. . . The vast number of citizens hasn't demanded a referendum on the issue or sought to put it into the Constitution. This is politically motivated ploy and a ham-handed way for the Republican bullies to force the divisive issue.
Thank the Republicans for making this a wedge issue when all eyes have been on the budget.
It also allows legislators to turn the incredibly charged issue over to the voters without having to reveal their own thinly cloaked bigotry.
The message the GOP is sending gays and lesbians could not be clearer. We like you (or are at least forced to say that for the cameras) - just not as much as straight people.
This new movement isn't just legislation to define marriage. It's legislation to prove we're bigoted.
Sadly, Winona Roman Catholic Bishop John Quinn testified at last Friday's Senate hearing at the Minnesota State Capitol in support of the amendment. Of course, that's not surprising given the clerical caste's uninformed and mean-spirited stance on the issue of homosexuality. It's also a stance that can be easily refuted.
I just called the office of Bishop Quinn (507) 454-4643 and left a message with his secretary. I strongly encourage my readers to do likewise. I said I did not appreciate his support of the amendment and of his statement at last Friday's hearing that he speaks for the Catholic Church. He does not. He may speak for the bishops but polls clearly indicate that the Catholic people are supportive of civil rights – including civil marriage rights – for gay people. I also recommended that the bishop prayerfully reflect upon the May 3 editorial from the Winona Daily News.
(NOTE: For more actions you can take regarding the proposed marriage amendment, see Catholics for Marriage Equality MN's 7-Step Action Plan.)
Following is the Winona Daily News' May 3 editorial in its entirety.
_____________________________________
GOP Definition of Marriage is Hateful
By Darrell Ehrlick, editor,
on behalf of the Winona Daily News editorial board
May 3, 2011
Winona Daily News
By Darrell Ehrlick, editor,
on behalf of the Winona Daily News editorial board
May 3, 2011
Winona Daily News
It would be funny if it wasn't so sad, not to mention hateful. A new Republican initiative seeks to define marriage only between a man and a woman. But it's so much easier to define marriage than admit bigotry, insensitivity and pandering to the worst kind of stereotypes.
With no end in sight to a record state budget deficit, the Republicans in the Legislature have seized on the opportunity to drive a wedge issue into the middle of what is already a tension-packed political climate.
Employing the typical "activist judges" bogeyman, the GOP wants to beat any judge to the punch and define marriage without a single shred of evidence telling the majority of straight Minnesotans how letting two consenting adults marry threatens them in any meaningful way.
Nor do the Republicans pushing this say why it's fair to let some people have a marriage license while others cannot for no other reason than genitalia.
Sorry, that's really what it boils down to.
Republicans pushing this don't like gay people. Instead, they would rather disguise their own prejudice in the form of legislation ... you know, protecting marriage and all.
If we really want to talk about protecting marriage, maybe these concerned and obviously moral legislators would do well to remember the antithesis of marriage, divorce. Now there's something that threatens the institution of marriage.
Or maybe they want to do something about the way tax code unfairly punishes those who are married, making it an economic disadvantage to say, "I do."
Republicans have also taken this issue and possibly made it more reprehensible by seeking to make it one for the state constitution.
We've said it before: The state constitution should not be used as a trump-card tool for policy. It's the wrong forum.
The state constitution isn't the right battleground for considering whether we like gay people.
Don't let politicians fool you: This has nothing to do with married folks. We can assure you married heterosexual couples – in the states that have legalized gay marriage – are still carrying on.
In fact, marriage is probably more threatened by the economy, or health care or any other number of topics that introduce stress into a relationship than whether two other people can or cannot obtain a piece of paper.
More importantly, legislators in Minnesota are hiding behind some empty rhetoric about allowing voters to decide an issue the overwhelming number of Minnesotans have never asked about.
That is: The vast number of citizens hasn't demanded a referendum on the issue or sought to put it into the Constitution. This is politically motivated ploy and a ham-handed way for the Republican bullies to force the divisive issue.
Thank the Republicans for making this a wedge issue when all eyes have been on the budget.
It also allows legislators to turn the incredibly charged issue over to the voters without having to reveal their own thinly cloaked bigotry.
The message the GOP is sending gays and lesbians could not be clearer.
We like you (or are at least forced to say that for the cameras) - just not as much as straight people.
This new movement isn't just legislation to define marriage.
It's legislation to prove we're bigoted.
This isn't Minnesota nice – it's Minnesota malicious.
By Darrell Ehrlick, editor, on behalf of the Winona Daily News editorial board, which also includes publisher Rusty Cunningham and deputy editor Jerome Christenson. To comment, call (507) 453-3507 or send email to letters@winonadailynews.com.
Recommended Off-site Links:
Catholics for Marriage Equality MN
House Committee Passes Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment – Andy Birkey (The Minnesota Independent, May 2, 2011).
Republican Rep. Talks About His Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Ban – Rachel E. Stassen-Berger (Star Tribune, May 2, 2011).
Father of Minnesota Soldier Takes His Case Against Marriage Amendment to State House, Veterans Groups – Doug Grow (MinnPost.com, May 2, 2011).
Senate Committee Passes Anti–Gay Marriage Amendment – Andy Birkey (Minnesota Independent, April 28, 2011).
MN Legislators' Triming of Marriage Amendment Wording Could Leave Door Open for Same-Sex Civil Unions – Rachel E. Stassen-Berger (Star Tribune, April 28, 2011).
Supporter of Gay Marriage Offers Sunny View of Vote – Gail Rosenblum (Star Tribune, April 30, 2011).
Just Say No to Wedge Politics – Lori Sturdevant (Star Tribune, April 30, 2011).
Banning Gay Marriage Would Institutionalize Injustice – Gary Boelhower (Duluth News Tribune, May 1, 2011).
See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Rep. Steve Simon on Gay Marriage and the Arc of History
Disappointing, But Not Unexpected: "Marriage Amendment" Bill Passes MN Senate Judiciary Committee
Governor Mark Dayton to LGBT Advocates: "I Stand with You"
A Celebration of Faith and Family; A Call for Compassion and Fairness
Quote of the Day – November 4, 2010
A Message for NOM (and the Catholic Hierarchy
Minnesotans Rally for Equality and Love
Responding to Bishop Tobin's Remarks on Gay Marriage
Archbishop Nienstedt Calls (Again) for a Marriage Amendment to Minnesota's Constitution
A Catholic Statement of Support for Same-Sex Marriage
Steve Chapman: "Time is On the Side of Gay Marriage
Dale Carpenter on the Win-Win" Reality of Gay Marriage
Dr. Erik Steele on the "Naked Truth on Same-Sex Marriage
Stephanie Coontz on the Changing Face of "Traditional Marriage"
No comments:
Post a Comment