Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Minnesota voters to decide on gay marriage ban

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Jock S. Trap 23 May 2011, 10:58am

    Disgusting.
    Here’s hoping they vote against this ban and smack these bigotted religious Nutjobs right in the…

    1. So this is the strategy?
      Calling people “religious nutjobs?” Is this how you are going win people over?
      The bigoted name-calling needs to stop.

      1. He will not, because he is an ateistic idiot.

        1. Atheism doesn’t make people bigoted, it is ignorance. In fact many atheist are open to many things just as long as you can prove them. I have many atheist friends, and they are not like the Jockstrap, they tolerate christians. It is just a few that are militant, just like in the gay community.

          1. @Pepa

            Some of what you say there I agree with – I am stunned …

            Atheism does not make people bigoted.

            Ignorance can make people bigoted.

            Where there is proof or reasonableness most atheists will happily accept things.

            Some atheists tolerate some Christians.

            Some Christians are militant (we see a few on here from time to time who are insensitive and bigoted)

            Some atheists are also militant.

            Some gay people are also militant

            Some people who are militant eg fundamentalist Christians see moderate gay comments as militant – thats wrong!

          2. Jock S. Trap 27 May 2011, 3:30pm

            Pepa – your boring me again!

        2. Another new word atheistic …

  2. @Jock S. Trap

    “Here’s hoping they vote against this ban”

    When places like California, which admittedly outside LA County and the San Francisco Bay Area, is quite conservative, votes to ban gay marriage, I don’t have much hope for Minnesota.

    1. I hope things are changing if current US wide opinion polls are representative

      1. Polls do not always equal election results regarding gay marriage.
        Take a look at prop 8 and how the gay establishment in California told us not to worry.

        1. No they dont you are correct

          But one poll failure doesnt mean others will be

          1. Just means that I don’t trust them nor give them that much cred… polls tend to lie all the time. There are polls that say that over 85% of Americans are christian when in fact many christian churches’ own numbers refute that claim (its more like 60%). Americans LIE all the time on polls.

          2. Well there is plenty of media reporting suggesting that the religious right believe they have lost the argument in people aged under 30 that same sex marriage should not happen – thankfully!

            It seems there is progress and its moving … whether people want it or not – there is a movement towards equality …

  3. Any amendment to the constitution of the state to focus on relationships would possibly be against the federal constitution?

    1. Not necessarily.
      The state is not “banning” gay marriage. In fact it is refusing the courts and banking/corporate law to recognize gay marriage. Gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, just not recognized by the courts.

      1. No it is trying to make gay marriage unconstitutional – that means banning

        1. Even though the US is my neighbor to the south I have never understood the politics between congress and the individual states. Land of Liberty and Free seems to be so conditional depending on which state you live in.
          My perception of the Constitution was that it applied to all Americans… all these recent state propositions and proposals to have individual State Constitutions undermining Federal constitutions or set precedence especially when it comes to discriminating in human rights between it’s citizens and sexual orientation is sad, frankly never as presently so alarming. Spiritual leaders or religious beliefs should not be influencing legislation or Constitution changes no more than Legislators would ever influence scriptures. The argument against the ban is eloquently made by this senator.

          1. @ Steve
            My take is that the US is supposed to be a Republic. But in reality it is not. It has been so centralized (ie DOMA) by the federal government. It has become a corporate state where corporate and federal power go hand in hand. In deed that US government is nothing but a corporation which views its citizens as its employees (“Human Resource) for the corporate establishment. If you look how all the major corporations and big banks finance all the major politicians you will see who really controls this country and looting it of its wealth.

        2. Stu, your comprehension of the U.S. Constitution is so infantilistic…. Before you write anything in this regard, please, study it and think cartefully about it. The idiotic concept of “gay” marriage never existed in minds of American people who established the federal and states constitutions.

          Homosexual perverts just joing so crazy with their politcal activities that they lost the sence of history and any respect for the traditionally thinking and living superior majority of Mankind.

          1. And I doubt interracial marriage figured in their minds much either, Rich. But, look, they moved on – wow. Many Americans don’t agree with your backward, divisive ideas thankfully.

