Gay Marriage

[mndfl]

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/11/21_mccalluml_gaymarriage/

Just the facts please. Okay.

First fact: Minnesota State statute defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

Second fact: federal law defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

Third fact: the United States Supreme Court will not change either law. (Under Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the court was the most conservative in the last one hundred years. Since his passing and the retirement of Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate, Bush has appointed the most conservative Supreme Court in the nations history.)

Fourth fact: it is ILLEGAL for a gay or lesbian couple to marry in the State of Minnesota or ANYWHERE in the United States.

Fifth fact: most successful American companies have offered civil union benefits that provide same sex couples health insurance and life insurance, just like their heterosexual counterparts.

Sixth fact: the proposed amendment does not ban only gay marriage. it also bans the "legal equivalency." What does that mean? It means that if the amendment passes, it will revoke existing benefits for same sex couples. Couples who have lived together for fifty years will lose health benefits; they will lose hospital visitation rights; they will lose life insurance benefits.

So what is the purpose of the gay marriage amendment?

The proposed amendment to the Minnesota constitution is not designed to prevent gay marriage, which is already barred by federal and state statute.

The ONLY legal effect of the proposed amendment to the Minnesota State Constitution will be to take away health and life insurance from gay and lesbian couples.

So why do it? Just read the article.

The Minnesota Republican Party is convinced that if they can get the gay marriage ballot initiative on the 2006 ballot, it will help Mark Kennedy and Tim Pawlenty draw out voters who would not ordinarily go to the polls.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

1. It all comes down to money in the end, doesn't it?

And btw, welcome to DU, and check out our Meetup thread!

[mndfl]

2. thanks...

DU is a great community and an excellent source of info.

I feel strongly that Minnesota's progressive community must organize early to stave off the effects of the gay marriage ballot initiative.

http://www.ballot.org/

Maybe someone in DU with links to the Minnesota legislature can contact the people at this organization or similar to develop and implement a strategy.

[Minnesota Raindog]

3. Join the fight to defeat Michele Bachmann

As long as Michele Bachmann is running for public office--anywhere--she will be beating the drum for this hateful legislation. In addition to fighting to keep this off the ballot, please join the fight to defeat Bachmann at every level--in her race to be the next 6th District Congressperson or in her race to retain her state senate seat. Don't buy into the twisted logic of some in the DFL who think that it would be great if Bachmann won the endorsement in the 6th because she'd be the easiest to beat. She's the darling of the extremist fundies, and don't underestimate the voters they and their churches can turn out. Witness the hundreds of so-called Christian pastors who already have signed onto her ugly campaign of discrimination.

Bachmann, chief author of the Hate Amendment, plans to do nothing else at the legislature next session. This is what she told MPR:

"This will be the issue that will dominate until the clock strikes midnight at the last day of session. People will be down in force this year."

Check out the rap on Bachmann at www.dumpbachmann.blogspot.com.

[ISUGRADIA]

4. one correction

"it is ILLEGAL for a gay or lesbian couple to marry in the State of Minnesota or ANYWHERE in the United States."

anywhere except Massachusetts

[indigo32]

5. Alot of Dems I've talked with believe it's all about votes too

these people are the lowest and will do anything.
One can only hope in MN that this strategy could backfire, as Dean Johnson said in that piece, but mostly he and his comrades need to hold them off, so it never gets on the ballot.

We MUST contact them, and tell everyone we know to contact them, so that they don't give in.

[CatholicEdHead]

6. Yes it is, it is nothing more than a way to keep their power

by demonizing another group.

[Zookeeper]

7. It strikes me that an argument to be made to all the...

"pro-business/anti-government" ME-publicans is that the government has no right to interfere with the decision that "most SUCCESSFUL American companies" have made to offer civil union benefits. They didn't make the offer out of the goodness of their hard, little hearts....they made it because it was a good business practice.

The RW doesn't seem to mind policing people's sexual orientation, but, intruding on corporate profits should cause a massive sense of outrage.

[loveable liberal]

8. Those who must have marriage defined are not christian.

Those who demand similar beliefs dont really understand the nature of religion. Its not a concern of humanity to decide who is righteous; those that do try to usurp holy power by claiming they know the mind of God.

The spiritually strong do not need their beliefs confirmed by others or congregations or laws.

Those who seek to deny the rights of others are therefore weak of faith.