POLL: Do You Agree With the Supreme Court's Amendment Decisions?

On Monday, the justices voted 4-2 in favor of the Republican-controlled Legislature on the wording of the voter ID and same-sex marriage amendments.

On Nov. 6, the ballot titles and questions for the voter ID and same-sex marriage amendments will appear as the Republican-controlled Legislature wrote them, according to the Star Tribune.

The Minnesota Supreme Court on Monday affirmed the wording legislators chose, instead of those submitted by Secretary of State Mark Ritchie.

On the ballot, the title above the voter ID amendment will be, "Photo Identification Required for Voting." Ritchie changed it to "Changes to In-Person & Absentee Voting & Voter Registration; Provisional Ballots," but Chief Justice Lorie Skjerven Gildea and justices G. Barry Anderson, Christopher Dietzen and David Stras rejected his change.

The title above the same-sex marriage amendment will say, "Recognition of Marriage Solely Between One Man and One Woman." Ritchie wanted the title to say "Limiting the Status of Marriage to Opposite Sex Couples."

Justices Alan Page and Paul Anderson dissented from the majority opinion.

Now that you've read what the justices decided, what do you think? Explain your answer to the poll in the comments below.

Al Anderson September 03, 2012 at 09:57 PM
Susan As if Democrats don't try to shove their version of "religion" down peoples' throats? it may not be called Catholicism or some other "traditional" religion -- but it can fairly be called kneeling at the thrones of "global warming" or "diversity". Yes, I'd rather shred the safety net and have all charity funneled through private organizations like the Salvation Army or Goodwill or Churches or other organizations. When you have bureaucrats who don't care about taxpayers' money deciding how things are dispensed -- you leave open large gaps of accountability -- just waiting for n'er do well types to take advantage of. Name one "safety net" program that isn't widely abused and/or is broke. SSDI, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Section 8 Housing, and so on. Democrats only get elected because they have built up such large numbers of "takers" -- and consequently demogogue fiscal conservatives for having the meanspirited temerity to publicly oppose these programs. To keep generations of people from being productive members of society by enslaving them to government largesse at the expense of productive members of society is not only wrong...its evil.
Susan September 03, 2012 at 10:00 PM
I think evil is way over the top, but I get your point. I wonder, what is the end game for these Democratic leaders hoping to get everyone on welfare and beholding to the government?
Randy Marsh September 03, 2012 at 10:04 PM
Thanks for clarifying, jaw, although I don't understand the need for personal attacks. I'm sure you were a wonderful parent to those seven children while working 60-80 hours per week. Did you wear name tags at your house so they know who you were? Apparently in your ideal world we shouldn't help people access birth control while making sure they can't have abortions and offer no assistance to those often unwanted children. Let me know which part of your mantra I may have interpreted incorrectly.
Lon Dugan September 03, 2012 at 10:38 PM
The end game is any easy answer. Ever hear of the Soviet Union? Socialism? While the idea of socialism appears "nice" where everyone is equal, the fact is that there were 2 sets of standards. The people in power had all the money and all the control while the people at the bottom had all the poverty, hunger, disease, were tread upon, and so on. Why do you think that those who lived in the Soviet Union were so glad to see it fall? Also why do you think that Obama and the DFL want to tax the rich so much? Their goal is to destroy Amaerica as we know it and turn it into a socialist state. Ever ask yourself why Obama has issued so many executive orders? It is because he cannot get his wishes and plans through Congress. He has trampled on the Constitution! It interfers with his making America into socialism! And he want to be the dictator! He is not concerned about the national debt. Under Obama we have not passed a annual budget for 3 years? He thinks he is a dictator! You perhaps heard about the comments that Mr. Obama made when he thought he was off camera. Something to the effect that he could not get something done now, but wait till I am re-elected, then we can do it. (Not a direct quote.)
Randy Marsh September 04, 2012 at 12:11 AM
You are making a lot of assumptions that could not be farther from the truth, jaw. You'll just have to trust me on that. And seriously, I think it is great that you were so generous and devoted to their lives almost 30 percent of the week (including sleep hours). Your wife/partner must be a wonderful person to put up with you and a house full of kids. Congrats, you are obviously an overachiever.
Edward September 04, 2012 at 12:47 AM
The same things were said about FDR by the opposition as he was dealing with the Great Depression. "Many Americans, however, argued that the New Deal was a Pandora’s box of troubles that violated the Constitution and sought to impose socialism, although socialist leaders like Norman Thomas believed that FDR was not doing enough, complaining that the New Deal was “trying to cure tuberculosis with cough drops. Initial supporters like the “radio priest” Father Charles E. Coughlin turned on Roosevelt over deficit spending and the Federal Reserve. Louisiana’s “Kingfish” Huey Long challenged Roosevelt, promoting his “Share the Wealth” program that would have restricted how much the wealthy could earn and impose high taxes on those with the greatest incomes. Communists assailed the New Deal as “social fascism” and called FDR a dictator. At the other end, business leaders, believing they had been made the scapegoat for the nation’s ills, wanted a return to the old economic order, believing that the market would correct itself without the meddling of direct government interference." Ha. Sounds familiar, doesn't it. Read more at Suite101: New Deal Opposition: Criticism of FDR's Recovery Program in the 1930s | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/new-deal-opposition-a95119#ixzz25SQUyWmc”
