My response so far has been to write letters to my state senator and state representative, both Republicans (District #29, Dave Senjem and Duane Quam). Senator Senjem has already voted for this in the senate, and the house has not yet voted. I expressed my disappointment to Senator Senjem, and to both I asked them how they would feel if the right to marry their wife and have the legal protections that their wife and children have was put onto a ballot for voters to decide on. I also pointed out that over the next year and a half, I, like many other people in my situation, will be spending our time, energy, and probably money campaigning to defeat this amendment, instead of spending our time, energy, and money on our families, and doing things that actually make a difference (for me, that is the volunteering I do at church and the animal shelter, and the community bands I play in, not to mention the time I will be spending on my master's degree).
The response I am expecting from my elected officials (if I get any at all) is that they're not voting for a marriage ban, they're voting to give Minnesotans the right to vote and make the decision themselves. Which is a complete political cop-out. If that is really how they believe things should be (that we should all vote on everything ourselves), then we do we have elected officials? It is also important to point out that 301 out of the last 304 proposed constitutional amendments were NOT passed on to voters. So the VAST majority of the time, the legislature does NOT believe that people should have the right to vote on an issue themselves.
The constitution should be HARD to change or amend. Our US constitution only has 26 amendments in almost 250 years. Some states, like Iowa, require that the legislature pass a proposed amendment in two consecutive sessions (i.e. 2 years apart) before it goes to the ballot. Other states have similar rigorous procedures like requiring 2/3 majorities. The US constitution requires that, after it gets through the senate and house, that 3/4 of all of the states ratify an amendment in a general election. 3/4!!! All to make sure that amendments are taken seriously. Minnesota? Legislative majority, and popular vote majority in one election. Governor has no power to do anything. Minnesota Supreme Court can't overturn an amendment. Where are the checks and balances here?
Friend Shelley shared a good blog post with me from Nick Coleman on the topic. A recent poll hows that over half of Minnesotans don't support amending the constitution for this issue. But history also shows that even when poll numbers show that something isn't going to happen in an election, sometimes it still does (Proposition 8 in California in 2008). So, despite the best efforts of me and a lot of other people over the next year and a half, it's very possible that this amendment will pass, and that my right to marry the person I love will be taken away in Minnesota forever (forever = it would take another amendment to nullify this one, which would probably mean years more of time, energy, money, campaigning, etc.).
Oh, and in case you didn't know, there is already a law on the books in Minnesota prohibiting same-sex marriage. Yes, that law could be overturned by a court or repealed by a legislature. But that has not happened, and so even if this amendment fails, I still don't have the right to marry the person I love.
For the first time since I've lived in Minnesota (and just so you know, I've lived in Minnesota the majority of my life, from age 1 to 8, and from age 22 to 36, a total of 21 out of 36 years), I am really considering whether I will be living here for the rest of my life.
No comments:
Post a Comment