Opponents of marriage equality are licking their wounds after Monday’s passage of marriage equality in the Minnesota Senate, assuring The Land of 10,000 Lakes would become the 12th state recognizing same-sex marriages. Despite polling showing a majority of Minnesotans support the bill, conservatives have suggested otherwise, with Tom Prichard of the Minnesota Family Council calling its passage “a hostile takeover.”
A statement from the Minnesota for Marriage coalition suggested it was a “sad day” for the state that will have “unintended consequences”:
Today is an historic and sad day for the state of Minnesota. As a result of years of campaigning by gay “marriage” activists awaiting a time when DFL leadership in the Minnesota legislature and governorship would be ready to champion their cause (contrary to the will of Minnesotans), the Minnesota Senate joined the Minnesota House of Representatives in passing the same-sex “marriage” bill. This bill not only upends our most foundational institution of marriage, redefining it as genderless and declaring mothers and fathers as “neutral” in Minnesota—it also fails to protect the most basic religious liberty rights of those who believe based on their faith that marriage can only be the union of one man and one woman. […]
Now we are being told that redefining marriage poses no threat to religious liberty—that “everything will be ok”—and again, we argue that this is false. Over one million Minnesotans will be forced to either affirm what they believe to be false or subject themselves to prosecution and insult as “bigots” and “criminals” under our law with the passage of this bill.
Minnesota will be discovering the unintended consequences and sentencing more and more people of faith to prosecution under our laws for years to come as a result of this decision made by a few today.
The statement covers many familiar talking points: Somehow marriage is weaker if it is “genderless.” People of faith should be free to discriminate against same-sex couples. The LGBT movement is “powerful.” None of them ring any truer in hindsight.
The National Organization for Marriage also chimed in, suggesting the lawmakers “cast a terrible vote that damages society, tells children they don’t deserve a mother and a father, and brands supporters of traditional marriage as bigots.” As always, the group promised retaliation against Republicans who supported the bill, even though past retribution campaigns have led to more Democrats being elected — making the effort counterproductive.
Minnesota marks six state victories for marriage equality in about as many months. Opponents seem desperate to prove that they are made victims by these changes in the law, but their only examples continue to be individuals intent on blatantly discriminating against same-sex couples. For all their “pro-family,” “what’s best for children,” and “protect the institution of marriage” arguments over the years, their opposition all boils down to a will to discriminate in the end. They may object to being called bigots, but every time they do, it becomes more clear to the public that that is exactly what they are.