Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Planning the next step in marriage equality

February 28, 2013

MARSHALL — About 15 students gathered at Southwest Minnesota State University on Tuesday night to hear plans for the next step in the marriage equality campaign....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Feb-28-13 8:39 AM

A marriage is between one man and one woman. Forcing gay marriage on the public and taxpayers is not equality.

7 Agrees | 22 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-28-13 9:10 AM

If our elected state officials bring this gay marriage thing to a vote... may I suggest anyone voting "yes", invision their voting button as the handle on the ol' crapper, 'cause they'd be flushing what's left of Minnesota morals right down into the sewer.

7 Agrees | 23 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-28-13 9:27 AM

The prioritys of the modern world is amazing. The budget can go to*****in a handbasket and we are wasting time with this. We don't seem to be able to do anything about illegals sucking away gov money, attempting to balance the budget, dealing with the mentally illor or unemployment but we got all kinds of time to be concerned about gay rights. The only thing I see accomplished so far is the fine art of hiding the real major problems by giving max exposure to this warped behavior.

6 Agrees | 22 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-28-13 6:40 PM

Sooo, you are saying... The government SHOULD set the moral code to determine who you can make a life long commitment to, but SHOULD NOT be involved in keeping track of who owns deadly weapons? That makes no sense.

21 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-28-13 8:13 PM

The moral code has been set for many centuries. The government can't even track who has "mandatory" auto insurance, or track welfare fraud or enforce court orders against stalkers, who by the way kill a lot of people every year.

2 Agrees | 20 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-01-13 8:54 AM

So 15 students meet to discuss a controversial topic. Is this a bad thing? Why were more students not there? Perhaps they attended the other meetings about gender stereotypes or disabilities. This is the time that the legislators introduce proposals so they will be discussed in committees. It would be good for rona45 to check out what is being discussed.

18 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-01-13 1:16 PM

Had to be a pretty slow newsday to report this as local news - or does the writer have an agenda?

2 Agrees | 19 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-01-13 1:41 PM

Ranger, forcing marriage on the public and taxpayers would be a bad thing. Unless of course it was your daughter and you had to exercise your 2nd amendment rights and bring out the shotgun. Do you really think that the legislature can force marriage on anyone?

19 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-01-13 1:53 PM

So now that it's the democrats pushing a social agenda it's a waste of time, but when the repugnicans were pushing constitutional amendments it wasn't?

For the record I think gay couples should be allowed to marry, but I also think the issue should be decided by popular vote, not legislative action. Otherwise there'll just be endless legal challenges, etc, which truly do waste time & money.

And Al, even if the law passes, I doubt very seriously anyone is going to force you to marry someone of the same sex. It will simply give you the opportunity to do so if you choose.

19 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-03-13 7:40 PM

But it would use my tax dollars to help provide benefits to gay couples that can't procreate and who have no track record of raising families.

1 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 10 of 10 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web