The Politics of Pairing Up

Same-Sex Marriage Rally (Photo credit: City of West Hollywood)

On the ballot in Minnesota (and a few other states) is an amendment taking what used to be an accepted fact of life in Western culture--the institution of marriage is between a man and a woman--and turning it into part of the state constitution.  No gays and lesbians need apply.

This has come about for two reasons:  (1) The Republican-dominated state legislature spent most of the last session--when they weren't debating football stadiums and voter ID--on this issue before deciding not to risk voting on it themselves, fearing a veto by Democratic Governor Mark Dayton.  So they're leaving it to the voters.  What could possibly go wrong?  (2) The GOP's desire to block a lawsuit challenging the statute that already makes gay marriage illegal in Minnesota, thus taking the matter out of the judicial system.

As it stands, the newspaper polls show folks split over the issue.  The Minneapolis Star Tribune's Minnesota Poll says that 48% favor the marriage amendment, while 43% oppose it.

This is where the television ads come into play, with both the "pros" and "antis" spending tons of money on their message.  Unless you happen to be Catholic, in which case they're asking you to contribute so they can put out their own ads supporting the amendment.

The ads for the "anti" side, sponsored by Minnesotans United for All Families, feature either an elderly couple who come around to gay marriage only after one of their offspring is in a committed relationship, or a straight, young Republican couple talking about how nice their lesbian neighbors are.

You'll notice that there are no actual gay people in these ads.  Why hurt your cause?  That's like discussing what's best for your children, as long as they're out of the room.

The ads from Minnesotans for Marriage have also been on the benign side. Currently, their message seems to be that the amendment should be a choice issue for voters, instead of having gay marriage rammed down their throats by liberal politicians and judges.  Isn't that why we elect representatives to do that for us?

The man behind Minnesotans for Marriage's ads, Frank Schubert, was recently profiled in the Star Tribune as a man who has never worked on a campaign he has lost yet.  He may be right.  So far, anti-same sex marriage amendments have won in every state where it's been on the ballot.

Like we said, the ads from both sides tend to focus on the soft sell.  But wait until the gloves come off.  Then it'll be all about Protecting The Children from all the horrors gays and lesbians might bring.  Thing is, kids have already been exposed to positive images of them through TV, the movies, and the person they sit next to at school.

No matter how you vote on the marriage amendment November 6, same sex unions will remain illegal in Minnesota.  And as long as the state legislature is in GOP hands, it will likely stay that way.

So what's the point?  The definition of marriage has been changing over time, whether we like it or not.  If this were about gay and straight couples getting the same kind of benefits that married couples do without actually tying the knot, this wouldn't be an issue.  But same sex couples, in their attempt to be just like everybody else, want access to the altar.  The question before Minnesota voters is whether, symbolically speaking, people with a different sexual orientation can put a ring on it.