Al Anderson September 04, 2012 at 01:11 AM
And you know what Edward? The critics of FDR and his policies were correct. We have been paying the price (and people younger than 55 will be paying a unfathomabale price) for decades long socialist programs that give people the illusion of a "free lunch".
Edward September 04, 2012 at 01:23 AM
"We have been paying the price (and people younger than 55 will be paying a unfathomabale price) for decades long socialist programs" Yeah. Ryan is right. We need to get rid of Social Security and Medicare. Come to think of it those public schools are a pesky expense, as are those socialist roads and bridges. What a wasteful boondoggle the development of the interstate highway system was . . .
Smokin' Joe September 04, 2012 at 01:36 AM
There are real similarities in the two situations although they probably go against the point you're trying to make. First, it was a beauftiful example of not letting a perfectly good crisis go to waste. The social agenda got pushed in the direction Roosevelt wanted it to go and even got the power hungry an unprecedented fourth term. Second, it didn't work. Are you insinuating that it'll take another World War to get us out of this?
Edward September 04, 2012 at 01:42 AM
"Are you insinuating that it'll take another World War to get us out of this?" No. Fiscal stimulus can be accomplished without wars, but you are inferring that a fiscal stimulus (deficit spending) of a high order is required. Yes, that is true.
Smokin' Joe September 04, 2012 at 04:00 AM
In the last 3 1/2 years the purported leaders of our wonderful country have spent around FOUR TRILLION dollars that we don't have, with a good amount being borrowed from people who hate us. Not only that, but Bernanke has finished off the retirement hopes of millions by forcing a negative real interest rate on whatever investments they had left after the crash. Those people now have two choices, either work until they die or live off of the government. So we've got operation twist, the presses have been running non-stop on QE's 1, 2, and probably 3, we own most of General Motors and AIG along with Freddy and Fanny, and your suggesting that some fiscal stimulus through a bit of deficit spending will do the trick? Gee, why doesn't that sound like such a great idea? The only thing Helicopter Ben hasn't done is to make good on his nickname and dump the stuff from the sky. You should really look up fiat currency and check out what this is doing to your standard of living. And here I thought you were the one who was so concerned with your social security. My mistake.
Susan September 04, 2012 at 06:23 PM
jaw, the best way to see a person's true nature and what is in their heart, is to pay attention to how the treat those who have differing opinions and those they perceive to be "less than" themselves. You have given us a very clear view of the type of person you are... I believe you to be an Internet troll leaving antagozing comments in an effort to get people agitated. Trolls should be ignored.
jaw September 04, 2012 at 11:48 PM
16,000,000,000,000.00 and counting, thank goodness the Democrats have it under control......US Population 311,591,917 (2011) Do the math, and were not screwed? 5 trillion by Obama in 3,1/2 years, the other 11 trillion took 236 years, yes he's good for us... Wonder why they want people focused on voter ID and who can marry who.....
rob_h78 September 05, 2012 at 12:01 AM
Of course let's subtract all of the debt run up under Bush - including the debt that was in the pipeline that Obama inherited - including 2 unfunded wars, a massive unfunded Medicare Part D program, decreased revenue due to tax cuts while Bush knew he would be increasing spending... Obama's hands are not clean. But if you think that turning control back over to the "Borrow and Spend" Republican Party will do anything - well - just look back when they were in charge and then ask yourself what proof is there that they will actually change anything and not really end up making the problem even worse?
Susan September 05, 2012 at 02:05 AM
rob, please see above...it's a waste of time. If he does bother to read your comment, he will only come after you with vicious and personal insults which can not possibly be from a rational mind. He only wants to rant, if we ignore him, maybe he will disappear.
Smokin' Joe September 05, 2012 at 02:16 AM
Well to start off, Bush was an idiot and not much of a conservative. The republican name really doesn't mean much anymore as far as conservative/liberal goes so I'd consider Bush a closet Democrat at best. The best we can hope for is that Romney is neither Obama nor Bush. We know that he knows how to run a business and we know exactly where Obama's path will lead us. Our choices are limited and barring a resurgence by Ron Paul there's really no choice at all.
Susan September 05, 2012 at 02:21 AM
One good thing about Romney is that he could disappoint you today, but when he changes his mind tomorrow, you can be proud again. ;-)
Lon Dugan September 05, 2012 at 05:39 PM
Edward, There are those that believe that because of FDR and the New Deal that the depression lasted much llonger than it needed to. It also appears to be true that what FDR started has not ended and if you look at the long term, the problems that he created are still around today because of him. There is this foolish notion that you can spend your way out of debt. I don't know of any reputable finacial expert would recommend that method. Yet somehow spending billions of dollars of "stimulus" is going to help repair the economy? A phrase from scripture comes to mind, "Professing themselves wise, they became fools!"
Susan September 06, 2012 at 12:15 AM
Internet troll on the rant again!
Michele Olson September 06, 2012 at 04:56 AM
Sigh. Can we at least agree, that if people weren't so darned lazy, they could read up on what's going on in the elections and figure out how to vote? And then, it wouldn't matter what the bill was titled.
winoceros September 08, 2012 at 07:08 PM
Colin Lee, Really. Some guy who is trying to get a severance out of his former employer, who isn't going to get it because he failed to disclose he had conflicts of interest by owning a fundraising company and lying to the committee about it...that's your source? Who gives no details whatsoever about the alleged conversation and describes it in loaded terms...that's your evidence of voter suppression by all groups pushing for voter id?
Colin Lee September 08, 2012 at 07:23 PM
winoceros, I see you're having trouble disproving a negative. Let me help you. George W. Bush's U.S. Attorney Generals had the same problem after he hired them and told them to find evidence of voting fraud. When dozens of Republican-appointed attorney generals said they could find no evidence of intentional fraud to prosecute, he fired them and replaced them on the spot, causing the U.S. Attorneys scandal. Their Bush-appointed replacements still could not find evidence of intentional voter fraud. In Pennsylvania, both Republican and Democratic sides admitted that there was no evidence of in-person voting fraud, the only kind which Voter ID has anything to do with. http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/state/state-acknowledges-there-is-no-evidence-of-voter-fraud-645985/ If Minnesota Republicans really wanted to stop voter fraud, why did they reject the cheaper, FAR more effective, and bipartisan solution of electronic poll books, preferring instead to disenfranchise 4%-8% of all voters who are mostly poor and minority groups.
rob_h78 September 09, 2012 at 01:25 AM
Where I can apply to get a refund on the Iraq War? The last seven years of the Afghanistan War? How about Medicare Part D? How about Farm Subsidizes - Ethanol Subsidizes? Refunds for the weapons systems even the Pentagon says aren't needed but were kept around by Conservative Republicans as what amounts to nothing more than government jobs program?
Thomas September 09, 2012 at 04:04 AM
so true
jaw September 11, 2012 at 07:14 PM
Everyone Susan doesn't like is an internet troll.....LMAO... The director of the popular romance "The Notebook". “I’m not saying this is an absolute but in a way, if you’re not having kids – who gives a damn? Love who you want. Isn’t that what we say? Gay marriage – love who you want?” Cassavetes said. “If it’s your brother or sister it’s super weird, but if you look at it, you’re not hurting anybody, except every single person who freaks out because you’re in love with one another. There ya go Susie, ammednd the law before it's passed.....
Bauer September 11, 2012 at 07:49 PM
People once freaked out because women and/or people of color voted also.
Rita Mix September 21, 2012 at 05:59 PM
Both proposed amendments are designed to build an electorate that will favor conservative candidates by 1.) reducing the number of voters overall and disenfranchising a segment more likely to vote for moderate or liberal candidates, and 2.) stirring up the far right on moral/religious issues that will get out the vote for candidates that are otherwise lacking in merit. There's no "putting the politics aside." Both proposals are entirely about favoring one political ideology over the others.
Allan September 25, 2012 at 09:57 PM
I feel obligated to respond to Colin's appeal to the "scientific method" to ascertain the truth or fiction of the existance of spacecraft from outside earth. Be aware, the scientific method REQUIRES a careful CONTROLLED experiment, wherein ALL potential variables that might influence the observation are in fact held constant, while those variables under study are varied in a defined manner. All decisions that do not meet these criteria are outside the providence of the scientific method. It makes me sick when I see/read/hear people trying to support their position on any issue on the basis of "false" science. It shows both their ignorance of science and its limitations and their susceptibility to questionable "truths". Global warming and evolution are two other subjects to which science can not provide a definitive answer for just those reasons that one can not perform a controlled experiement to verify such theories.
Colin Lee September 26, 2012 at 02:18 PM
Allan, your anti-science argument is quaint. If ALL variables were controllable in experiments, we never would've invented penicillin, plastic, the pacemaker, or Teflon. ALL variables are NEVER controllable. You just do the best you can. If we accept your premise, we have to throw out all of astronomy and much of geology.
Doomsayer2012 October 10, 2012 at 12:37 AM
Try buying a pack of smokes a stiff drink chasing a check driving a car even unless you are a illegal. Don't get your undies to tight because there is only 73 days left till DOOMSDAY


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something