Gay marriage hearing in Grand Rapids divides town

[katinmn]

Just like the Republicans wanted!

The hearing also left people wondering why the legislature isn't dealing with pressing issues. Answer? It's more politically expedient to make a name for yourself over "moral" issues.

I love this quote by a Grand Rapids City Council member: "What's more important to the community of Grand Rapids and the community of Minnesota?" he asked. "Our education system, our economy, our elderly, our youth and our environment or an issue that's already settled in the laws of Minnesota?"

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/politics/11166032.htm

Posted on Fri, Mar. 18, 2005

Gay marriage hearing splits town
Panel likely to OK constitutional amendment
BY SCOTT THISTLE
Duluth News Tribune

GRAND RAPIDS, Minn. — In churches on opposite ends of this small city, those for and those against amending Minnesota's Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriages gathered their forces and their courage Thursday night.

Those opposing the amendment gathered at Zion Lutheran Church on the south end of town and those for it at the Assemblies of God Church on the north end.

At a hearing here today — the place better known as the birthplace of "Wizard of Oz" star Judy Garland — a Minnesota House committee on civil law and elections is expected to vote, along party lines, in support of a bill to let voters decide the issue in 2006.

As many as 2,000 people may turn out to demonstrate for and against the bill, and the 645-seat auditorium at Reif Performing Arts Center, where the hearing is scheduled, is expected to be at capacity.

-more-

[saltpoint]

1. Can't say how it is in Grand Rapids, MN, but --

-- I'm thinking that it might be good for GLBT kids in that city to hear this debate, to know it's going on, to examine the arguments on all sides, and to finally realize that they are not alone in the world and that their feelings are valid and legitimate and deserving of equal respect and rights of citizenship.

The idiot fundamentalist Christians will beat their chests to the ends of time on this matter because they want control over other people's genitals.

I think that the loud, angry and hysterical impulse to control others' genitals should be grounds for detention.

[Botany]

2. Quick hint!

If you are a man and opposed to gay marriage do not marry another man.

Same is true for women except they should not marry another women.

[saltpoint]

3. But Botany! Look what you've gone and done!

You've offered a sensible, reasoned, clear-minded, completely fair, and practical solution to the conflict.

What role does a suggestion like THAT have in far right-wing politics!

-----
(Good post & right-on, too.)

[Botany]

4. But I copied your one liner and opened a new thread under .....

..... the best one liner ever by a DUer.

BTW As a straight man I have gay & lesbian neighbors and as far
as what they do in the bedroom ...... I DO NOT CARE!

[saltpoint]

5. You rock, Botany.

Thanks for your kind words & clear head tonight.

[loveable liberal]

7. I have to spend tomorrow night with a reich wing homophobe.

Wifes college freinds are getting together and one of the husbands is a kool-aid drinkin homophobe. I already told the wife that if he says something Im going to ask him why he worries so much about what other men do with their penises? Additionally, men who think about other mens' penises are latent homosexuals. (not that theres anything wrong with that). It may be a short evening. :)

[saltpoint]

6. katinmn, I think you are right about the Republicans --

-- wanting to divide people on this issue, wanting to use it as a wedge issue, wanting to keep the tension level high.

I hope some good of it will come from the exchange of ideas. When I was growing up, no one discussed pee-pees, let alone variations on what one does WITH pee-pees, and certainly not in town forums.

So I agree with you that the Republicans & Far Right instigate conflict for the sake of division, I'm hoping for a silver lining that people might have cause to reconsider their assumptions about GLBT folks.

[katinmn]

8. Thanks. I agree open discussion is good and necessary

I just hate being manipulated openly!

We are now one step closer to a statewide referendum on the ban.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/5300910.html

As expected, the vote was along party lines -- seven Repubs in favor, five Dems against.

The chair of the committee is thought to have brought the hearing to the northern Minnesota town believing there would be widespread public support. He sought to "stack the deck" so to speak. In fact, the public was about evenly divided. And there were some who traveled to take part.

The article in the Star Tribune today is very good and profiles some brave individuals who showed up to protect their own or their loved ones' freedoms.


Edit: add photo link. Caption: Six-year-old Luke, Molly Troumbly, five-year-old J.C., one-year-old Addi and eight-year-old Jet painted their signs and came to Grand Rapids Friday as a family from Taconite to show support for the amendment to ban gay marriages.

[CatholicEdHead]

9. Poor kids

being dragged into an issue they cannot think to comprehend.

[katinmn]

10. I agree. What must they be telling them?

[dflprincess]

11. I imagine they were shocked to find the amendment didn't

have overwhelming support in Grand Rapids. I wonder how much money they wasted taking their show on the road and still coming up with the same party line vote they would have had in St. Paul.

I did get a kick out of the Strib's article mentioning that Grand Rapids was the birthplace of Judy Garland, "a gay icon". There does seem to be some irony in that.