Monday, November 5

The Vow

About 4 years ago I made a vow to myself.  A vow that I would not allow myself to be dragged into political conversations or discussions because I had learned that, despite years of training at a college level, I am not as persuasive as I thought I was.  For every fact or figure I could tout as proof that my candidate or view was the correct choice, the opposition had a fact or figure to back up their posture.

In the end, I was also no longer willing to damage relationships because of politics.. I really don't think all that highly of most politicians anyway.

The vow is one of the reasons I've become strangely silent here.. filling holes by snapping snippets of my life via instagram.  (It is not the only reason I've been silent... but that is for another day)

I broke the vow for 1 issue though, and it is this so called "protection of marriage" constitutional amendment... I thought I was done talking about it until I got a call from the other side this weekend.

Volunteer:  I'm calling on behalf of the Defense of Marriage Amendment and am asking you to protect children by voting yes on Tuesday.

Cursingmama:  Excuse me, who are you calling for?

Volunteer:  I'm calling on behalf of the Defense of Marriage Amendment and am asking you to protect children by voting yes on Tuesday.


CursingMama:  You mean the highly offensive and bigoted amendment?

*Click*

I know that nothing I say will change the minds of those who are 100% certain they want this constitutional amendment; minds that are made up are closed for business, I get that.

If you are on the fence at all, I urge you to vote no.  And, not just for the reasons that Chris Kluwe points out in his well written (almost final) post about voting No  (kerfluffle available @ChrisWarcraft on Twitter) and Final Final blog post for the Pioneer Press.

But also because if you have a sliver of a doubt about this, if you think that there might be a reason not to amend our constitution - then those who are arguing for it, haven't done their job. 

They haven't convinced you that this is 100% the very right thing for Minnesota and if you aren't 100% sure about it, then you shouldn't vote to amend the state constitution because undoing it once it is done... that is an all uphill battle.

I'm voting No and I hope you will too.

3 comments:

Chris said...

Absolutely voting NO.

Stella said...

Same-gender marriage is ALREADY against the law in MN. Raising the marriage thing is simply a distraction to get the evengelicals and conservatives out to vote, and they will vote Republican. Mission accomplished.
Constitutional amendments are for protecting rights...not taking them away.

kmkat said...

I was voting a virtual NO from across the river. Glad so many of the legal voters in MN agreed with me.

Channel 4 did a piece a week or two ago about how the stimulus for this piece of nastiness was not to protect marriage but rather to get conservatives and born-agains to the polls, thereby electing conservative and born-again politicians. (Talk about cynical!) After seeing Amy Klobachar's massive victory, Chip Cravaat's defeat, the takeover of both houses of the legislature by the Dems, the defeat of both the marriage amendment AND the voter ID bill, not to mention that little thing with Obama and Romney, all I can say to them is, How's that workin' for you?

So sorry about Michelle's re-election. It was looking pretty sketchy for her for awhile there. But such a narrow victory in the most conservative district in MN does not bode well for her future.