MN Marriage Amendment Fails: 'Vote No' Wins

While proponents were saying the race was still too early to call, the Associated Press called the race shortly before 2 a.m. The vote means the state constitution will not define marriage as only between a man and a woman.

The Minnesota Marriage Amendment has been rejected.

The campaign to amend the Minnesota state constitution to limit the definition of marriage to strictly between heterosexual couples was defeated Tuesday by more than 51 percent of a statewide vote.

With 92 percent of state precincts reporting, the Associated Press reported shortly before 2 a.m. Wednesday that Amendment 1—informally known as the Minnesota Marriage Amendment—had failed: "Vote No" won.

Speaking to a cheering crowd of hundreds at St Paul's River Centre, Richard Carlbom, the campaign manager for Minnesotans United for All Families, told audiences that Minnesota was the first state in the nation to reject a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage at the ballot box.

"Tonight, Minnesota proved love is bigger than government," Carlbom said.

Carlbom continued: "The strength of this campaign was our thousands of volunteers, and our broad and diverse coalition of partners. This campaign did something that has never been done before: it brought together people of all faiths, in all communities, and of all political affiliations on the principle that freedom means freedom for everybody."

A full copy of his statement is attached to this article.

"No" votes outnumbered "Yes" votes in every provisional vote tally posted Tuesday night, but Carlbom's speech still brought Southwest Minneapolis resident Florence Brammer to tears, which she rubbed away from beneath her glasses.

"I've been married to a man for 35 years," she said. "It really defined my life. I raised three children in a marriage that was recognized by society."

Thinking of LGBT friends in 25-year, legally-unrecognized relationships, she said she was personally offended by an amendment that seemed to target them "with such vengeance."

"I'm very proud, very moved to be a Minnesotan right now," she said.

As Carlbom concluded his speech and left the stage, the Queen song "We are the Champions" began to blare over the loudspeakers, but amendment supporters weren't initially ready to concede quite yet. By 2:30 a.m., though, Minnesota for Marriage's Deputy Campaign Manager threw in the towel via Twitter.

"We gave our best and came up short. The fight to preserve God’s definition of marriage is not over just b/c we lost tonight," Andy Parrish wrote. "I’d like to thank everyone for their thoughts and prayers. The fight for marriage is not over just b/c we lost tonight."

The National Organization for Marriage, who helped bankroll Minnesota's amendment supporters and those in three other states, echoed Parish in a statement issued Wednesday morning.

"Though we are disappointed over these losses, we remain faithful to our mission and committed to the cause of preserving marriage as God designed it," the statement read. "Marriage is a true and just cause, and we will never abandon the field of battle just because we experienced a setback. There is much work to do, and we begin that process now.”

Susan March 15, 2013 at 03:18 PM
Dan, are you still getting email alerts for this thread? If so... http://edenprairie.patch.com/articles/should-gay-marriage-be-part-of-a-district-s-curriculum?1363294463#
Mike B. March 15, 2013 at 03:49 PM
This country and state has lost its bearings. We need to go back to the time when there were laws against deviant behavior such as homosexuality and interracial marriage. The 1950s were a good time in this country. The '60s liberalism and permissiveness wrecked normal behavioral standards in this country
Joyce March 15, 2013 at 04:01 PM
Absolutely, Mike. There are a few other social policies from the '50s we should return to as well, such as segregation - mixing the races in public places makes absolutely no sense! Also, women should not be allowed to work in traditional male professions such as law and medicine, nor should women be allowed to have credit in their own names, and married women should not be allowed to work at all. Let's return to Jewish quotas in colleges and universities, too, and advertisements for jobs should be able to state, "Jews and Negroes need not apply". Yes, the '50s were wonderful!
Michael Hindin March 17, 2013 at 11:13 PM
Good times on the surface for white middle class Protestants and wealthier folks, with male wage earners that could support and entire family. The TV programs of tht era left a lot out. Not so good for Blacks, Jews, Catholics, many women and other minority groups. Women were assumed to not be supporting a family so women's wages were deemed not important or worthy of a man. A family supported by a women's wages faired poorly. Racism, anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism were rampant. I lived through that era and it wasn't pretty below the surface. Employers were allowed. to steal promised pensions by fireng people shortly before the 10 to 20 year vesting periods. The Korean war killed many. You probably weren't eligible for the Vietnam draft. You probably never withness a chemical filled drainage pipe flowing into a river or lake. 1960's liberalism helped found the environmental movement that eventually pushed even Richard Nixon to sigh laws to clean up our air and water. I helped enforce soem of those laws with low paying government job. Work places were far less safe and factory air and water pollution were unchecked. Ozzie and Harriet, Leave it to Beaver, etc were the 1950's American mythology. Go more deeply into history before you steriotype '60s liberals.
Donald Lee March 17, 2013 at 11:31 PM
The left has its own stereotypes that it uses to justify its agenda, equally untrue.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »