ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — A Republican state senator who supports legalizing gay marriage in Minnesota said Wednesday that he hopes to convince GOP colleagues to join him in abandoning the party's traditional stand on the issue.
Sen. Branden Petersen, a likely co-sponsor of a gay marriage bill to be introduced soon at the Capitol, is the first Republican lawmaker to signal support for allowing same-sex couples to wed.
Petersen said his backing hinges on a few conditions being met, chief among them that religious exemptions that don't want to perform same-sex marriages would be exempt from doing so. That provision has been a common feature of gay marriage legislation in other states.
"I think the time has come," Petersen told The Associated Press, arguing that it's the conservative position to let gays join an institution that's one of society's fundamental building blocks. He said he hoped his support would sway not just his fellow Republicans wavering on the issue, but Minnesotans in general that it's OK to support gay marriage. The Star Tribune first reported Petersen's break from his party on the issue.
Nailing down Republican support is significant for gay marriage activists preparing for what's likely to be a divisive debate later this spring at the Capitol. While Democrats control the House and Senate, some of the party's rural members hail from socially conservative areas where a majority of voters last fall backed the failed constitutional gay marriage ban.
Voters in Petersen's district, in suburbs north of Minneapolis, supported the marriage ban by a narrow majority. In 2011, as a House member, Petersen voted to put the constitutional ban on the ballot; he declined Wednesday to elaborate on that vote, but acknowledged that having a gay father-in-law has influenced his thinking.
"It's an issue where we all travel on our own path," Petersen said. He acknowledged the possibility of political consequences for his decision, but said that was trumped by doing what he believes is the right thing. He also said working on the bill would put him in a position to win compromises from Democratic sponsors on its provisions.
On Wednesday, Republican activist Andy Parrish blasted Petersen in an email fundraising pitch for his political committee, A Stronger Minnesota. The group "holds 'Republicans' like Petersen accountable for straying from traditional Minnesota values," wrote Parrish, who helped run last fall's unsuccessful campaign to pass the gay marriage ban.
Sen. Dan Hall, a social conservative from Burnsville, said he was disappointed in Petersen but doubted any other Republican senators would join him.
"I think same-sex marriage is wrong," Hall said. "It's a lifestyle that is not healthy spiritually or physically. I think any time the government OKs something, it's an endorsement or promotion of it so I think it's unhealthy for us to do that."
Still, even before Peterson revealed his intentions, the push for a 2013 legislative vote to allow gay marriage had been gaining steam. Gov. Mark Dayton restated his support in his State of the State speech, and Democratic legislative leaders — while not fully embracing the effort — have signaled they won't stand in its way. House Speaker Paul Thissen and Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk have said they'd vote yes.
Dayton called Petersen's decision "terrific."
"I admire him for his courage and conviction, and hope others will follow to make it bipartisan legislation," Dayton said.
At 27, Petersen is considerably younger than the average Republican senator — personifying a growing generational split in the Republican Party on the issue. Minnesotans United, the group now pushing gay marriage at the Capitol, had recruited a number of young Republican activists and supporters during its successful effort in 2012 to defeat the constitutional gay marriage ban. On Thursday, the group's director Richard Carlbom sent out a fundraising plea touting Petersen's decision.
House and Senate bills to legalize gay marriage are expected in the next few days, though the debate may not get going until later this spring. The chief sponsors are expected to be two Minneapolis Democrats, Sen. Scott Dibble and Rep. Karen Clark, who are both gay and in long-term relationships.
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.
Comments (40)
Add commentFinally
Some common sense. A GOP that believes in freedom for all, not just straight people.
If you have a problem with gay marriage being legal, you should also have a problem with divorces being legal.
In addition
I just like to see bipartisan support of any topic today, whether I agree with the support or not.
Just a friendly reminder that there are politicians that aren't afraid to cross party lines. There isn't much of that anymore.
natorade
I guess one poor soul really doesnt matter. They are going to shove it down somewhere anyways with the libs in control!! I just wish I could remember how many times I heard last fall it's already illegal & there is way to many important things to worry about instead of that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You know Harvey Milk was assasinated in 1978, and here we
are 30 years later still arguing back and forth about gay rights. Is it any worse to have a same sex couple getting married than a straight President who cheats on his wife?I recently met a gay man, and even after shaking his hand, it turns out my life didn't change one bit. Isn't our country EQUALITY FOR ALL?
PD
You have to meet 2 of his older bro's. Had a few cold one's with'em. I am talking about the one you shook hands with.
Since you are a Southern boy. When did the deer lose their horns down there?? I still have an 8 pt with both sides still on. The spike & basket 6 have lost there's.
Equality?
I like the "equality for all" comments...so long as the government is the sole determinate of what "equality" means. Why is government in the marriage business at all. Imagine a MN without the government in our bedrooms. This is only an issue because governments play favorites with the laws they pass; taxes, property rights, etc. They messed it up, why on earth would we trust the idiots to fix it?
Just a question-but why can
Just a question-but why can gay partners cover each other on insurance but if you live with a straight partner you don't qualify.
OFB
He just hasn't bumped them on anything yet-and BTW-they are antlers. Horns are grown year around and not shed each year.
Oh KMA Hein
Less letters!!! But since ya it brought up. Normally they are gone by now?? Had 17 in tonight. Gosh a mama with 2 little one's & if ya cut their legs a little shorter my lab is bigger. Glad I put 20 little piles so the babes had something to eat too it was fun watching.
Maybe I used that word because that is what we are going to get. Somewhere???
