You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
If you're among the undecided on Nov. 6, just take a pass.
One can lie by what they say or by what they don't say. This editorial does the latter. If the amendment fails, nothing will change... until judges redefine marriage in response to the lawsuit currently in process in Hennepin County, or legislators who are promising to redefine marriage the first chance they get beat judges to the punch. Why don't you mention that?
@mplsskeptic...Because the author doesn't share your bigotry and your misguided opposition to full equality for ALL Minnesotans, including LGBT Minnesotans.
The tide is turning in support of same-sex marriage. If we are not currently at a tipping point in Minnesota, we certainly will be within the next several years. It doesn't make sense to try and sneak in a constitutional amendment vote now when we know societal attitudes are changing.
The real reason supporters of the amendment worry about same-sex marriage being decided in the judicial system is because, unlike voting, reason and logic have a much better chance of prevailing. There are no rational, scientifically-supported reasons to deny government-sanctioned same-sex marriage. In other words, amendment supporters who suggest that children and/or society will be harmed have absolutely no basis in reality for making such a claim. When the light of reason shines on the issue of same-sex marriage, it is clear that the government has no legitimate reason to deny gay couples the right of civil marriage.
I like the idea of leaving it blank. Maybe that will discourage the practice of legislating with the Constitution, which is a bad practice no matter what the issue or party that supports it.
I am definitely voting NO on this bigoted amendment. When I was just under 2 years old, the Supreme Court deemed the ban on interracial marriages unconstitutional, as they should have. This needs to happen again with respect to this issue. I am tired of the government and certain religious groups trying to micromanage everyone's lives. One does not have to be gay to realize how wrong this amendment is. The law should also be changed to allow marriage for any adult couple that wishes to enter into it, with the same set of rights and responsibilities across the board.
VOTE NO (twice), either by marking the ballot or leaving it blank. Future generations will thank you (heck, current generations will be appreciative!!).
People are fed up with activist judges and politicians who circumvent the will of the people. Arrogant legislators and political leaders just want citizens to be sheep. Those days are over.
Perhaps the simplest and most honest solution to this is just to encourage people not to vote at all. After all, the amendments are confusing to them, they probably don't know anything about their legislators, there's a long list of judges which they've never heard of, and everyone knows that the presidential selection is unimportant since both parties are essentially the same. Far better to stay home and not worry about standing in line and making a lot of decisions.
What logic used for gay marriage could NOT be used for someone who wants multiple spouses??? Wouldn't stopping me who wants to have multiple partners thru life be discriminatory??? Unless of course society figures I am better off with only one mother-in-law :)
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks