Amendment on marriage unnecessaryPublished 6:27am Thursday, October 18, 2012 Updated 8:28am Thursday, October 18, 2012
The proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman is at best unnecessary and at worst discriminatory, and we hope Minnesotans vote against it.
Those in favor of the amendment have made arguments that families with a husband and wife are better for children, and the legalization of gay marriage would infringe upon the religious beliefs of others, and most of all, the Bible says it is a sin.
However, considering the U.S. Constitution requires the separation of church and state, that many gay couples are already parents, it’s hard to see where those arguments hold water. And as for the Bible, there are many acts that are considered sins — divorce and adultery among them — that are also legal.
The fact is, gay marriage already is illegal in Minnesota. Considering that, on average, younger residents are more likely to support the legalization of gay marriage than older ones, it is likely only a matter of time before the majority opinion on gay marriage will change.
If and when that happens, a constitutional amendment will only make changing the laws on gay marriage more difficult.
The constitution was written in part to protect the rights and liberties of its citizens. An amendment that clearly discriminates against a certain group of indviduals does the opposite.