Get 'em fattened up and we
Get 'em fattened up and we can cull out a couple this fall when Mama ain't home. Ya right!!!!!!!
Anytime
You want. I will even gut it for ya. Aint that funny that she thinks she's thee boss?? & she dont buy the corn or feed unless I'm gone for a few days. Then she man's up.
I thought all the gays
and lefter posters on here screamed their guts out when other people were proposing anti-gay marriage laws and amendments a year ago.
They all screamed that there were more important things to deal with and that the Right was discriminating. Fast forward to NOW, the same screamers want to WASTE time on a Gay Marriage Proposal while our nation collapses.
Step on out here gay supporters and tell us where you posted that this was a waste of time.
Right...............
Hey two thumbs down
I think you really are being nasty and intollerant and violating my rights as a non-gay. Your public display of displeasure of my beliefs is unsettling and is making me distraught. You are interfearing with my right to live the way I choose and I may have to seek a civil recourse for your invasion of my right to enjoy life and liberty. You are intimidating me by making me feel that I can't be straight and enjoy life without harrasment by gay supporters and gays themselves.
hein i ric
before you boys started talking deer you asked about insurance. gay people can not cover their partners under insurance. there are individual companies that may decide to include that in their HR benefits packages, but it is not codified anywhere into state law.
gay couples can not provide insurance for each other and do not have any of the legal protections offered to any other MN family. They can not even claim their partner's body at the morgue, and they have no legal right to be informed of each other's death. In fact, due to data privacy, it is against the law for emergency/health care persons to share info about the loved one, because the state does not define gay partners as legal family.
edit added a 2nd later for clarification and to address the 2nd part of your comment.
To answer the 2nd part of your question -- why gay people can provide their partners w insurance [they can not] while single dating or live-in couples can not. The difference between these two groups is that the first is legally prohibited from any options to be able to provide for their families. The second group has the option to use the mechanisms provided by the state (marriage) to access those rights.
we were all created in Ed S. stupidity
Both groups can hire a lawyer and write up the legal paperwork for medical,Death, And finances. SO QUIT LYING. or are you stupid?
Imagine the progress that
Imagine the progress that could be made if the parties didn't try to beat the members into toeing the party line. Good ideas would actually have a chance in St. Paul instead of being shot down for 'points'.
We need more legislators who are willing to vote for what they think is best for the state.
Never said it was a state
Never said it was a state law! Read what is written not what you read into it.
It never ends
I think many government jobs provide health benefits for
the gay partner. Someone that cares could look up this information as well as how many private companies do.
I think many large companies do offer that benefit.
But, it needs to be law, seriously, when that happens
there will only be something else.
In the 60's in New York, the gays were protesting and said they would not want to get married in the future.
Guess what? They were wrong, at that time they only wanted to be recognized.
8 thumbs down
I got 8 red thumbs down for my comment about bipartisan support. That explains everything on these message boards.
This is why our governments don't get anything done, everyone is so afraid to lose a vote by crossing their party line by supporting the what they think is best.
I wish they'd stop screwing around with this "non-issue"
...and get to work on creating an attractive business climate in this state. Fiddling while Minnesota burns--it's a Democratic tradition!
Muehlbau:
"A Republican state senator who supports legalizing gay marriage in Minnesota"
Yep, democratic tradition. It's called following the story.
natorade
Mew Mew. I have 11 reds & going for 19 I hope.
Well natorade,
I got 10 Ts down for asking you "tollerant" lefters to not harass me and give me the same consideration you give gays. That's pretty traditional too.
Purposed:
"The liberals have figured out how to infiltrate conservative districts"
Is that kind of like your guy Jack Shepard running as a DFL for senate just to steal votes from your gal, Amy Klobuchar? (Hope I spelled her name right)
It actually wasn't a bad approach, he was banking on all the democrats that don't follow the news to just put a check next to his name because he's DFL with a cool name.
I know, it's a different approach than what you're talking about. But both parties do it. I don't think they should, but politicians do a lot of things I think is wrong. Haha
Why can't a conservative be
Why can't a conservative be for gay rights? I am against abortion, and for gay rights. Does that make me a hated "liberal"? Are we not allowed to think for ourselves, and still vote one way or the other? Allowing gays to marry, will not affect me one bit, why worry?
MotleyLarry
I completely agree.
In today's day and age, people are not allowed to think for themselves, politically. You have to be lefty hippy or tea party righty.
purposed, really? Enlighten
purposed, really? Enlighten me please.
Purposed:
Yeah it's true. I actually tried to link to his website but it has since been shut down after the election.
He was running radio ads that made it very clear what his intentions were. He went as far as to say he's got republican values running as a democrat to "get that Amy Klobuchar out of office".
I've since tried to find more information on Shepard, but it's tough. I don't think he was ever a serious candidate, just there to steal votes.
I'll try to find more info, all I could find was his wikipedia page and it only states his views on abortion.
But I agree with you, neither party should do that. Each candidate should be very clear what their intentions are. Unfortunately there are always a TON of uneducated voters to take advantage of.
Here is some more info
http://www.minnpost.com/political-agenda/2012/06/convicted-felon-jack-sh...
I know it's MinnPost, but kind of explains the situation. After reading more about Shepard, sounds like he had some other issues anyway.
And here is an old one from MPR, where they refer to him as republican.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/ar...
Just doesn't seem like a guy I want to hang out with, no matter the party.
http://candidates.sos.state.mn.us/CandidateInformation.aspx?county=0&mun...
purposed, you run off at the
purposed, you run off at the mouth, now tell me about my liberal statements.