I figure folks could use a end-of-week smile! Check out the 60-second clip from Ellen where Brad Pitt speaks out against Prop 8 back in 2008.
I don’t think it has any place in our definition of America.
Couldn’t agree with you more, Brad. These propositions and amendments have no place in our constitution. Thanks to all of the folks that lend their voices to this fight. Keep telling your story and speaking out. That’s how we will defeat these mean-spirited measures.
A great page from OutFront Minnesota that debunks three common myths around the marriage amendment:
- Let the People Vote
- The Courts Will Decide if We Don’t
- A ‘No’ Vote is a Vote for Gay Marriage and Will Expand Gay Rights
There are great speaking points to each of these. I’ve included a couple of my favorites below, check out OutFront.org for the complete list!
Let the People Vote
- The people have already voted on this issue through their elected representatives: Gay marriage is already prohibited.
- In 153 years, Minnesota has never amended its constitution on a family law issue.
The Courts Will Decide if We Don’t
- Jordan Lorence of the Alliance Defense Fund, which opposes gay marriage, has said: “I expect that the Minnesota Supreme Court or some other lower court will again reject this challenge to the marriage definition.”
- The Minnesota Supreme Court already rejected a gay marriage claim (Baker v. Nelson (1971)). Most state supreme court members today were appointed by Gov. Pawlenty.
A ‘No’ Vote is a Vote for Gay Marriage and Will Expand Gay Rights
- Minnesota law already limits marriage to one man and one woman.
- Minnesota law already bans recognition of gay marriages from other states.
- A ‘No’ vote will not make gay marriage legal in Minnesota.
Many thanks to our friends at OutFront Minnesota for creating such a great page for folks to reference.
A Pew Research study released last week finds that voters rank gay marriage as a low priority in comparison to everything else going on in the country today. Not surprisingly, the economy and jobs were ranked as the top two topics on voters’ minds. Rounding out the bottom of the list: birth control and gay marriage. Here’s hoping these findings reduce the use of marriage amendments as a way to get voters out to polls.
If you missed it, back in March another Minnesota City voted to oppose the marriage amendment on ballots this fall. The Edina City Council “unanimously approved a resolution opposing the proposed amendment,” according to ABC News.
Looking forward to keeping the momentum going well into the fall when Minnesota voters will vote NO on this mean-spirited marriage amendment!
Are you kidding me? It’s insane that civil rights are being denied people in this day and age. It’s embarrassing, and it’s heartbreaking. It goes without saying that I’m completely in support of gay marriage. In 10 years we’ll be ashamed that this was an issue.
Chris Evans, Actor
Source: Internet Movie Database
One of several “Vote NO on Amendment One” commercials that will air over the next two weeks before North Carolinans head to the polls. The ballot reads:
Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized by this State.
These words have far-reaching consequences that many people don’t realize. In states that have passed similarly worded amendments, both gay and straight people are impacted. While the commercial doesn’t do a great job explaining how or why (and I fear will leave many people scratching their heads), it does highlight yet another dangerous repercussion Amendment One would have if it passes.
There are many reasons to Vote NO on May 8. This commercial highlights yet another reason.
I just came across a great blog post that gives me a lot of hope. In Washington State, Catholic pastors have been given the option to “opt out” of collecting signatures in an effort to repeal same-sex marriage. In fact, Reverend Tim Clark received a standing ovation from his parish when he announced that they would not be gathering signatures. The parish is the sixth in Seattle to opt out of the petition drive.
The standing ovation experienced during one of the Masses says less about me and much more about the health of this parish. I only wished the archbishop [J. Peter Sartain] could have experienced the sustained applause — the ‘sensus fidelium’ — of the people. He needs to listen to this ‘voice.’ That is my prayer.
We need more leaders like Reverend Clark. Thank you for standing up for what you believe to be right.
Unfortunately, in Minnesota, folks like archbishop John Nienstedt have given parishes no option to opt out of supporting the mean-spirited Minnesota marriage amendment. In fact, back in January I blogged about how the archbishop issued a very clear message: If you disagree with the amendment or the church’s support, you had best keep it to yourself.