          2. David Myers 25 May 2011, 12:27pm

            People people, don’t you remember that your not supposed to feed the troll? Rich is either just trying to get people’s goat for the fun of it or he is simply an anti-gay bigot. Either way please – just ignore him. He is totally consistant – ask any regular poster here they’ll tell you.

          3. @Rich

            No I have studied American politics and law.

            Your view of humanity is bigoted and damaging.

            Gay marriage may not have existed in the minds of those creating the federal nation or constitution. Nor did television, the internet, computers, air travel, space travel, antibiotics, nuclear weaponry etc – yet there are constitutional views on all these things.

            Homosexual perverts? If thats how you want to view it – I don’t really care what evil bigots think of me – I know the truth and you have lost this argument Rich

          4. Jock S. Trap 27 May 2011, 3:33pm

            Where did you get your – cough – education Rich?

      2. Pepa, why are you misleading homosexuals and wrote that “Gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, just not recognized by the courts”?

        There no such recognition in ALL 50 of the U.S. states. That’s the fact. Stop substitute your fantasy for fact.

        1. You are wrong.
          Gay marriage is NOT a CRIME in any state (Lawrence v Texas). Therefore it is legal to engage in a marriage.
          No state in the country will jail or punish a gay person for getting married.
          These amendments only apply to the courts and the banks. You need to do your homework and now how the law in the US works.

    2. Stu…. before asking an idiotic quesiton, why don’t you take in hands the text of the U.S. Constitution and read it? Your ignorance is so infantilistic!

      1. ‘infantilistic’? Is that your new word? Make a change from ‘idiots’. Nice to see you’re working through the dictionary so thoroughly, and even contributing your own words too. Now what dos the US Constitution and Us Law say about your racist remarks and those advocating genocide, I wonder?

      2. Rich

        Just because my opinion differs from yours does not mean you have to invent words to berate me with

  4. James madison wrote that the rights of the minority cannot be voted on by the majority. Its a shame americans are so ignorant about their founding fathers.

    1. Agree. I hate it when some of us Americans ignore Jefferson’s most famous quote:
      “The man who would choose security over freedom deserves neither.”

      1. And as an ardent supporter of equality I choose freedom almost every day over security …

        1. Stu, you are a liar, because you violated right to freedom of Britts when you was working as a policemen for most degenertive government in the world – the British.

          1. Rich

            Great command of the English language “when you was …” to go with your “infantilistic” …

            You clearly don’t understand the British justice system, Rich – I suggest you go and study it and then criticise me for having been employed as a police officer. The British police system is unique is policing by consent – therefore not agents of the government, nor agents of the crown (although crown protection is an element) but agents of the law and protecting the population by consent. Go and read – then accuse me of working for the government! Secondly degenerative (hmmmm …. Guantanamo springs to mind)

        2. Well Stu, in that case I hope you know what that quote really means.
          Most of the people that support “equality” tend to do so at the expense of freedom. When in fact freedom is knowing that everybody is already equal. I guess you might say, that gay activists are going about it all backwards. They use government and tyranny to get equality to have a false sense of security. These people deserve no freedom nor equality.

          1. @Pepa

            If you are not clear in what i am saying, please ask …

            Do not presume or misrepresent me – although that is your normal modus operandi

            Every human regardless of gender, race, religion, sexuality, age, ability etc deserves freedom, equality and security – I suspect you disagree – (although I hope I am wrong) – if I am right that you disagree, this merely underlines the bigotry at the heart of your being

      2. He was wrong. Security is first, the freedom can be limited. Its possible live without freedom but impossible to live without security. Jefferson was an idealist, while I am a realist. Besides who was he to make judgement about person’s choice? He has no right in such nasty judgement!

