MN Largest Paper Endorses Marriage Equality

Minnesota is undergoing a debate over whether the state legislature should pass a constitutional amendment to the voters to decide whether or not to insert a ban on marriage equality into the founding document of the North Star state.

Now the largest circulation newspaper in the state, The Minnesota Star-Tribune, is weighing with a decisive editorial urging support for marriage equality ("Don't put bigotry up for a vote," May 5, 2011):

Many of our nation's civil, human and women's rights laws might never have passed if they were put to a vote. Instead, those advances usually came through legislative and court decisions that valued human rights more than special-interest politics. 

Minnesota already has the curiously named Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibits same-sex couples from marrying. That's the status quo in many other states as well, although there's no evidence that heterosexual marriages need to be "defended'' from gay and lesbian unions.

Loving relationships between two men or two women have absolutely no impact on other matrimonial commitments. Nor do they pose any threat to the institution of marriage or family life, as the amendment backers claim.

And yet opponents of marriage equity say a constitutional amendment is a necessary backstop that would prevent the courts from overturning existing law.

In reality, enshrining this form of bigotry in the state's premier governing document would be a step backward. Rather than reinforce an already discriminatory law, core values of equity and fairness should compel Minnesotans to repeal DOMA and extend marriage equity to all.

We understand that emotions on this issue run deep. The debate hits numerous religious and moral hot buttons, for secular and sacred reasons. Concurrent with their beliefs, religious organizations may indeed decide who they will marry with their blessings.

However, government is not and should not be a church, synagogue or mosque. Marriage under the law is a next-of-kin, legal arrangement that includes important property, benefits, child custody and health care rights. Those legal rights should be available to all couples.

You should probably go ahead and read the whole thing and if you live in Minnesota, contact your state legislators and tell them to vote NO on the proposed constitutional amendment.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God.

Endorsements for March 8, 2011 L.A. Citywide Election

The March 8, 2011 Los Angeles Citywide elections are next Tuesday today! Please vote. Here are the endorsements of the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, the Stonewall Democratic Club and MadProfessah.

Proposition LA TIMES Stonewall LA County  Me
Measure G   Yes      Yes        Yes       Yes
Measure H   Yes      Yes        Yes       Yes
Measure I   Yes      Yes        Yes       Yes    
Measure J   Yes      Yes        Yes       Yes
Measure L   No       Yes        Yes       Yes
Measure M   No       Yes        Yes       Yes
Measure N   Yes      Yes        No        Yes
Measure O   No       Yes        Yes       Yes
Measure P   Yes       -         No        Yes
Measure Q   Yes       -         No        Yes
Los Angeles City Council Races
LA CD 2   Paul     Paul       Paul     Paul
LA CD 4   O'Grady  Labonge*   Labonge  --
LA CD 6   Goodman  Cardenas*  --       --
LA CD 8   Parks*   --         Parks*   Parks
LA CD 10  Wesson*  Wesson*    Wesson*  Wesson*
LA CD 12  Mitch    Brad       Brad      --
LA CD 14  Rudy     Jose*      Jose*     Jose*
Los Angeles Community College District
Seat 1   ---   Field*     Field*     Field*
Seat 3   ---   Veres      Veres      Veres
Seat 5   ---   Svonkin    Svonkin    Svonkin
Seat 7   ---   Santiago*  Santiago*  Santiago*
Los Angeles Unified School District
Seat 1  Lee       Lee       Lamotte*     Lee
Seat 3  Tamar*    Pugliese  Tamar*       ---
Seat 5  Sanchez   ---       ---          ---
Seat 7  Vladovic* ---       Vladovic*    ---