Kudos to Reverend Tim Clark, his congregation and all of those in Washington State that support equality for all.
I was catching up on the news of the week when an article titled, “Gay Marriage Is an Abomination Before God” caught my eye in the newsfeed. Curious, I clicked over to read more. The article serves as a plea to North Carolina voters to vote for Marriage One on May 8, 2012. The author’s reason:
Many do not see this, but where we are headed is the jungle, where homosexuality, lesbianism, transgender, bestiality, pedophilia and any other conceivable behavior is a self-proclaimed right.
Dwight Creech’s words may create a sense of sadness or anger in some. His words should also generate fear. There are people out there like Mr. Creech that actually think committed gay or lesbian couples should be compared to pedophiles – and that’s just scary.
So if you’re wondering why so many people are out there speaking out against these mean-spirited amendments, it’s partially because they fear people like Dwight Creech. When an individual has no qualms of putting this kind of hateful speech out there for public view, you’ve got to wonder how far they would be willing to go. Who is next in Mr. Creech’s crosshairs?
If you don’t like to see or hear things like this, you must lend your voice to the fight. North Carolina is literally just weeks away from a very heated vote on this so-called marriage amendment – we can’t allow this mean-spirited amendment to pass because we sat idly by and were quiet on the sidelines.
The same is true here in Minnesota. There are Dwight Creeches in every state out there. We must stand together and say No More.
North Carolina, I’m hopeful you will stand together in May and say NO to Amendment One. Minnesota, I’m hopeful we will stand together in NOvember and say no to our very own marriage amendment. And Dwight Creech, I will say an extra prayer for you tonight: may you see your judgement on others as a direct conflict to the very teachings you profess.
This amendment hurts rather than heals. It erodes the rights of individuals and if we begin to write laws that (are) discriminatory it opens the door for other laws to discriminate against whoever the majority may deem to be unworthy of rights.
Rev. Clarence Laney (Monument of Faith)
Reblogged from my friends fighting in North Carolina to defeat Amendment One on May 8, 2012.
The last two constitutional amendments passed by Minnesota voters were a 2008 measure that set aside billions of dollars in sales tax money for the outdoors and the arts and a 2006 proposition that directed $300 million a year in state money to patching potholes, upgrading roads and improving public transit.
Source: St. Paul Pioneer Press
Interesting factoid. Over the last half dozen years, two constitutional amendments have passed in the state of Minnesota, both aimed at making Minnesota a better place for all. Patching potholes, upgrading our roadways, investing in the outdoors and the arts… Some may argue that we should spend tax dollars elsewhere or that one cause over another might be a better use for those dollars. But the prevailing fact is that both were aimed at making Minnesota better.
This marriage amendment that I’ve been talking about for the past 5 months doesn’t do that. It doesn’t make Minnesota better for all. Instead, it actually just rehashes an ugly debate that has already been settled in the state of Minnesota. Marriage is already defined in the state between one man and one woman. But outside influencers won’t stop at that. They want to ensure that committed gay and lesbian couples know their place in this world, and that place, to these amendment proponents, is not an altar.
I ask each Minnesotan to think about what our constitution was created to accomplish. It was to make this state great; it wasn’t to marginalize a group of individuals because one group or another disagrees with the definition of love. I’ve said it before, and I know that I will say it again, if we start voting on what rights minorities should and shouldn’t have, it’s going to be a scary future we’re faced with. At some point, what happens when one of those groups disagrees with YOU?
Interesting article that speaks to how Romney and Obama’s views are the same, yet significantly different, when it comes to gay marriage. It’s also interesting to learn more about Romney’s previous advocacy for same-sex equality (we haven’t seen much of that in recent times).
What I found intriguing is the comparison between Romney and Obama. While neither candidate supports gay marriage, Obama has demonstrated (and even publicly stated) that his views on the matter or evolving. Whereas, Romney supports Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), donates money to that scary group National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and has signed a pledge promising he’ll support an anti-gay marriage amendment.
I’d say the views of these two politicians are quite different after all, wouldn’t you?
The amendment makes no change in rights and benefits for gays and lesbians, nor does it limit the legislature’s ability to provide future benefits if those become needed… Gays and lesbians have the right to live as they choose, but they do not have the right to redefine marriage for all society.
Chuck Darrell, Communications Director, Minnesota for Marriage
Source: The New American
Warning: Spin machine in action! Back in January, I wrote about the strategic approach amendment proponents would be taking, and the above highlights that strategy in action. Essentially, the message takes committed gay and lesbian couples out of the picture, and instead, turns it around to the right to vote. Darrell says that nothing will change – and he is right - nothing will change whether this amendment passes or doesn’t pass. But if it does pass, the only way that Minnesota could make a change in the future would be by another constitutional amendment. Another fight with more money and more time.
What Darrell isn’t saying should be as loud as what he is saying: Minnesota for Marriage wants to ensure that committed gay and lesbian couples are not able to benefit in recognizing their commitment in the future without a significant fight that would cost millions of dollars and require millions of Minnesotan’s to stand with them. He is also saying that he wants the majority to vote on the rights of a minority. Yikes. That’s a scary proposition.
The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.
Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, 1986
Source: Catholics for Marriage Equality MN
I’ve written about the Catholic Church many times over the past several months. Specifically, I’ve talked a lot on how leaders in the church are inserting themselves into the political fight on marriage that voters will decide this NOvember.
With that said, I’ve also shared that not all Catholics are fighting to take away or limit our rights. In February, I shared:
It’s important to note that not all people who are religious are crazed zealots. In the coming week, I’m going to be posting several articles about various religious groups and how they’ve come out against the amendment. Of course, as you know, there’s been one notable exception in the state of Minnesota.
And in March, I blogged about how Catholics for Marriage Equality MN asked religious leaders to withdraw financial support of the marriage amendment in Minnesota.
I truly believe that the quote above reflects what the church should be teaching about Love today. Some Catholics still don’t get it, but for the ones that do – like Rev. Mike Tegeder, a Catholic Priest in Minnesota - I say thank you. Tegeder had this to say about the mean-spirited amendment:
That’s not the way to support marriage… If we want to support marriage, there are wonderful things we can do as Catholic churches and ministers. We should not be focused on beating up a small number of people who have this desire to have committed relationships.
For my Catholic, religious and spiritual friends out there, I Love you. As you vote this NOvember, I encourage you to think about this foundational teaching for yourself.
And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
1 Corinthians 13:13
This amendment was put on the ballot for a variety of reasons, however, you won’t find “Love” on that list.
Frankly, I think it’s unfortunate that the President of the United States is getting involved in a state issue, but that’s certainly his right.
State Representative Steve Gottwalt
Source: The New American
Gottwalt’s response to President Obama speaking out against the Minnesota Marriage Amendment.
Really neat comparison between polls on the topic of Gay Marriage in the Chicago Tribune. From the article, take a look at the difference between 2003 and 2012. Moving.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll July 26-28, 2003 “Do you favor or oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to enter into same-sex marriages?”
Favor 32%; Oppose 51%
CBS News Poll. Nov. 10-13, 2003. “Would you favor or oppose a law that would allow homosexual couples to legally form civil unions, giving them some of the legal rights of married couples?”
Favor 39% Oppose 53%
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. Nov. 18-19, 2003. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in favor of gay marriage in that state. Do you favor or oppose same-sex marriage?”
Favor 25% Oppose 66%
Public Religion Research Institute/Religion News Service. March 7-11, 2012. ”All in all, do you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry legally?”
Favor 52% (22% + 30%) Oppose 44% (19% + 25%)
ABC News/Washington Post Poll. March 7-10, 2012. “Do you think it should be legal or illegal for gay and lesbian couples to get married?”
Legal 52% Illegal 43%
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll Feb. 29-March 3, 2012. “Do you favor or oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to enter into same-sex marriages?”
Favor 49% Oppose 40%
Every day, we make progress. While the journey may be sometimes slow, it’s so worth fighting for!