        1. If you want live in submission that is your choice. I choose to be free and not be submissive.

  5. Yes, Scott. Its called a blatannt violation of the 14th amendment of the U.S. Consituttion protecting the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority which is exactly what this ban would to. What a disgusting thing to do and what a disgusting system of state government allowing mob rule to dictate which rights a minority can and cannot receive. Its not democracy at all, but fascism borne out of religion based bigotry. We should thank our lucky stars we don’t have that awful system in the UK, not that ours is perfect, no country has that, but at least ours is a lot better for gay people, certainly better than America has to offer. It should be ashamed of itself espousing freedom around the world and it can’t even give full freedom to a minority of its gay citizens. Absolutely appalling. At least we in the UK have a government that is going to try to make marriage equality a reality, and a conservative one at that. It doesn’t say much about the Democrats in America.

    1. In the US we have a corporate Monarchy while the Brits have an inbred degenerate family as their Monarch.
      For those that find what I just said offensive 1) Read the writings of the late Princess Diana, and 2) Regardless how much gay marriage advocates tried, the royal family blew them off.

      1. @Pepa

        As always find some vile way to stick a knife in when you recognise the truth of the bigotry reaped by your peers

        1. It is not bigotry. I am stating my repulsion of so called “royalty” and Stu, in the previous comment you stated that you were freedom… but yet find it offensive when I call out the Hitler loving royal family… again read Diana’s writings before her death, she had a lot to say about how these degenerates show no love for humanity at all.

          1. @Pepa

            Again you read into things I say and make presumptions – please do not – you seem to think you know so much about me, you dont – you know nothing about me (other than bare facts that I have shared) and you still choose to misrepresent them.

            Pepa, your tea party crack pot views are irrelevant here in the UK and pretty much out moded and out dated in the US

        2. @Pepa

          With the greatest of respect, what does the British Royal family and whether or not they are loving have to do at all with Minnesota banning gay marriage???????

  6. My apologies, a couple of typograhical errors in my last post, I meant to have written “blatant” and “Constitution” in the first two sentences.

  7. A shepherd dog could be brown but sheep are still white. If only God would bless them with wisdom.

  8. Have to say I find John Kriesel’s words very touching. Clearly he is one of the few Republicans true patriots, if the others where they would understand how wrong it is for the majority of Americans to decide on the rights that other Americans citzens should recieve.

    1. Well, the thing is do the majority of gay people want marriage? I’m not fully convinced that the majority of gay people want a sexual exclusive relationship in a monogamous setting. Though I am in a monogamous relationship myself, I do find it saddening that most gays do not reek the benefits of marriage/monogamy. The banking law (which is where Marriage Laws reside in this country) is one thing but it is our attitude that really counts. If you really want the state (or the courts and banks) to recognize our marriages “officially” then some drastic changes need to happen to the gay community itself.

      1. @Pepa

        The thing is they dont have the option ….

      2. “Well, the thing is do the majority of gay people want marriage?”

        Certainly the majority of homosexual perverts doesn’t.

        1. No they don’t obviously.
          But it does not mean that all homosexuals are perverts. There are many that want to sexualize the community (ie Will, the Jockstrap etc). I understand why you might say what you say, but again you have to look at the issue closely. It is the gay establishment that is perverse, not all individual gay people. We have to make those distinctions. I am opposed to talking to children about gay sex (or any type of sex), I’m opposed to promiscuity, to the distribution of condoms (as these schemes have actually increased infection rates), having sex with minors, and using sex as a trading tool. So YOU are looking at a homosexual that is NOT perverted, there a lot of gay people that are indeed normal, they just don’t frequent or comment on this site a lot (maybe thats about to change).

          1. giving out condoms increased infection rates want to give me some statistics about that. the last person who tried to get away with that line was the pope and I think we all knew about his agenda as for promiscuity I am in a monogomous relationship pretty much all my gay friends are yes occasionally there are people not in relationships who will have one nighters, however so do alot of straight people and whats sleeping with minor’s got to do with it. I don’t and I don’t know anyone who does not only that but I don’t know anyone who would condone such a thing.

