In a few days, Minnesotans will vote to amend the state
constitution to limit marriage to one man and one woman. I have had at least
six conversations with people who think that this amendment is about the legalization of same-sex marriages. Which in a way it is, but this particular
vote will not…. I repeat… WILL NOT directly legalize same sex marriage.
This topic has been the center of many debates across the
country for years, and many are calling for change. One could easily say “VOTE NO!” and
think that you are making a HUGE difference for the LGBT community. I myself
have been talking to friends and family, and even posted a few Facebook status’
urging my friends to vote no. Well myself, and many others across the country
are drastically deceiving ourselves. I think it is really important that voters
have a full understanding of what voting no, or if you so choose to vote yes,
will mean.
Minnesota’s constitution currently states that marriage is a
civil contract between a man and a woman. In reality, if this amendment passes,
literally all that will change is two words. “A man, and a woman” will become
“one man and one woman.” How does this really change LGBT rights? Well to be
frank… it doesn’t. Same-sex couples in Minnesota will still be refused the
rights that married heterosexual couples receive.
What voting no WILL do is show support for marriage
equality. The fact that this amendment has even been brought to the table is
insulting. The fact that religious zealots are so threatened by the LGBT community that they would push something like this to stall for time is crazy to me. “One man and one woman”? Seriously? Is bigamy really that much of a problem in
Minnesota?! Doubtful. The only reason this has been brought up for a vote is to stall any pro-equality legislation.
Federal law grants more than 1,000 rights to married
couples. These rights include things like claims to a deceased spouse’s social
security, work leave to care for a sick spouse or a spouse’s family member, granting citizenship to a spouse of a U.S. citizen, hospital visitation and parental rights.
So the question we should be concerned with is not the wishy-washy
wording of Minnesota's constitution, but rather what we are going to do to about the issue of inequality.
As I sit here, thinking about the supporting arguments for
marriage equality, I find myself spitting out the same arguments we have all
heard a thousand times. I thought about sparing any potential readers the boredom
of reading the argument about the first amendment for the 10 kabillionth time,
but I feel that this is a valid argument which is not being taken seriously.
So I’m gonna make like Selena Gomez and repeat-peat-peat-peat-peat.
The first amendment to the US constitution states, “Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof”. The reasons same-sex couples are denied these civil rights
are due to the religious beliefs of many political leaders. I believe this is
unconstitutional. No… THIS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
The second portion of the religion clause in the first
amendment states that Congress cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion. Legalizing
same-sex marriage will not prevent the free exercise of religion. Two men signing a legal document will not
prevent someone from going to their religious service.
Pause for ridiculous fantasy.... By some miraculous turn of events I meet, fall in love with and get married to Tom Daley tomorrow afternoon.
Damn, back to reality.
Let's be completely honest, if that scenario were true, Sara Palin would still go shoot an elk for Sunday dinner with her pastor. Given the obvious fact that Sara Palin has no idea who I am, she would not be phased my hypothetical marriage to a man.
Pause for ridiculous fantasy.... By some miraculous turn of events I meet, fall in love with and get married to Tom Daley tomorrow afternoon.
Damn, back to reality.
Let's be completely honest, if that scenario were true, Sara Palin would still go shoot an elk for Sunday dinner with her pastor. Given the obvious fact that Sara Palin has no idea who I am, she would not be phased my hypothetical marriage to a man.
As the great Margaret Cho once said, “ People who hate gay
marriage would never even know if gay people got married… Because they don’t
know any gay people!! Let’s just not tell them.”
Unfortunately the inventions of radio, television, the internet and social media make that an impossibility.
Now, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t add a touch of pessimism
to this post. I am an incredibly impatient person and am ready for a BIG move to be made
for the LGBT community. I just don’t feel like this vote is that move. The realist
in me realizes that vetoing this amendment is a very minor step for the
community. As with any vote, you must make the best decision for you. I believe
this vote will not make or break same-sex civil rights movement in the state of
Minnesota. If the amendment passes, we have to fight against it. If the
amendment does not pass, we have to fight against the current constitution.
Vote Yes or Vote No…. just know this fight is far from over.
