Thoughts on same-sex marriage and the Constitution

Dear Editor:

Next year, voters in Minnesota will be able to vote on an amendment to Minnesota’s Constitution which would legally define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. This would violate at least two parts of the U.S. Constitution.

Article IV of the U.S. Constitution states: “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.” This is a problem because currently there are six states in the United States that grant marriage licences to same-sex couples. Minnesota’s current Defense of Marriage Act violates Article IV of the Constitution but putting it into our constitution would make it more difficult to become compliant with Article IV of the U.S. Constitution.

It would also violate the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states, “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Limiting marriages to heterosexual relationships denies homosexuals the equal protection of 515 legal rights that heterosexual couples in Minnesota can enjoy by getting married.

The people of Isanti County should stand up for the equal protection of homosexuals and at the same time defend the U.S. Constitution by keeping a definition of “marriage” out of Minnesota’s Constitution.

Adam Beard
Isanti

up arrow