Putting Civil Rights up to a Popular Vote

[Ghel]

I know this is happening or has happened in other states as well, but it looks like the same-sex marriage issue will be put up to popular vote in Minnesota in next years’ election. The state Senate has approved an amendment to the state’s constitution that will formally define marriage as “one man and one woman.” The House is expected to approve the amendment as well.

Minnesota state law already defines marriage as “solely between a man and a woman,” but this will firmly entrench the definition in the Minnesota Constitution, so that it will be next to impossible to change it.

How could we limit people’s civil rights like this? Why should we prevent two consenting adults from formalizing their relationship with a slip of paper? It makes me angry.

One supporter, Sen. Paul Gazelka, R-Brainerd, said prohibiting gay marriage in the state Constitution "does not prevent gays and lesbians to live as they choose in our state as they do now," citing legal contracts already available to gay and lesbian couples.

This really bothers me. Yes, gays and lesbians can hire attorneys to draw up legal contracts that would give them the same rights as married couples. However, they would have to pay thousands of dollars in legal fees as opposed to the $110 it costs for a marriage license in Minnesota. Fuck you, Gazelka.

[Andara Bledin]

And no matter what the contracts say, they still won't have the same rights that are conferred through marriage.

Didn't we go through this same whitewashed bigotry with segregation?

^-.-^

[smileyeagle1021]

To give you an idea of just how much it costs to get the legal contracts, just the name change that comes included with a marriage license costs $350 PER PERSON in the state of Utah, with no guarantee that the state will recognize the name change.
I can't even afford to talk to an attorney to find out how much it will cost to do the rest.

Welcome to America, where all white heterosexual Christians are created equal, plus anyone that Christians feel deserve rights.

[insertNameHere]

You just don't understand, gay people will destroy the sanctity of marriage!!!!!11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@@!@!@ $!#$@#%$!$!!@$#!@#!@#!@#!@~!@!!!!!!!!!!!!


And J-lo, Brittany Spears, um can anyone else name some whores that get married for 1-7 days, maybe a few months, then get it annulled like it never happened, are for some reason completely ignored as reasons why it should be harder for people in general to just up and get married.

My point is this, marriage is fucked weather or not gay people get married, if you like the same sex whatever, as far as I have found out, most gay people tend to leave you alone and not push the issue once you establish your straight and not interested.

I really don't understand the whole, we will let them be gay and not arrest and kill them but we will be damned if them queers gonna get married mentality.

ooops, almost forgot, then the religious freaks bring up the bible and start saying how it was adam and eve!!!!, OK but fuck, what was that thing about religious freedom, IE, you should find something other than religion to give the argument some standing. Because honestly, I give a fuck what your God thinks of me, and even then he is forgiving, just as long as you don't commit suicide from what I understand. I do love how people start preaching to me and I turn the argument around pointing out information from THEIR bible, and then they go "well your missing the point, that section is taken out of context, it really means the opposite!"

[Greenday]

One of the days, the judicial branch will grow some balls and say, "Look, we know not all of you agree with this...but we are all equal so deal with it." God that'd be nice.

[Ghel]

If the religious fundies were so worried about "attacks on the institution of marriage," you would think that they would be trying to outlaw divorce.

I always thought that our system of government was put in place to prevent the majority from discriminating against the minority. Putting civil rights issues up for a popular vote gives the majority an opportunity to oppress the minority.

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

To give you an idea of just how much it costs to get the legal contracts, just the name change that comes included with a marriage license costs $350 PER PERSON in the state of Utah, with no guarantee that the state will recognize the name change.
I can't even afford to talk to an attorney to find out how much it will cost to do the rest.

Welcome to America, where all white heterosexual Christians are created equal, plus anyone that Christians feel deserve rights.

As someone in this group, I get where you are coming from. I REALLY do, but it's unfair to paint all of us with that brush. I may be Christian but I do NOT hate gays nor do I feel they should be treated as inferior or second class citizens.

[KnitShoni]

As someone in this group, I get where you are coming from. I REALLY do, but it's unfair to paint all of us with that brush. I may be Christian but I do NOT hate gays nor do I feel they should be treated as inferior or second class citizens.

He's not saying you do. But, you do benefit from being a white heterosexual Christian. It's never been illegal for you to get married.

[KnitShoni]

If the religious fundies were so worried about "attacks on the institution of marriage," you would think that they would be trying to outlaw divorce.

As fluid as the institution of marriage has been throughout the history of all the peoples on this planet, it really irks me to hear folks talk about "preserving traditional marriage."

Oh, and they won't outlaw divorce. It's allowed in the bible, after all. Never mind that it's only allowed under one circumstance.

[Andara Bledin]

Count me as yet another white, heterosexual Christian that thinks this stuff needs to get the heck out of our legislating and be stuffed back in the churches where it belongs.

^-.-^

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Getting away from the extremely played theme of how much Christians suck and hopefully back to the issue here of putting things like this up for a popular vote, allowing pitchfork toting mobs decide what minority groups it's still okay to treat like second class citizens scares the hell out of me.

The US is not a democracy. It's a republic. We don't really have the "right" to decide things like this.

It sounds fine on the surface, I guess. The will of the majority should decide law. It would seem.

However, when you think about it, it becomes a terrifying prospect. The republic has the responsibility under its Constitution to protect the rights of its citizens. When an arguably unpopular minority is having its rights threatened, the republic has MORE responsibility to protect that group. Not less. Allowing a "popular vote" of a majority to decide the rights of an unpopular minority is NOT how this country is supposed to work.

[Gravekeeper]

This is one of those things that strikes me as surreal. Its been legal in BC since 2003, and all of Canada since 2005, and we haven't exactly sunk beneath the ocean in an orgy of hellfire or anything as a result. Sure we had opposition too in the more religious sectors, but in the end we decided it was a human right and that was that. It always strikes me as sort of surreal seeing the debate go to such extremes in other countries.

Even with a majority conversative government now, they could never try to reopen the debate. The public backlash would be too big. Our politics are more "Ok, we decided, lets move on". In contrast, I think that's one of the biggest problems US politics faces is the back and forth. Side A may impliment new policies, laws, etc, but Side B just vows to completely revoke all of it the moment they get in power.

I think its religious opposition that amuses me the most though. God clearly wants gay people around seeing as he keeps making them. Either that or he has a fantastic sense of humour and just enjoys farkin' with his supposed followers. ;p

[Greenday]

The will of the majority should decide law. It would seem.

Humanity is too stupid as a whole to really pull that off. If I could trust my fellow man to do the right thing, I would be okay with it. But really, I think there's just way to many dumb people to let the individual citizens make laws, especially when it comes to human rights. Gay people are humans, thus they deserve the same rights straight people have.

[Racket_Man]

If the religious fundies were so worried about "attacks on the institution of marriage," you would think that they would be trying to outlaw divorce.

.

actually someone in California IS trying to do just that ( I know I have posted about this guy before) after seeing Prop 8 pass. he started out in a joking type manner but.......

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/polit...-78221817.html

His website RescueMarriage

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Humanity is too stupid as a whole to really pull that off. If I could trust my fellow man to do the right thing, I would be okay with it. But really, I think there's just way to many dumb people to let the individual citizens make laws, especially when it comes to human rights. Gay people are humans, thus they deserve the same rights straight people have.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Putting something like this to a popular vote is criminally negligent, and failing to protect entire minority groups. I suspect politicians do this so they can attempt to keep their hands clean of issues they're afraid of. It's irresponsible.

The gay minority is paying taxes into a republic with an expectation that laws concerning them will be constitutional (of course, we know how that goes) and made with an accepted level of due process. We might not like how that turns out, but it's the way we do things here, at least it's supposed to be. We cannot go in and freaking vote to deny an entire sector of the population their rights as citizens. If we want to open that can of worms, nobody will ever be safe again.