Patch Readers Respond to Passage of Gay Marriage Bill

Whatever side of the debate you fall on, there’s no denying that this week’s passage of a bill legalizing same-sex marriage was a historical moment. Minnesota became just the 12th state to sanction gay marriage when Gov. Mark Dayton signed the bill Tuesday.

Patch readers quickly wrote in to share their thoughts on the moment.

Eagan Patch reader Kathi Malone echoed the view of legislators who voted yes in seeing same-sex marriage as a civil right:

I am so happy that finally gay people will be able to have the civil right to marry. This is truly an American vote for freedom.
I applaud Sen Clausen and all other legislators who voted for this historical bill.

James N added:

Thank you Senator Carlson and the entire MN legislature for extending marriage rights to everyone living in MN. Now 1000s of same gender couples and families with children will be valued and have equal legal protection under the law. That is what family values is all about.

Roseville Patch reader Dale Howey quipped:

I am thankful that the senate had more sense on this than on gun regulation.

But Eagan Patch reader TurningPoint thought same-sex marriage was an example of “regressive” policy:

This bill which legalizes gays to marry is another symptom of a declining culture and not to be mistaken as progressive. Like most things in the liberal DFL party it is really regressive. As the "far left" has hijacked the Democratic party, the few gay activist have tried to mainstream deviant behavior and I guess they have succeeded. Part of the gay effort has been to redefine "tolerance" which used to mean ignoring particular behavior and not demonstrating bigotry or prejudice. Now the definition seems to be embrace and help promote the behavior other wise you are labeled a bigot or prejudicial. This bill is divisive and it accentuates the split between peoples in the U.S. and now MN. The whole DFL party is about division of peoples and control and this is just another example. The party has done a masterful job with "political correctness" and "social engineering" to weaken this country.

Apple Valley Rosemount Patch reader Mark Opseth said legislation can’t change the true definition of marriage:

So call them civil unions, not marriages. Marriage has already been defined (by God) and it has been defined this way for centuries.

Gays don't just want tolerance, they want all-out acceptance. So the next phase is to silence churches and Christians, calling it hate speech if anyone speaks out against homosexuality, which is already taking place in Canada and Europe. Until then, people will resort to name-calling and mischaracterizations (like Sen. Hall living in fear).

Southwest Minneapolis Patch reader Southwest Dad thought it wouldn’t take long for acceptance of same-sex marriage to be the norm:

As one of the tweets in the article says, what is going to happen now is - nothing. In much less than a year, marriage for all will be the default position of our society. Everyone will simply move on, live our lives, practice (or not) religion as we always have. Things will be the same...except for that group in our state who has finally achieved equality, and who deserve to be ecstatic today. Congrats and thanks to Senator Dibble and all of the elected officials and others who made this happen.

Minnetonka Patch reader Jonathan Dough predicted that the measure would drive up the cost of social services:

Ya know. This is still The United States of America. We are allowed to have differing opinions. While I don't agree with this legislation, I am willing to accept it as state law and move on. I am sure Senator Hann would agree. How will it affect me in a negative way? I will now be paying more. Same sex couples and their "children" are going to be loading up on social services and welfare at my expense. I estimate this change in state law will cost me an additional $750 per year.

But another Minnetonka Patch reader, Krista Krahn, was quick to respond:

Actually, that's the opposite. Couples living together but NOT married can have one person on welfare while the other works. Not so with married couples. If you want to know numbers, use facts. Also, as it's been shown again and again, LGBT individuals usually have their finances in order moreso than the average American. So you should be glad they live in your area to pay for roads and schools. http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/06/pf/gay-money/index.html

Many critics of the bill worried that business owners with religious objections would be forced serve gay couples. St. Michael Patch reader 1anthropos was one of those:

And yet there are existing law suits in several states against business owners who don't believe that same-sex marriage is morally right and refuse to provide their services to same-sex couples. Senator Kiffmeyer is absolutely correct and it will only be a matter of time before our 1st amendment rights are ignored if we oppose same-sex marriage. However, the double standard prevails as those who believe same-sex marriage is their right will have no problem shoving their opinions down the throats of anyone who doesn't agree with them. It is a sad day in Minnesota.

But after Sen. Warren Limmer worried about similar issues, Maple Grove Patch reader Derrick Berg had this to say:

Wow. I am speechless. Sad.

What do you think about the new law? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.