You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
We were always talking about civil marriage. One can get married in any church in the land, if they don't have a marriage license from the state it is not legally recognized.
That said, if this helps get it passed, then do it!
It took them this long to be able to distinguish the difference between Civil vs. Religious marriage?!
Great compromise, to protect religious freedoms.
what ramifications would this have on a 'civil marriage' being recognized by other states?
Let's get real. Nobody has proposed that churches in Minnesota will be forced to marry gay couples against the beliefs of the pastor or the church.
Lipstick on a pig. This entire bill is an affront to genuine Christianity and even Islam. No one with a clean conscience could possibly support it.
"It took them this long to be able to distinguish the difference between Civil vs. Religious marriage?!" ----- Sad that they don't understand separation of church and state isn't it? This was never and never could have been about religious marriage, yet the right wing fear mongers tried to make people believe it was.
Gay marriage is going to happen in Minnesota, and in a year, when the world has not ended as prophesied by the catholic church, everyone will wonder what all the fuss was about. Ten years from this thursday, will you be one of the legislators who can look back with pride that your vote helped minnesota become the 12th state(alas,we used to be first) to eliminate discrimination against gay people, or will you stuggle to come up with some lame explanation to your grandkids(maybe with gay parents!)why you were one of the few legislators in the 21st century who voted to promote discrimination.
I thought liberals were all for compromise? If this helps get those who may be opposed or on the fence to support the bill...then it should be a good thing. Guess it is true...some people just have to have something to complain about...even when it is a good thing. On a side note, while it can be said that there is no intention to force any church into performing gay marriage, by not defining civil marriage, it opens the chances of someone attempting to sue a church and force them to do so...long stretch...maybe...possible...very much so. People have sued over less.
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks