Bradlee Dean

You Can Run But You Cannot Hide, the front group for the punk rock ministry of Bradlee Dean, took his brand of fundamentalist Christianity to a DFL gubernatorial meet-and-greet several weeks ago to confront Sen. John Marty about his support for “sin” and homosexuals. Dean and fellow group frontman Jake McMillian repeatedly asked Marty about sodomy.

“In Minnesota, there is something called the sodomy law. It governed all 50 states for quite some time. As a matter of fact, you can go to prison for the act of sodomy,” said McMillian. “Now we are debating a marriage amendment between homosexual couples, male with male which has never happened in the history of civilization, but yet we are overlooking a statute that is very valid called the sodomy law in Minnesota.”

Minnesota’s sodomy law was struck down as unconstitutional by the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2001, and by the United States Supreme Court in 2003. Repeated requests for comment by the Minnesota Independent to Dean and McMillian on this issue were not returned.

“I travel around to high schools all around the country and kids are often puzzled and confused by shifting standards,” said McMillian. “I see lawmakers and I’ll use you as an example… How can a man legislate that which is a solid foundation? As we travel across the nation, youth are given this perplexity. And now kids are asking ‘why do I have two dads, this makes no sense?’ Rosie O’Donnell is a great example.”

He continued, “It just makes no sense according to laws of nature or revealed law, the bible, or government law.”

Marty gave the group his take on same-sex marriage and equality under the law.

“In terms of changing the law, yeah, that’s what I do at the Capitol. If a same-sex couple wishes to make a life-long commitment, I want to honor that and I want to respect that,” he said. “The constitution that our servicepeople fought for, they didn’t fight to keep all of the laws the same. We have to change as times change in society.”

Marty continued, “If a couple loves each other let them decide. I can’t think of anything more intrusive than a government telling a church you must marry them or you can’t marry them.”

Part 1:

Part 2:

Pastor Brad Brandon

A prominent pastor and GOP activist says Republicans in the Minnesota Legislature are blocking a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in order to save face in the 2010 elections. Pastor Brad Brandon, who was a staffer for former Senator Rudy Boschwitz, sent out an appeal to his radio show listeners to pressure the Republican Caucus to move on banning gay marriage:

[L]ate yesterday, we learned that this initiative is being blocked. You would think that it is being blocked by Democrats or Liberals. But surprisingly enough it is being blocked by the Republicans. YES THE REPUBLICANS! The House Republican Caucus is saying that they want to stay away from the ’social issues’, because of the election year. Insiders tell us that they are also getting pressure from wealthy business donors to focus exclusively on taxes and spending and stay away from “social issues”. So they are backing away from their support of traditional marriage. Truly, “the fear of man bringeth a snare” and “the love of money is the root of all evil”. Looks like it’s politics as usual and it’s time for God’s people to step up.

In a follow-up to that message, Brandon said that Republican representatives were lying about blocking the bill:

I am hearing from a lot of you that you are being told, by the Representatives, that there is no Republican resistance about the MN Marriage Amendment. This simply is not true. Remember, it’s politics. They are going to tell you anything to make you happy. I just talked our insiders, this morning, and they told us this just simply is not the truth. There is a very strong resistance to the MN Marriage Amendment, coming from the Republican Caucus Leaders.

Brandon is pastor of Berean Bible Baptist Church in Hastings and host of the “Word of Truth Radio Program” on KDWA 1460 AM.

Minnesota Capitol. Photo: Wikipedia

Three bills that would assist same-sex couples in the event of one partner’s death were passed by the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. Legislators recalled stories of couples who underwent hardships because of inequality in the law, while Tom Prichard of the Minnesota Family Council called the bills “discriminatory” and said they are “unfair to married couples.”

Rep. Frank Hornstein, DFL-Minneapolis, offered a bill that would allow equal access in personal asset distributions. If a couple in a domestic partnership hasn’t drawn up a will, the measure states, assets in the event one partner dies would go to the surviving individual, just as it would with married spouses.

Hornstein said he was inspired to help rectifiy the inequalities of the law after learning of the difficulties faced by a pair in his district.

“There’s a couple in my district, Jim and Duane, and Duane had medical issues he was dealing with and was hospitalized. And his partner could not see him, he didn’t have visitation rights in in the same way that a heterosexual couple would,” he told the committee. “And it really got me thinking about the inequality many of our neighbors and constantly face on a day to day basis.”

Ann Kaner-Roth of Project 515, a group working to educate Minnesotans about the inequalities in Minnesota law, explained the bill, saying, “Essentially the protections would allow the assets of someone who dies without a will in place to be distributed to their domestic partner.”

The bill passed the committee by a voice vote, as did a bill to allow a surviving domestic partner to sue for wrongful death. Rep. Steve Simon, DFL-St. Louis Park, said the bill is modeled after Minnesota’s Fortune 500 companies.

“The domestic partner definition in this bill, and in all these bills, was taken from some of the most esteemed Minnesota based fortune 500 companies,” he said. “Already our most trusted corporate citizens are way ahead of us on this. I know there are strong opinions on this, but I trust you will vote your conscience.”

A third bill, sponsored by Rep. Paul Thissen, DFL-St. Paul, and passed on Wednesday, addressed Hornstein’s concerns. It would allow domestic partners to share health data in certain situations with the same access that spouses and family members have. It would have allowed Duane’s doctors to alert Jim about Duane’s condition when he was hospitalized.

The main voice of oppposition to the bills was Tom Prichard of the Minnesota Family Council.

“Basically, what they are attempting to do is redefine marriage,” he said. “This is discriminatory… It’s also unfair to married couples because married couples have a legal status and legal obligations where as these individuals are getting the benefits without the responsibilities and fundamentally this is an effort to redefine marriage.”

Despite Prichard’s testimony, all three bills were passed and placed on the General Register. The House could vote on them as soon as next week.

At the press conference, MFC president Tom Prichard warned of “real dangers to our culture” and said that a bill by Sen. John Marty that would make same-sex marriage legal could become law next year, and to prevent that from happening, Minnesota needs a constitutional amendment.

“What it will do is have a dramatic impact the institution of marriage, right of conscience and freedoms and every aspect of society will be impacted,” said Prichard of same-sex marriage.

Rep. Dan Severson, R-Sauk Rapids, said, “This goes to the structure of power of the people of Minnesota. Allowing them to vote on this important issue is fundamental to our society.”

Marty replied in a press release Monday night saying he has every intention of pushing the bill to legalize same-sex marriage into law next year.

“I stand by my commitment to equality,” he said. “I am confident that we can give Minnesota LGBT families the same rights that other families have — the right to have each other and their children qualify for the health care benefits they get at work; the right to visit each other in the hospital; the right to inherit each other’s property, and hundreds of other rights that other families take for granted.”

Marty said that in 2003 conservatives began the push to ban same-sex marriage in the Minnesota Constitution, often playing to Minnesotans’ prejudices. “Same-sex marriage was a concept most Minnesotans were not familiar with,” he said. “Even so, their efforts failed. Now, after years of public discussion and as more people are getting to know wonderful gay and lesbian families, minds have changed.”

Here’s the full press release by Marty’s campaign for governor:

John Marty Response to Minnesota Family Council’s Call for Constitutional Amendment on Same-Sex Marriage

Yesterday morning, the Minnesota Family Council and several Republican lawmakers attacked Senator John Marty’s comment that a marriage equality law could be signed in Minnesota as early as next year. They urged passage of a constitutional amendment to block such action. Here is Senator Marty’s response to their challenge:

“Seven years ago, Minnesota had a very vocal debate about same-sex marriage. Proponents of a constitutional ban fought hard for its passage. In 2003, the opposition to same-sex marriage was strong, but much of that opposition was based on fear and misunderstanding. Same-sex marriage was a concept most Minnesotans were not familiar with. Even so, their efforts failed.

Now, after years of public discussion and as more people are getting to know wonderful gay and lesbian families, minds have changed. People who opposed marriage equality have been rethinking the issue and the change is happening faster than some politicians realize. Acceptance is growing month by month, not decade by decade.

The proposal for the constitutional amendment is dead. Over numerous conversations in communities throughout the state, Minnesota values have come to the forefront, and Minnesotans are rejecting discrimination against same-sex families.

I stand by my commitment to equality. I am confident that we can give Minnesota LGBT families the same rights that other families have — the right to have each other and their children qualify for the health care benefits they get at work; the right to visit each other in the hospital; the right to inherit each other’s property, and hundreds of other rights that other families take for granted.

The promise of marriage equality for all Minnesota families is within reach. We can pass marriage equality legislation and sign it into law next year.”

