StarTrib Poll: Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment up 48%-43%

St Paul Capitol and Cathedral

A year before they face the issue on the ballot, 48 percent of Minnesotans favor such an amendment while 43 percent oppose it. That falls within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

The poll of 807 adults statewide, conducted Nov. 2-3, shows that battle lines will be drawn on clear partisan, generational, educational and geographic fractures.

The poll may reflect some shifting opinions among Minnesota voters. In May of this year, just before the constitutional question was approved by the Legislature, 55 percent of respondents in a Minnesota Poll said they opposed the amendment while 39 percent favored a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Amendment supporter Chuck Darrell, communications director for Minnesota for Marriage, said the early signs of support reflected in the recent Minnesota Poll was good news for his side. He said even though the lead in favor of the amendment is slim, it may reflect even more support.

Darrell said in other states, notably California and Maine, early polling showed marriage amendments failing. But when voters are in the secrecy of their voting booths, he said, they supported the amendments.

"People tend to give the politically correctly answer" on marriage amendment polls, he said.

Star Trib

"Crucifield ghoul" in Hopkins, MN to protest Marriage Amendment

A lady called the office Thursday to report a home in Minnetonka near Hopkins on Minnetonka Blvd, just west of Hwy 169 (at Chippewa Road) that the Halloween decorations at the home include a "crucified "death's head" ghoul (dressed in modern clothing), and an OutFrontMN campaign sign for the Marriage Protection Amendment campaign.

I drove out and took a few pictures.

In a way, it might be difficult to beat them on the "blasphemy" charge, but since they scream "homophobe" and "hatespeech" at the drop of a hat, why can't we? I'd be willing to go to the Minnetonka City Council meeting to raise the issue.

You know that if it were a Black person or Muhammad on that cross, this would be national news!

And I'm pretty sure that "Chippewa" is a derogatory word to Ojibway/Anishinbe Native Americans.

St. Thomas Univ professor's natural marriage debate audio available online

Both debaters argued the importance of marriage and it’s stabilizing effects on families. Gallagher argued that same-sex marriage would redefine marriage and further erode the institution.

Gallagher’s reasoning stemmed from the belief that children need both a mother and father.

“There is something special about public sexual unions of male and female in which the man and the woman make explicit commitments that are socially supported and not just privately and personally supported to the children they make,” she said. “Children should have have a father as well as a mother,” she said. “Almost not other couple provides that.”

The debaters were asked questions by the audience as well. Among the topics discussed were religious liberty, protections for same-sex couples, and why the Catholic church is invested in the issue in the first place.

Minnesotans will vote on the constitutional amendment in November 2012.

audio at Minnesota Independent

Univ. St. Thomas Law School to host natural marriage debate Thursday

Maggie Gallagher,  President of The Institute for Marriage and Public Policy and Dale Carpenter, University of Minnesota Professor of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Law will present their views on the Same Sex Marriage Amendment at the Murphy Institute's inaugural debate on public policy issues for the 2012 elections.

Reception following in Board of Governor's room.

The Murphy Institute for Catholic Thought, Law and Public Policy is pleased to present a new speaker series at the School of Law that explores both the Catholic positions and some challenging perspectives on major policy issues likely to be the focus of debate in the upcoming 2012 election. Each program will consist of two expert speakers respectfully engaging in one of these hot topics.

Details

HT Stella Borealis

MNCathConf: Catholic leaders will not be silenced

It is not surprising to see the Star Tribune continue to beat the drum in opposition to the marriage protection amendment that will appear on the November 2012 ballot ("On gay marriage, state is out of step," Oct. 1).

What is troubling is the paper's attack on the Catholic Church's participation in the public debate -- an attack that should concern all Minnesotans as out of step with this country's most cherished traditions of free speech and religious liberty.

The Star Tribune sees in the church the specter of a looming theocracy, but this could not be further from reality. The church only proposes; she imposes nothing.

Legislators and the public are free to accept or reject her witness, and Catholics who participate in the public square are fully conscious that they must make arguments that are persuasive to people of faith and those outside religious communities.

So why are some eager to silence the church's voice?

The church's public witness in helping to shape a public order that is just, protects authentic rights, serves the common good and promotes human flourishing is not in any way different from what the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. did when he, a Baptist minister and theologian, fought for just laws.

His civil rights advocacy was grounded in biblical conviction, the natural law, and the Declaration of Independence, much like Catholic advocacy today. In his words, "a just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God."

Would the Star Tribune criticize Dr. King for imposing his religious views on others?

To be clear: There is such a thing as a healthy secularism that guides the respective roles of church and state.