          2. pepa: “they just don’t frequent or comment on this site a lot ”
            How do you know? You have no idea about the feelings of the commenters on PN. You’ve already decided for us what we think – ie we’re all promiscuous, etc etc etc
            Why do you think you are the only person who values monogamy, love not sex for sex’s sake, and abhors paedophilia? Why do you make up crap about other posters with no evidence whatsoever? YOU are the one who seems fixated on sexualising children. No-one had mentioned sex until you brought it up on the other thread. No-one had mentioned paedophilia until you brought it up with your outrageous accusation and your rants about the TSA.
            You’re not the only moral/worthwhile/informed gay person in the world, you know. Bu, hey,t don’t let that fact stop you from your bizarre habit of ignoring anything that doesn’t fit in with your preconceived ideas and your own version of reality.

          3. “You’re not the only moral/worthwhile/informed gay person in the world, you know”
            Thanks for the compliment. LOL.
            I do my homework. And of course in your dither you accuse me of ranting on about the TSA, well Iris, this is why I don’t find your (or Stu’s or The Jockstrap’s) claim of “protecting” children children seriously. The TSA in America is GROPING and placing mental anguish on children, some of them have been arrested for possessing child porn, and molesting children at the airports. Then you say that you do not care. Because your main objective is NOT children, it is to attack people whom you disagree with.

          4. Jock S. Trap 27 May 2011, 3:36pm

            God pepa you don’t alf talk out of your ass, man!

          5. Wow, pepa – “LOL”? Yes, actually it was a compliment. Unlike you, I take in what people say and I trust them to be telling the truth unless I have reason to disbelieve them. So my comment about you WASN’T a dig, as you wrongly, thought, it was merely an acknowledgement of what you’ve written here previously.
            You mentioned the TSA when it wasn’t relevant. You’ve already been told that clearly no-one here is anything but disgusted at ALL child abuse, but the fact we didn’t all stop our discussion to agree with you about something that’s very obvious to all decent people (ie abusing children is disgusting beyond words) you take it upon yourself to say that we agree with abuse.
            But do you know what’s almost as vile as child abuse? Wrongly accusing someone of it with no evidence or justification whatsoever. Yes, like you did to Stu.

        2. @Rich

          So how did you come to this conclusion? What survey of homosexual perverts did you carry out and what criteria and definition did you use to determine that those that you surveryed were “homosexual perverts”?

      3. @Pepa

        Even if you are right (which I doubt) but what about the minority of gay people (in your view) who want marriage – should we exclude them purely because some people (such as you) perceive that gay people do not engage in monogamy – stereotyping if I ever heard it

  9. johnny33308 23 May 2011, 4:50pm

    Ah, yet another display of what religion can do for your country! It is also a rather disgusting display of the ignorance, bigotry and intolerance so many of my countrymen wear with pride-they are so very proud of their limited intelligence and their bigotry and hatred. Yes, America is such a lovely ‘free’ country just filled to overflowing with lovely KKkristians!

  10. All sympathetic US citizens reading this:- support any and all political candidates, state or federal, of any party, congressional, senatorial or presidencial, who pledge to support a Federal bill outlawing ALL referenda on minority rights or citizenship and issues of equality under the law.

    1. Worshiping, supporting and butt-kissing to the political ruling class has been done already for many, many years. And here are the results of that.

  11. johnny33308 23 May 2011, 5:43pm

    In America “might makes right” and so the majority abuse and even destroy the minorities here and feel it is their “right” to do so. So much for ‘freedom’ and equality for ALL citizens. The US is now a Fascist state, sliding inexorably into a theocracy-it is no place for any civilized person to live…..

    1. Theocracy is used as an illusion to make the religious right think that they have power, but they don’t. They swindle christians to think that fighting gay marriage is an actual good or worth wild idea. It is actually one of the biggest scams in politics. It is a fact that you cannot ban gay marriage unless you want to make it a crime. So this crusade is so flawed, misguided and full of holes. Christians are mandated by the Bible to fight oppression and tyranny not to give it a helping hand. So many of these “mega-church” pastors give in to the powerful elite and tell their flock how to vote, usually in way that empowers the elite and at the same time give them this allusion of power by voting “against” gay marriage. Voting against an idea is just a useless thing, and it is mindless to even waste resources or money on this call it “just.” That is just foolish. Again, people need to start to doing their homework.