Senator John Marty is author of SF 120, the Marriage Equality legislation. He is a DFL candidate for Governor and has committed to signing this legislation in 2011.

(Lavverrue, Flickr)

Gay marriage will get another hearing in the Minnesota Legislature on Tuesday when the Senate Judiciary Committee will hear three bills that deal with the issue. Like their counterparts in the House, the bills will be introduced and testimony heard, but no vote will be taken.

A bill authored by Sen. Patricia Torres Ray, DFL-Minneapolis, would allow same-sex marriages performed in other states — such as Iowa — to be recognized in Minnesota. The Marriage and Family Protection Act, authored by Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, would make marriage in Minnesota gender neutral. And legislation by Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, would also created gender-neutral marriage laws.

The hearing will be on Tuesday at 6:30 pm in room 15 of the Capitol building.

Barb Davis White

For the first time in Minnesota history, a legislative committee contemplated the legalization of same-sex marriage in the state on Monday. And while gay and lesbian families shared moving testimony about the hardships their families face because they cannot marry, a duo of congressional candidates stole the show with controversial commentary on gays and lesbians.

Barb Davis White, a Tea Party activist and Republican candidate for Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, prompted shocked gasps from the packed hearing room when she said, “Rosa Parks did not move to the front of the bus to support sodomy.” Her testimony involved accusations that the movement for marriage equality is hijacking the civil rights movement.

“There is no difference between a black person and a white person other than their skin color when there’s a tremendous difference between a man and a woman,” said White, who was the GOP’s endorsed candidate against Rep. Keith Ellison in 2008. “Allowing a black woman and a white man to marry does not change the definition of marriage. However, allowing two men or two women to marry would fundamentally change that definition.”

GOP candidate Teresa Collett at Monday's hearing

White also garnered some laughs from the audience when she said, “Studies also show that the average homosexual has hundreds of sexual partners in his lifetime… and I repeat hundreds.”

“I’m here today to tell you that homosexuality and lesbian behavior is unhealthy,” claiming that gays and lesbians have higher rates of STDs than anyone else in the world, including “gay bowel disease,” an ailment that does not exist and is often used by religious right figures to paint gay men as diseased.

Another congressional candidate, St. Thomas University law professor Teresa Stanton Collett, who is running as a Republican for the 4th Congressional District, warned that Minnesota’s Christians are under attack.

“Make no mistake: Marriage, as a civil institution, as a legal institution, is grounded not merely in religion but also in the biological reality that sex makes children and children need a mom and a dad,” she said. “And should we choose to redefine that legally we will put the religious and moral beliefs of all Minnesotans at issue.”

“Churches and religiously affiliated institutions will lose their tax-exempt status,” she said. She claimed that Christian colleges would be forced to house same-sex couples in dorms, social work students would be kicked out of school if they refused to counsel gays and lesbians, politicians would revoke funds from religious organizations, and parents would be arrested for speaking out against homosexuality.

The hourlong testimony from both sides contemplated three bills: one to create civil unions, one to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages and one to allow full legal marriage for same-sex couples. The hearing was for informational purposes only, and no vote was taken.

Photo: Lavverue, Flickr

LGBT advocates are calling an upcoming Minnesota House committee hearing on same-sex marriage “historic.” The hearing, to be held Monday afternoon, will be the first time same-sex marriage will be discussed in a committee hearing without the specter of a constitutional ban on gay marriage — a measure Republicans have tried for years to pass.

The only hitch: It’s only for informational purposes, and no vote will be taken.

OutFront Minnesota, the state’s largest LGBT advocacy group, says that’s okay. It’s still progress.

“Although no votes will be taken Monday, the hearing will be historic because it is the first time a committee in our state Legislature will be looking at what enacting marriage equality means for Minnesota,” the group wrote in an email on Thursday.

Three measures will be discussed: a bill to make marriage gender neutral (the Marriage and Family Protection Act), a bill to establish civil unions, and a bill to allow for the recognition of same-sex marriage performed outside Minnesota.

Doug Benson, the citizen author of the Marriage and Family Protection Act, said the hearing seems to be more an effort to stifle gay marriage supporters during an election year.

“It’s basically a show hearing,” he said.

But OutFront believes it’s a good opportunity to let legislators know how important the issue is.

