I am not sure where to put this so started a new thread On the ballot this election is an amendment to the MN Constitution that would enshrine marriage as only between one man and one woman. The polling currently is 50% for the amendment and 43% against and 8% undecided. Support though for the amendment has been steadily eroding from a high point of 72% for when it was first put on the ballot. A quirk in MN's rules also means that a ballot with a blank vote on the amendment counts as a 'No' vote so it is possible that if most of the undecided simply don't vote the amendment will be defeated. Jesse Ventura has just recorded a new ad with his wife against the amendment and while Jesse Ventura has been mocked for this prickly persona, outrageous statements and obsession with conspiracy theories he still is popular in MN. Also Jesse Ventura's support has mostly been white suburban males (generally a demographic against gay issues) so him weighing in on this issue could be tipping point for defeating the amendment. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/M6SRCRxYa_k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Good for Jesse. This issue is going to be the same as the equal right movement and women suffrage. All these fools who are are on the wrong side of this debate are going to conveniently forget that were bigots 20-30 years from now.
Ventura could have built a credible third party and nabbed a long career in statehouse or Senate to boot, but he cared more about cashing in on the irony of his success. Not gonna start taking him seriously just cause I agree with him on one issue; and that "no vote" ballot rule is dumb.
I certainly hope this doesn't pass, but this doesn't sound very promising. It seems that these measures always poll poorly, with the actual results being much more against gay marriage than the polls would indicate.
Also, I think abstaining (i.e. vote, but leave that question blank on the ballot) is equal to an "against" vote - at least for this amendment.
Obama's next Supreme Court nominee will take this issue out of the hands of the various recalcitrant states and their regressive, Constitution-hating voters and will resolve this in favor of individual freedom for today's citizens and those of future generations. I can't wait because I am sick of talking about this.
If you think a Supreme Court ruling will be the end of the discussion, you obviously have no idea how strongly opposed some people are to gay marriage. Roe v. Wade was nearly 40 years ago and that debate is still going on. If the Supreme Court strikes down all anti-gay marriage legislation and constitutional amendments, social conservatives will just use that as another rallying point for decades to come.
At least that's what he'll believe until it becomes politically expedient for him to "evolve" his position. Or until Joe Biden comes out in support of a Supreme Court ruling against marriage discrimination!
Kennedy has ruled in favor of homosexuals in Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas, and is generally liberal on social issues. Roberts, while in private practice, helped set the framework for the majority opinion in Romer v. Evans. http://articles.latimes.com/2005/aug/04/nation/na-roberts4 You won't have to wait for pro-gay rights rulings. Prop 8 might be on the docket next term. DOMA will be on the docket next term. Seven federal courts have found DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional. You won't have to wait for another nominee. Hell, this current court is tailor-fit to knock the s**t out of DOMA, at the very least. Sure, that might be leaving it to the states, ironically, but you knock down that pillar of federal discrimination, and good things will follow.
This is a good point. The USSC might craft a compromise ruling that leaves the issue to be fought out on a state by state basis.
There is no way DOMA stands unscathed after SCOTUS is done with it. As for Prop 8 and other such laws, there is probably going to be a compromise where Prop 8 is struck down, but there is no national basis established for same-sex marriage equality. From the 9th circuit ruling--- Considering how Kennedy ruled on Romer v. Evans, this would seem to be a home run argument for SCOTUS as well. So, no, I don't think SCOTUS will revolutionize gay rights, but I'd just like to note that this current court is hell of a lot more friendly towards gay rights than most think, and hell, within the next term or two, there could be massive change forward for gay rights.
