State Constitutions don’t, and aren’t supposed to, exist at the same level of majestic purity as the United States Constitution. The process to amend the US Constitution is intentionally very, very difficult – because its intention is to define, at a high level, the relationship between (plug your ears, Liberals – your unions and professors will spank you even for reading this) a free association of equals and a government constituted of, by and for them. Not to nail down every nuance of that relationship.
The US Constitution reserves powers to the states – and those powers are laid out in the various State Constitutions.
The idea that defining marriage – even into a form that we social conservatives approve of – is a dangerous one; we are one DFL sweep away from having them repeal the amendment and put forth one requiring all people to become civil partners with their dogs, with power of attorney.
Government, as a rule, at all levels, should butt out of peoples’ personal lives. Including their marriages. The family has survived for millenia as the bedrock of civilization, without government to define it. It in its genuine form will survive government as well.
Will it survive government’s attempt to define it? When has that ever worked?
And Rep. John Kriesel makes a good point; while the referendum exists for a reason, people shouldn’t have a right to vote about what people do with their personal lives – provided it doesn’t harm others, and by “harm” we mean literally and tangibly.