The Free Press, Mankato, MN

News Ticker

Your View

June 6, 2012

Your View: Better to let voters define marriage than judges

By Bob Jentges, North Mankato

— The Defense of Marriage Act defines civil marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman. It passed Congress with large majorities and was signed into federal law by President Clinton Sept. 21, 1996.

But in my opinion, DOMA does not prevent individual states from exercising their constitutional authority to establish their own legal definition of civil marriage. Some states have legalized so-called gay marriage — some have not.

In 1997, the Minnesota Legislature clarified that lawful civil marriage may be contracted only between persons of the opposite sex and went on to specifically prohibit “marriage between persons of the same sex". (Minnesota Statutes chapter 517.01 and 517.03)

I support the biblical and centuries-old tradition that marriage is between a man and a woman. I think it better to let the residents of Minnesota codify the legal definition of civil marriage in our state's constitution by a vote, than to leave it to a judge to make/change law from the bench by ruling those “Minnesota Statues” in violation of our state’s constitution. In my opinion, asserting a violation of the 14th Amendment in the U.S. Constitution i.e. equal protection under law is misguided, unless and until there is discrimination under present civil law.

If the amendment passes, for sincere adults of the same sex who in good faith choose to cohabitate (according to recent surveys fewer than 5 percent), maybe recognizing civil unions granting them certain benefits could be considered, so long as it would not result in any change in our state’s legal definition of civil marriage.

Constitutionally, churches are free to set their own doctrine with respect to religious marriage.

 

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Your View