In their incremental strategy to obtain same sex marriage in Minnesota, homosexual activists at OutFront Minnesota will take another run at the state legislature in 2008. They're describing their efforts as a less controversial approach than last year. They say they are merely seeking to authorize cities, towns, schools and counties to offer marriage benefits to homosexual couples and establish a marital type status for homosexual couples for purposes of public assistance.
In either case, these two proposals are just as controversial as their proposals in 2007. The goal remains the same: establish in state law a marital-like status for homosexual couples.
The PR side is to create the most empathetic situation. Last year it was homosexual partners of hospitalized partners. They alleged homosexuals, because they couldn't marry, were denied hospital access to their partners. (The only problem was homosexual partners weren't excluded from visiting their partners by Twin Cities hospitals we contacted. And proponents wouldn't accept a proposal which would allow any adult to decide who could visit their partner. Thus showing both the discriminatory nature of their proposal and their intent was exclusively getting a homosexual marriage type status embedded in state law.)
This new proposal will be just as discriminatory as the ones they pushed last year. Why should homosexual couples be given special recognition exclusive of other people who care for someone just because they aren't homosexual? Say elderly siblings? Long time non-homosexual friends who live together? An elderly parent living with a disabled adult child?
The reason they aren't interested in helping other people in similar situations is because they're only concerned about moving towards homosexual marriage recognition in state law. These initiatives are merely the first step towards the eventual goal of recognizing homosexual marriage whether through the courts or the legislature.
That's why these proposals are every bit as controversial, notwithstanding their claims to the contrary, as their proposals last year which Governor Pawlenty threatened to veto.
3 comments:
Actually, OutFront didn't say that the session would be less controversial or that their efforts would be less controversial. I did, based on the fact that few bills will be presented and there is next to no chance of a constitutional amendment going through.
Why doesn't the family council then push legislation to fix these loopholes in the law? You could put something forward that would cover all the bases: same-sex partners, siblings, and caretakers.
And, if I recall, several of OutFront's proposals last year DID include provisions for not just same-sex partners. The Sick Leave bill was one of those.
So to say that "This new proposal will be just as discriminatory as the ones they pushed last year," is patently dishonest.
OutFront Minnesota will continue to pursue humane, fair, and common sense solutions to the unfairness in our laws.
The argument that everything comes down to "marriage" is simply a diversionary tactic to avoid addressing the unequal treatment borne by a segment of our society, treatment that can be alleviated through simple fixes in state law.
OutFront Minnesota secured almost 60 lawmakers to support equality legislation last session and hopes for an even higher number this year.
Jo Marsicano
Communications Director
OutFront Minnesota
Unfortunately, OutFront’s “humane, fair, and common sense solutions” call for legalization of same-sex marriage.
A same-sex domestic partnership for elderly homosexual couples is just same-sex marriage by another name.
And, common sense solutions regarding home ownership can be found without legalizing same-sex marriage.
Post a Comment