“Supporters of marriage equality will speak about what it would be like if our state no longer explicitly barred same-sex couples from legal protections. Legislators will hear from experts and their constituents that discrimination against people because of who they love or who they are is wrong.”

A gay couple is married in Iowa. Photo: Bobster855, Flickr

It’s unlikely same-sex marriage will become law in Minnesota this year — Gov. Tim Pawlenty will undoubtedly veto it and skittish DFLers may vote against it in an election year — but the bill’s chief author in the Senate says it could get a hearing and possibly make it out of committee.

For three years, Sen. John Marty has been the chief sponsor of the Marriage and Family Protection Act, a bill that would equalize marriage laws to include same-sex couples. The bill was drafted by Doug Benson, a citizen who wants to marry his partner of more than twenty years. On his own time and his own dime, Benson has lobbied to get the support of 28 legislators.

What the bill needs most is a hearing and a committee vote. The bill’s chief sponsor in the House, Rep. Phyllis Kahn, told the Minnesota Independent a hearing is possible, but getting it out of committee isn’t likely.

But on the Senate side, the chances are better.

“I agree that it is unlikely that the bill is going to pass this year, but think we would have the votes to pass it out of committee in the Senate if we get a hearing,” Marty told the Minnesota Independent.

“I’d like to have a hearing and a vote — assuming we have the votes–  to begin moving the bill through the process,” he said. “Attitudes are rapidly changing, and by having a thoughtful discussion in committee, I think we can assist in that effort.”

Benson is much more optimistic about the bill’s chances.

“No one will actually know how the bill will do until a vote is taken… I think our attitude should always be, ‘This bill CAN pass,’ because that’s the truth.”

He added that Republicans continue to push for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, even though such a measure has no chance of passing a DFL-dominated Legislature.  On the other side of the issue, “that’s the kind of dedication we need” in the marriage equality movement, he said.

“We can sustain a negative vote and come back, but we cannot sustain a failure to act,” he said. “We are drowning in inertia at the Capitol over this and the thousands of gay and lesbian families across the state, including my own, are suffering because of it.”

To Sen. Marty Benson added, “I know you agree that we can’t afford to waste another session waiting for someone else to make the first move. The pendulum is swinging and time is slipping away from us.”

As the legislative session starts and the campaign season kick into high gear, every DFL candidate for governor has come out in support of marriage equality. Whether that support will translate into votes in committees and pressure from leadership to move the bill forward remains to be seen.

Photo: Lavverue, Flickr

The Marriage and Family Protection Act is still alive in the Minnesota Legislature, but Rep. Phyllis Kahn, DFL-Minneapolis, the bill’s chief author in the House, says it’s unlikely it’ll make it far this session. But with same-sex marriage legal in Iowa and domestic partnerships protected in Wisconsin, pressure is building in the DFL controlled Legislature to deliver some relationship rights for the key LGBT constituency.

Having been submitted last session — the first part of a biennium — the same bill will be continued during this session, Kahn said.

A committee hearing is seen by some, including Sen. John Marty, the state Senate’s sponsor, as a way begin thoughtful debate on the issue.

“We are looking at having a hearing,” Kahn said, but she says whether that happens rests with LGBT-rights groups. “That will depend on what the advocates want.”

Doug Benson of Marriage Equality Minnesota, the group behind the bill, says he’s lobbying to get the bill passed in the Legislature. OutFront Minnesota, the state’s largest LGBT advocacy group, says it will take 3 to 5 years to get such a bill passed. With Gov. Tim Pawlenty openly hostile to any expansion in relationship rights for same-sex couples, the groups are hopeful that a new governor in 2011 would be more receptive to the idea.

Would the bill pass the House or the Senate this session?

It’s unlikely in both cases. And Kahn said even passing it out of a committee would be difficult, if not impossible.

“We do not believe we have the votes to pass it out of committee, and we’re not sure what value a negative vote would have,” she told the Minnesota Independent.

Bachmann and Kline signed their names to a brief (pdf) submitted to the D.C. Superior Court by televangelist Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice.

“Under the United States Constitution, they serve as members of the ultimate legislative authority for the District of Columbia and the very body which delegated to the District its limited legislative power under home rule,” the filing states. “As members of the District’s ultimate legislative body, amici are concerned about the extent of the District’s delegated legislative authority, the preservation of Congress’s constitutional authority, and the interpretation of home rule.”

The court has 30 days to rule on the issue before the law takes effect.