Passage of the marriage protection amendment ensures that the people of Minnesota themselves—not activist judges or politicians—will decide how our state will define marriage in the future.
Without a marriage amendment in our constitution, activist judges and politicians can substitute their values for those of the people of Minnesota.
This is exactly what happened elsewhere. The marriage protection amendment will help make sure it will not happen in Minnesota.
Paul Dreblow, Fridley
Source: The Grand Folks Herald (via Fridley Patch)
The above is an excerpt from a letter Dreblow wrote that was published in the Grand Folks Herald. Two quick observations to Dreblow’s view:
- Those “activist judges and politicians” are elected by the people to represent the people. That’s how our system works. I learned that in both 9th Grade Civics and again on a recent episode of Family Guy where Peter disbands the government, only to later realize that we need to elect a group of people to represent the views of the majority (after creating this new vision of rule, Peter exclaims, “And we did it all without government!”)
- At what point have we decided that having the majority vote on the rights of a minority is a good idea? This becomes a slippery slope and begs the question, “Which minority are we going to vote on next?”
I realize that I’m not going to change Paul Dreblow’s mind through a blog post. However, I do hope to educate others about the types of views out there so that each of us is prepared to have the conversation. I’d be curious if Mr. Dreblow has any gay or lesbian co-workers, neighbors or even family members. If he does, they might want to sit him down and have a nice conversation.