But what animates the Star Tribune and other purveyors of a false secularism is a politically correct rewriting of the First Amendment, in which the newfangled concept of "freedom of worship" is substituted in place of "religious freedom" -- a move that seeks to "protect the public" by enclosing religious people and their evangelical witness within their own walls.

continue at Star Tribune

I've never heard a Catholic Conference proclaim the truth so boldly. 

HT Bliss

St Thomas U professor writes op-ed supporting natural marriage

Many religions recognize a natural law

Kudos to a recent letter writer who called for a return to first principles in the same-sex marriage debate, and to two others who answered the call. We're not on the same page, but we're closer.

One responder misunderstands the use of the term "nature" in "natural law." As any physician can tell you, many things occur (infections, functional failure) that violate the nature of the thing affected. It happens in nature that human beings are born without hands, but this violates the proper nature of the human being.

This is how doctors tell the difference between health and disease. Same-sex desires and acts literally make no sense given our embodiment as sexual creatures. The fact that they happen does not make them fitting to our nature, fully understood.

The other responder claims that the fundamental issue is equal rights. The Catholic Church is second to none in championing equal rights. But the recognition of rights must be based on the truth.

Any man who is capable can marry any woman who is capable. The letter writer is not asking for equal rights; he is asking for a redefinition of the nature of marriage, and thus for repudiation of our human nature, properly understood.

This is akin to saying that I have a right to fly, but I want to fly in my car. Calling a car a plane won't make it fly, and neither society nor the state have any reason to get on board.

Star Trib

MN Courage chapter leader writes Op-Ed on Same-Sex Attraction

Father Jim Livingston who is in charge of the local chapter of Courage, penned this well-done op-ed on same-sex attraction that was published yesterday in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

I am glad for Ron Bates that he was able to overcome the guilt and shame that burdened him for years and find that God loves him. ("I tried for years to pray away the gay. It didn't work," Sept. 1).

But while I respect Bates' personal experience, I respectfully disagree with his conclusions about same-sex attraction and traditional marriage.

I am the lead chaplain for the local Courage/Faith in Action group. Courage/FIA is a confidential support group for people who have same-sex attraction and who want to practice the virtue of chastity as understood by the Catholic Church.

As a confessor and confidant to many men and women who have homosexual attractions, I can say that people are not limited to the choices Bates offers.

The plain truth is that people with same-sex attractions experience them differently.

For some, those desires are deeply rooted and long-lasting, while others experience them as symptoms of something else: loneliness, lack of confidence or frustrated childhood bonding with same-sex parents or peers, just to begin the list.

In other words, some people really do find developmental and environmental roots to their same-sex attractions. And yes, some find release from them through therapy or through the mysterious grace of a spiritual awakening.

Bates was not able to pray away his same-sex attraction, but some people actually do. And others, while unable to avoid homosexual temptations, still live lives of chastity and virtue by the grace of God and with the help of good friends.

Marriage to a woman did not work for Bates, but for this you don't redefine marriage. And especially for this you don't tattoo a "GLBT" label onto teenagers who may be simply confused about their life choices. It took Bates 54 years to find his life direction after an imprudent start.

By the same logic, many young people could be trapped for years with a mistaken gay or lesbian identity, goaded on by our disintegrating, sexually untethered culture.

Like it or not, heterosexual behavior is rooted in human nature and the universal moral law. Both the body and the Bible witness to this truth in their own ways.

Traditional marriage is rooted in this ancient if inconvenient truth, and it can't be scolded or legislated away by one misguided generation. History is not and never will be on the side of gay marriage.

continue at StarTrib 

HT Bliss

Appleton approves gay partner benefits

Isn't it just a WEE BIT IRONIC to institute budget-cutting measures (zero-percent pay raises, etc) but implement costly benefits for one group?

Appleton Post-Crescent:

APPLETON — In a 10-6 vote, the Appleton Common Council approved a plan Wednesday that extends health benefits to same-sex domestic partners of non-union employees, a move Mayor Tim Hanna said would make Appleton's recruitment efforts more competitive [ummm....?].

"We do want to be able to attract good, talented employees and retain good, talented employees and level the playing field in terms of access to benefits," Hanna told council members who objected to the estimated $100,000 price tag [by way of comparison, the City of Milwaukee's gay partner benefits will cost the city $700,000] associated with the benefit expansion.

The addition of domestic partner benefits was adopted as part of a larger plan to standardize benefit packages for non-union employees in the wake of a new state law that eliminates many collective bargaining powers for most unionized state workers at all levels of government.

The broader plan cuts sick leave in half for Appleton's non-union workers, institutes a zero-percent pay raise, offers sick and bereavement leave for same-sex and opposite-sex domestic partners and incorporates retirement contribution requirements mandated in the collective bargaining law, commonly known as Act 10.

Read the rest here.