On the November ballot in Minnesota is an amendment to the state constitution which would define marriage as being between a man and a woman. Minnesota is, right now, ground zero in the issue of same-sex marriage.
From the St. Paul Pioneer Press:
In marriage amendment vote, a focus on the future
By Doug Belden
Minnesotans are not deciding this November whether same-sex couples can marry.
They can’t, under state law, and the outcome of the vote will do nothing to change that.
[QUAERITUR:] So, what’s the point?
What’s at stake, say advocates on both sides, is how Minnesota will be set up to grapple with gay marriage in the future.
To Jason Adkins, vice chairman of the campaign supporting the proposed amendment, the vote is the public’s chance to weigh in before the “elites” get a chance to redefine marriage through the courts or Legislature. [You mean, people still have rights? I thought everything these says was decided by activist judges!]
To Richard Carlbom, who’s leading the opposition effort, voting the amendment down allows the debate about same-sex marriage to continue. [Voting for the amendment allows it to continue also.]
Amending the state’s constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual union would bring “a hard stop to the conversation,” said Carlbom, campaign manager for Minnesotans United for All Families. “It ties the hands of future generations.” [Even if we accept that premise, I say “GOOD!”]
Carlbom said his group’s goal is not to secure gay-marriage rights but to preserve an environment [HA! Surrrrrre it is!] in which the state can figure it out without a conclusion having been locked in to the constitution.
But Adkins, executive director of the Minnesota Catholic Conference and vice chairman of Minnesota for Marriage, says the amendment would not be a permanent ban on gay marriage. “It’s not irreversible,” he said. “It’s pretty easy to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot.”
What it would do is allow Minnesotans to affirm the definition of marriage that exists in state law in advance of action by “powerful legal and cultural forces seeking to redefine marriage,” Adkins said.
The article is longish, but well-worth your time.
SUPPORT TRUE AND NATURAL MARRIAGE!