  12. People in the US state of Minnesota will place a constitutional ban on “gay” marriage! No doubt about it!

    1. It is not a “ban.” Read the amendment again. In fact read all the amendments, none of them have such language. Typical Language: “Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be recognized by this state.” Meaning that the courts, the banks (in which marriage law resides), and the government departments are not allowed to recognize them. I am allowed, other citizens are allowed as well. Please do your research. In fact these amendments are only limited to government owned property, which comprise less than 20% of the land in this country.

    2. David Myers 25 May 2011, 12:33pm

      You’re full of it “Rich”. Do you live there? I do and you are going to have to eat your words if you have any honor, which I’m sure you don’t since your a Troll! FOTroll.

  13. Britts are disgusting with their support for degenerative monarchy.

    1. Actually the popularity of the Monarch has lowered dramatically in the UK. So no. I don’t think that all Brits are disgusting, just their inbred royal family and those who support them (financially or morally).

      1. @Pepa

        Historically the popularity of the monarchy had decreased until this year. However, with the advent of a new generation of Royals such as the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge there is a growing support for the monarchy in the UK – evidenced both in polls and the national and international reaction to the recent Royal wedding and events with the Duke and Duchess since.

        I say this to correct your outdated view. By instinct I am repulblican, not a monarchist – however, I do think the Queen has led (with some mistakes) as head of state effectively and with grace in a manner few politicians ever could. I can’t find an alternative that I would work better for the UK involving politicians.

      2. Jock S. Trap 27 May 2011, 3:42pm

        Actually pepa another case of misinformation.
        Only a month ago polls showed that the monarchy in the UK had 80% approval rating.

        1. Facts, jock? What place do facts have in pepa’s world, eh? ;)

    2. But not as disgusting as you with your obscene comments about women, your disgusting comments about all gay men (you love the men, don’t you?) and your persistant trolling of this site using what you admit is someone else’s IP to post your vile comments. We pity you, Rich. Get help to come out and be reconciled to your true feelings.

    3. Jock S. Trap 27 May 2011, 3:41pm

      LOL – Rich gets more hilarious with each comment.

  14. Sounds like a good idea, perhaps they can extend the ban to all of the world?

    1. The UN has tried that many times.

  15. And what about your equally disgusting republican party funded and controlled by the corporate elite and their kings, the Koch Brothers, Pepa, the people who buy your elections with unlimited amounts of money and fund antigay hate groups such as NOM, Focus on the Family, NARTH and a host of others to villify, denigrate, dehumanise and discriminate against LGBT people from full equality. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones, least of all you. Ten countries, more civilised and progressive put your’s to shame when it comes to equality and most of them have those inbred monarchies which disgust you so much. We’re not perfect in the UK, but we treat our gay people a lot better than your’s, in fact, we’re light years ahead and always will be since we enjoy far more rights than American gays do and we’re going even further. What is your country doing exactly? You still have not passed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).

    1. We’re not perfect in the UK, but we treat our gay people a lot better than your’s,
      Oh please cut the crap… I was mildly amused by your post until this point… All the links that I can provide from PN articles about gay BRITS being discriminated against would not fit on this post, from posting anti-gay stickers, rise in anti-gay attacks in London and all over England, the CoE saying screw the gays, pubs supposedly kicking out gays, B&B’s not allowing gays in, and need I remind you that NO WHERE in the UK can you have your marriage recognized, at least in the US there are many states that do. this is why you gay activists are such a piece of work, you complain about discrimination, no gay marriage etc then later pretend otherwise all to feel pompous in trying to discredit me. How desperate and foolish.

    2. And what about your equally disgusting republican party” You obviously buy into the right vs left scam. LOL. Okay. I don’t. So any wisecrack attempts to label me as a republican just ain’t going to cut it.

      1. David Myers 25 May 2011, 12:37pm

        I don’t need to call or even think of you as a Republican. Asbhole is good enough to describe both you and Rich. Why are you even on this site? Really? Trolls . . . can’t live with em’ but they won’t stay the phk away! “It’s their nature!”

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all