Shot in the Dark

You Read It Here First

Gay marriage is worth more to the DFL as a permanent wedge than it is as policy.

I predicted right after the election: defeating the Marriage Amendment, to the DFL, was about waving a bloody shirt to get out the vote; not  a prelude to doing anything to legalize gay marriage.

Legalization would galvanize conservative opposition to the DFL on an issue where the currently-rulling party doesn’t need the friction – and, more importantly, would deprive the DFL of one of its bloodiest waving shirts.

Some on the left – Sally Jo Sorenson at BSP, Aaron Rupar at the City Pages – are finally figuring out that the new DFL majority are talking out both sides of their mouths, although neither will, or knows to, put it in those terms yet.

So mark my words (and if you don’t, no worries; I’ll mark them for you); there will be no repeal of Minnesota’s statutory ban on gay marriage. Oh, there may be a token bill; Scott Dibble and Karen Clark will submit a proposal, which will die in DFL-controlled committee (with the DFL’s noise machine doing its best to paint it as “GOP obstructionism”).  By 2014, gay marriage will be exactly as illegal as if the Amendment had passed.  And by 2016, whatever the results of the 2014 House elections, the DFL-controlled Senate will have blocked it as well.

Posted

in

, ,

by

Mitch Berg

Tags:

Comments

20 responses to “You Read It Here First”

  1. The Big Stink Avatar
    The Big Stink

    Doesn’t matter no law will be passed. What matters is that the religious order be bitch-slapped. Sexual justice!

  2. Chuck Avatar
    Chuck

    Democrats continually say that gay marriage is just like inter-racial marriage. So can we conclude that by not repealing the law saying marriage is just between a man and a woman, that Democrats support Jim Crow marriage laws of the old South?

  3. bosshoss429 Avatar
    bosshoss429

    I disagree about Dibble, Mitch. Even though he is openly gay, he was asked just after the election if due to the DemocRATs getting back in power, that meant gay marriage would be passed into law. He danced around the issue like a long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs. That said, I believe that he’s up for re-election in 2014, so if that’s the case, I don’t think that he’ll get on that wagon unless he gets re-elected.

  4. swiftee Avatar
    swiftee

    Chuck brings an interesting point.

    If teh gay is a matter of CIVIL RIGHTS, does Democrat reluctance to bless it with teh “=” make them teh BIGOTS or teh HOMOPHOBES?

    Can we have a FACTCHECK?

    Redecioulus, and developing!

  5. The Big Stink Avatar
    The Big Stink

    Swift: Gay=sexual slavery. No rights. No justice. No peace. It would have been so much easier for their cause if Rosa Parks would have been sitting with her dyke-ish significant other on that bus.

  6. swiftee Avatar
    swiftee

    Stink, if only those people had shown up to demand a seat at the lunch counter wearing assless chaps…woulda; coulda; shoulda.

  7. Leslie Hittner Avatar
    Leslie Hittner

    At least the discussion now continues…

  8. swiftee Avatar
    swiftee

    Leslie, are you a bigot, or a homophobe….discuss.

  9. Emery Avatar
    Emery

    If activists hadn’t tried to push this through the courts in Massachusetts and California before the public was ready, gay marriage would likely be spreading like wildfire now through legislative action. As it is, we’ll need to wait until the public leaves behind their impression that gay marriage is something liberal judges are forcing on them before it will be allowed to spread through the nation.

    Anti-gay marriage supporters are dieing every day, and most of the new voters turning 18 every year just don’t understand why we need to protect marriage from gay people. If you want social change, you need to take the time and effort to convince the people and their representatives of the justice of your cause. Eventually they’ll come around, and the change that they enact will be permanent.

  10. BradC Avatar
    BradC

    There’s actually a case pending in Hennepin County District Court which could overturn the state statute. And that’s exactly what DFLers desire to happen (Hello, Massachusetts).

  11. Nachman Avatar
    Nachman

    Emery: this is the second time on this blog that you wish death upon the Jews. What exactly is your problem?

  12. It’s Time To Start Legalizing Gay Marriage! | Shot in the Dark

    […] Yesterday, I noticed that even some of the brighter leftybloggers are figuring out – or drifting in that direction – that the DFL majority in the Legislature isn’t going to knock itself out to legalize gay marriage. […]

  13. Emery Avatar
    Emery

    Don’t be a schmuck.

  14. swiftee Avatar
    swiftee

    “..most of the new voters turning 18 every year just don’t understand why we need to protect marriage from gay people.”

    Amazing what 12 years of having “teh gay is teh kewl” drummed into a kids head will do, isn’t it?

  15. swiftee Avatar
    swiftee

    When you stop to consider how many gays are kicking off from AIDS every year, public school indocrtination could be the only way they can propagate the species.

  16. Emery Avatar
    Emery

    Tom,
    A good Catholic School education will prepare you for anything in life.

  17. swiftee Avatar
    swiftee

    “A good Catholic School education will prepare you for anything in life.”

    I’m living proof of that.

  18. Terry Avatar
    Terry

    Y’know, Swiftee, you make me wish I was still a biker.
    I appreciate honesty.
    Now if only I could get rid of that tattoo of Alfred E. Newman screwing the Statue of Liberty.

  19. Lip Service | Shot in the Dark

    […] other words – it’s an empty promise.  Tom Bakk started weaseling out of all of the DFL’s happy-talk about what a fundamental right marriage is, as we discussed […]

  20. Gay Marriage: Still No Word | Shot in the Dark

    […] Since then?  Nothing but weasel words from the DFL. […]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.