MN Independence Party Against Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment


The Independence Party of Minnesota has officially announced it will campaign against a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage.

The issue of whether to codify the state’s existing statutory ban on same-sex marriage will be put before voters at the 2012 ballot.

From the Minnesota Independent:

The Independence Party of Minnesota, one of three political parties in Minnesota with major party status, announced on Tuesday that it is joining the campaign to defeat a ballot measure that would place a ban on marriage for same-sex couples in the Minnesota Constitution if passed by the voters in 2012. The party announced shortly after the Minnesota Legislature passed the ballot initiative that it opposed the amendment, but the new announcement means party activists will actively campaign against the measure.

“Our platform declares that ‘We oppose having the government impose state-sponsored morality or values on people of good conscience with differing views,” chair Mark Jenkins said in a statement. “This is a perfect example.”

With this the party joins the DFL in active opposition to the amendment. Putting the constitutional amendment before voters has been part of the Republican party’s platform in the state, and with majorities in both legislative chambers and a Democratic governor unable to veto the measure — though Dayton did symbolically veto it as a show of protest — Republicans were able to make their plans a reality after many years of trying.

As noted above, Minnesota already has a statutory ban on same-sex marriage but Republican legislators have said they want to give voters the chance to prevent “activist judges” from overturning the ban. Opponents of the measure say it is unnecessarily divisive at a time when the state needs to pull together to ensure fiscal recovery.

Polls suggest Minnesotans are about evenly divided on the issue with Public Policy Polling finding that 46% of people favor the amendment while 47% are opposed and 7% are undecided.

In a piece published earlier this year for the New York Times, respected statistician Nate Silver predicted that the 2012 ballot initiative is likely, though not certain, to fail given the upward trend in support for marriage equality. He also pointed out that even based on a conservative model tracking support for same-sex marriage, if constitutional amendments banning marriage equality in various states around the U.S. were voted on today, many would be overturned.

Related Reading:

MN Pro Gay Marriage Republican: War Experience Taught Me the Importance of Love (VIDEO)

Sixth Bullied Student Sues Minnesota School District

SPLC Demands Minnesota Address LGBT Harassment

Image used under the MorgueFile user license, with thanks to arashdeep.


Rin S.
Rin S6 years ago

Good on them. Marriage equality needs to be more common, I mean, COME ON, it's the 21st century!

Jane H.
Jane H6 years ago

it would not surprise me if the majority of Minnesotans vote down the same sex marriage ban.
Wouldn;t that be a defeat hard to take by the Republicans!

Paul Diamond
Paul Diamond6 years ago

Continued from previous post:

The First Amendment establishes,"...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
Denying people their "...equal protection of the laws..." Imposing arbitrary rules and laws based on religious doctrine and dogma constitutes " respecting an establishment of religion..."
An American citizen is one of "We the people..." commited " form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..."
Can anyone show me satisfactorily how any of the stated purposes of our country, the vision of our founding fathers, specifically are undermined, diminished, harmed or hurt by granting to two people who, out of love, have committed to sharing a life together the rights and priviliges enjoyed by every other couple that have made that committment?

Superstition is harmful to children and other living things

Paul Diamond
Paul Diamond6 years ago

I am truly disgusted with these right wing/christian/taliban characterizing jurists who uphold the e law and the principles of justice as codified in our Constitution as "activist Judges."ALL judges are activist.
The current crop of Supreme Court Justices, dominated by George Bush's appointees, have ruled that states can deny minorities, elderly, and poor their right to vote with impunity. They have ruled that it is okay to execute prisoners in an extremely cruel and painful fashion. That employers can discriminate against women as long as the discrimination is kept secret for the first 6 months. That despite the lack of a regulated militias in this 21st century, high crime era where guns kill more people than heart disease, it is permissable for anyone to have any kind of a gun. However, according to many conservative citizens that form of judicial activism is perfectly acceptable.
The Bill of Rights was added to our Constitution to protect the individual from the tyranny of the government and from an arbitrary dictatorship of the majority. The XIV Amendment states,"...No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; ..." and"...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws..."
The First Amendment establishes,"...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
Denying people their "...equal protection of the laws..." Imposing arbitrary rules

Lynne B.
Lynne Buckley6 years ago

Good to see. Marriage should be between a couple who love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together. Gay or straight.

Dawid B: Gay marriage wouldn't be a travesty. You say that allowing it in the law doesn't make it right. Years ago, a man was allowed to beat and rape his wife as she was his 'property'. That wasn't right either, but the law allowed it. That to me was a travesty and finally the laws reflected that change because it was the right thing to do.

Gay couples aren't any different that any other loving couple. They should be allowed to have the opportunity and right to get married. It's the right thing to do. It's going to happen.

Norma V.
Norma Villarreal6 years ago

Lead on, Minnesota. This is not about personal opinion, but equality, dignity, and respect for all.

donald baumgartner


John Gregory
John Gregory6 years ago

Even were I opposed to gay marriage I would not like to encourage a Constitutional Amendment based on the uneducated fears of those who would knit religion so close to public policy where by which one group is set aside for one treatment as another is not. Those who espouse these treatments smack of the Nazi's in 1935 Germany as Kristallnacht was the subsequent actions based on the anti-Jewish laws set down by the Party to inhibit the lives of those that were different. That this is even being considered in several States and Washington DC is disturbing in the least and alarming in the main. That something akin to the behavior of the German Nation couldn't happen here or at this time is simply societal hubris and a lack of historical knowledge. Judgement is the province of the Almighty and I, for one, will leave it up to Him. I won't usurp Him as others twist His words to defame others before His very eyes as others have for political gain. Ceasar was paid back in his own coin afterall. I wouldn't be so bold as to think of taking His Power from Him on earth and wield it with such Pride and arrogant malice using the Government for their personal and absolute intentions in His stead. Blasphemy to think man alone has such Greed for Heavenly Power that he takes it upon himself to Lord it over others by way of their contrived laws that are set against the Love He has for us all - through his son Jesus Christ.

Barbara S.

If people put as much money, time, and energy into just EQUALITY FOR ALL, we'd get a lot further, a lot faster. Still, though, I'm glad the Independents aren't against gay marriages, and I thank them for that. It appears their hearts are in the right place.

Doris Turner
Doris Turner6 years ago

Wonder how many people are confused by our 'supposed' government control. The same people who scream down with government control support anti LGBT legislation, ban abortions, confuse patriotism with caring for our country, want to lead us according to the bible. If that is not control, what is?