|
(Minneapolis) - Today's vote in the Minnesota House of Representatives to
approve a proposed constitutional amendment maintaining civil marriage
as an exclusive privilege of different-sex couples reflects political
calculation rather than public policy, according to OutFront Minnesota,
the state's leading organization serving the gay,
lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community and its allies.
"Brushing aside opposition from legal, political, and religious
analysts, the House has endorsed a proposal that is designed to taint
the state constitution by using it to mandate discrimination against a
group of Minnesotans," declared OutFront Minnesota Executive Director
Ann M. DeGroot. "Constitutions are drafted with 'equal protection'
guarantees in order to avoid instances where a majority is encouraged to
impose restrictions on the rights of minorities. Far from an exercise in
democracy, putting such a measure on the ballot would turn democracy on
its head."
Supporters of the proposal claim that the issue of whether same-sex
couples should have access to civil marriage on the same terms as
different-sex couples is so important that voters must be given their
say, says OutFront Minnesota Public Policy Director Monica Meyer. "But
the reality is that no matter what the voters would do with this were it
to get on the ballot, at the end of the day, Minnesota would still
afford no legal recognition of same-sex couples and their families.
Voters would clearly not be offered any sort of 'choice' at all."
As a result of the attention this proposal has drawn to the inequities
same-sex couples and their families face by being forbidden to form
legally-recognized relationships, Meyer continued, a number of concrete
public policy issues have been brought to the Legislature which deserve
rational analysis. "This amendment, if passed, serves no purpose other
than to permanently shut that discussion down at a time when a majority
of Minnesotans favor creating some form of legal framework for these
families."
The amendment language, drafted by Rep. Mary Liz Holberg (R-Lakeville),
goes well beyond enshrining discrimination in civil marriage and also
purports to ban other forms of recognition such as civil unions, says
Phil Duran, OutFront Minnesota's Legal and Policy Analyst. "Ironically,
the language is so vague that it would end up having to be interpreted
by the very same judges its authors were explicitly trying to circumvent
through this amendment."
Contact:
Monica Meyer, Public Policy Director
(612) 822-0127, ext. 115
Ann M. DeGroot, Executive Director
(612) 822-0127, ext. 107
|
