Thursday, May 09, 2013

Gay Marriage in Minnesota

It's going to happen:

A bipartisan coalition in the Minnesota House passed a measure Thursday to legalize same sex-marriage, setting in motion what could be a historic turning point for gay and lesbian rights in Minnesota.

“All Minnesotans deserve the freedom to marry the person they love and we are proud to take this historic vote to ensure same-sex couples have that right,” said House Speaker Paul Thissen, DFLMinneapolis.

The dramatic vote came after a sometimes passionate, three-hour debate that culminated when four Republican members privately wrestling with the issue joined a majority of Democrats to pass the measure 75-59. The debate raged as hundreds of advocates from both sides gathered outside the House gallery chanting, waving signs and praying.

Two thoughts:
  • If we're going to have gay marriage, it's far better that it come through the legislature than through a judge's edict. You can argue all day long whether the majority of Minnesotans actually support gay marriage, but what matters is that a majority of their elected representatives do. We sent these folks to St. Paul and they have decided the matter on our behalf. That's how the system works and if you really believe in the system, you have to let it work even when the results aren't amenable to your wishes.
  • My guess is that, in the short term, not much will change. What happens in the long term is a more interesting question. As I've said before, gay marriage is a longitudinal societal change with ramifications that will become evident only after many more years. And many of the people who regularly read this feature are likely to be pushing up daisies by the time the evidence is in.

7 comments:

W.B. Picklesworth said...

I agree that it is much, much better that it is coming through the legislative process than through the courts.

As for its results, we won't really see them. Not because there won't be any, but because we won't be bothered to look, or the threads will be too complicated to untangle, or because we'll simply assume that it was a good thing.

First Ringer said...

I guess I missed the part of the session where they resolved the budget debt, our education and transportation systems, and the myriad of other challenges facing the state so we could focus on resolving an issue that affects 3.4-4% of the state.

But yes, I agree, D. Better to do it this way than by judicial fiat.

R.A. Crankbait said...

We won't hear about any results that don't fit the narrative, because they won't fit the narrative.

Brian said...

Congratulations!

Anonymous said...

1. I do NOT have to respect the system that does such profoundly stupid stuff. I mean, raising taxes in a down economy? Besides, the legislator /I/ sent to St. Paul voted against this abomination. Where's the respect and tolerance for MY view?

2. Perhaps this won't change much, and if it quiets the lunatic fringe it may even be worth it. But I fear the long-term damage to society that this sort of moral rot begets.

3. The worst thing here is the God-complex of the DFL. I mean, they can pass a law that proclaims a pig is a duck, but that doesn't mean it can fly or lay eggs. They think it does.

Bike Bubba said...

I'm with First Ringer here. OK, we're going to be calling a special session, with more of those per diems to pay, and we're playing around with this? It shows the fundamental unseriousness of the DFL, really.

Moreover, I seem to remember that one of the big arguments against the marriage amendment last November was that it wasn't needed. Obviously they were lying, weren't they?

Again, a demonstration of the fundamental mendacity of the left. And they assure us that there will be no other effects.

Yup, right. Just like sky-high unemployment rates among big city minorities have nothing to do with the minimum wage. Yepper. Nothing to see here, folks.

Mr. D said...

Crankbait sez:

We won't hear about any results that don't fit the narrative, because they won't fit the narrative.

Yep, but it's not what you hear, it's what you experience that really matters, or, more to the point, our children and grandchildren. And that's what remains to be seen.

FR sez:

I guess I missed the part of the session where they resolved the budget debt, our education and transportation systems, and the myriad of other challenges facing the state so we could focus on resolving an issue that affects 3.4-4% of the state.

Yep. We all did. And it's something for which we should feel free to beat them about the neck and ears. And as the deadlines come and go, I'll be getting my whacks in. Count on that.

Bubba sez:

Moreover, I seem to remember that one of the big arguments against the marriage amendment last November was that it wasn't needed. Obviously they were lying, weren't they?

Of course they were lying. Lying is a growth industry for a lot of people in the political bidness. And now that the lie is clear, there are a lot of people who understand that they were had. What will be interesting is if the electorate turns the tables in 2014.

Anon sez:

I do NOT have to respect the system that does such profoundly stupid stuff.

We can disagree, but in my view the issue is with the people who control the system, not the system itself.

Anon also sez:

The worst thing here is the God-complex of the DFL. I mean, they can pass a law that proclaims a pig is a duck, but that doesn't mean it can fly or lay eggs. They think it does.

They'll be including that law as a rider to the omnibus budget bill that passes a few weeks into the special session, after they've collected their per diem.