At 05:38 PM 2/19/2004 -0600, Neal Krasnoff wrote: >The Minnesota state legislature, not the His Honor Rybak, has the >authority to pass laws on the subject of marriage. In some states, the >judiciary thinks they are members of the legislative branch and can read >same sex marriage into just about anything they want, in the most recent >case, a 200 year old document and throwing out 6000 years of human history >- because they say so. There is at least one mayor in this country - Gavin >"I Am The Law" Newsom - who thinks he can supercede state law, as with any >number of Lord High Magistrates. It will get very ugly if local officials >sell out their citizens for a few shekels.
Wow! I�m not altogether certain how to read Mr. Krasnoff�s comments. Selling out citizens? By allowing same-sex marriage? Throwing out 6000 years of human history? By acknowledging that all people deserve fair treatment, equal protection, and a degree of respect? On the contrary, the broad sweep of human history is all about conflict and change. It is inevitable. Gay marriage, rather than mocking or rejecting history, is simply the next logical step, a new chapter in human affairs. I�ll grant you, Newsom�s gambit is a dicey ploy. Will it stand up in court? I doubt it. Will it do more harm than good? Can�t say. But I do believe that reactionary right wing judges practice every bit as much judicial activism as the lefties, if not more so. Never mind the spurious bilge that incessantly spews forth from many religious leaders and elected officials. Discouraging. And largely founded on fear, bigotry, and superstition. I suspect that Mr. Krasnoff�s complaint is a question of process. Newsom Bogarted, cut ahead in line. Looks like bad form to some. I think we are all missing the point of gay marriage licensing. This is about allowing people, regardless of creed, color or sexual orientation, to enjoy equal protection under law. I, for one, as a single straight woman, would enjoy having the benefit of domestic partnership with whomever I choose to share my home (domestic partner or not), as it would grant me cheaper insurance (health and auto), tax breaks, and other benefits. Melissa Wyatt And thank you, Ms. Wyatt, for chiming in with a sensible and realistic point of view. Those of us who feel that church and state ought to be well and truly separate (�By the power vested in me by the state of...� are words that should never be in the mouths of any clergyperson), need to be careful how we frame our argument and how we couch our language. Marriage as a sex- and gender-neutral institution is certainly something that I support. Surprise. But in order to sell that idea to a broad audience, it must be made clear that civil marriage and religious marriage are quite distinct. No religious entity will be forced to endorse or officiate same-sex ceremonies. This debate is, at its core, about equal protection under law. Antiquated, unethical, or immoral laws ought to be changed or struck down, and usually are. Eventually. I�m pleased to find I�m not the only one who thinks so. How does this relate to Minneapolis? Maybe it doesn�t, but if Rybak did attempt to follow San Francisco�s lead, there would be long lines of the queer betrothed at city hall here, too. Michael Moeglin Uptown REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
