary. Well done. Now to change the Voter ID title to "Making sure the poor can't vote so Republicans can win."

262
63
dewey666Jun. 28, 12 1:23 PM

So, he can change the language on this amendment, but went to court to throw out the voter ID amendment because he doesn't like the wording on that one?

37
129
hotdigitydogJun. 28, 12 1:24 PM

How much time have MN GOP legislators spent on this anti-gay marriage ammendment?
How many jobs has it created?

245
38
bwebsterJun. 28, 12 1:45 PM

Limiting the Status of Marriage to Opposite Sex Couples? I am part of an opposite sex couple. Why would I want to limit my status? I'm going to vote 'No'! (... very clever Mr. Secretary, very clever).

119
15
allhailfsmJun. 28, 12 1:50 PM

Somewhere, in an alternate universe, are republicans actually focussing on jobs and opportunity?

190
30
minn12Jun. 28, 12 1:53 PM

Is there no end to this political hack's inferference with this amendment? Ritchie first refuses to do his job and defend the state's action, even though he's named as the defendent. Then, he goes around the state actively advocating AGAINST the amendment. Now, he is interferring with the legislative branch's role in naming the amendment title. And of course, fellow liberal political hack Swanson, (who also REFUSES to do her job and defend the ballot amendment) agrees with Ritchie. Folks, this is what you get when you put liberals like these in office- people who abandon their constitutional roles to defend the actions of the State of Minnesota, in favor of their OWN liberal agenda. They should both be impeached for failing to do their duty.

50
224
huntleyJun. 28, 12 2:12 PM

@minn12-

Is there no end to this political hack's inferference with this amendment? Ritchie first refuses to do his job and defend the state's action

Despite what you have heard or may think, that is not part of his job.

Now, he is interferring with the legislative branch's role in naming the amendment title

Dayton's veto put the ball in his court. That's the way it goes.

And of course, fellow liberal political hack Swanson, (who also REFUSES to do her job and defend the ballot amendment) agrees with Ritchie

Like Ritchie it is not her job to defend the wording of a proposed amendment. The AG deals with existing laws. If it was an actual MN law challenged in court it would be her obligation to defend it.

Folks, this is what you get when you put liberals like these in office- people who abandon their constitutional roles to defend the actions of the State of Minnesota, in favor of their OWN liberal agenda. They should both be impeached for failing to do their duty.

You cannot impeach someone for not doing something that they are not required to do.

194
21

Comment on this story   |  

  • 33°
  • 40/24
  • Cloudy

The Drive: Metro traffic

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

question of the day

Poll: Do you avoid restaurants because they’re too noisy?

Weekly Question

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT