White Supremacy Protection Amendment?

Kalley Yanta, as spokesperson for the misnamed “Minnesota for Marriage” organization is at it again.

In the third ad released as part of their marriage amendment “Vote Yes” campaign, I hear her saying:

“When equal rights for Negroes have been imposed elsewhere, it’s not been “live and let live.” People who believe that Negroes are inferior to Whites have faced consequences.

Small businesses fined. Individuals fired. Charities closed down. Churches sued. Negro equality being taught to young children in elementary school; with parents having no legal right to be notified, or to take their children out of class.

We can prevent this from happening here by voting yes on the White Supremacy Protection Amendment.”

Don’t those words sound ugly? For most Americans (but sadly not all) living in this century, the words are ugly.

Just as the words were ugly back then, they’re especially ugly now. They show how little we’ve progressed in over 200 years as a supposedly free nation, with equal rights for all.

To be sure, Ms. Yanta didn’t use the above words exactly. I like to translate outrageous political ads to reveal their true message.

Illegal discrimination is illegal discrimination – Period.

It just seems so very appropriate to point out how the hateful messages being delivered by Ms. Yanta sound so very similar to the hateful words used by Deep South bigots to oppose equal rights for Blacks. Most Americans (but sadly not all) now know that such ideas are wrong.

On their web site, the misnamed “Minnesota for Marriage” organization posted a convenient “fact sheet” to go along with their third ad. I downloaded a copy for review.

The problem with the ad, and the related “fact sheet,” is that both slant unrelated “facts” to support their agenda. A “no” vote on the marriage amendment will not legalize same-sex marriage – state law already prohibits it. And, a yes vote will not prevent the “consequences” they show in their ad from occurring, as the cases cited were not related to same-sex marriage. Rather, the “consequences” noted came from businesses ignoring existing anti-discrimination laws; and, an employee being fired after violating his employment agreement with a private employer.

In the case of the Catholic Church, they did shut down a couple of their adoption service businesses rather than agreeing to comply with existing laws. Same-sex marriage was not the issue. As was their right, the Church decided to quit that business, rather than to remain in it and obey existing laws.

In short, the ads we’ve seen so far from the misnamed, “Minnesota for Marriage” have been just as false and misleading as any of the ads we’ve seen during this political cycle. But then, I would expect that, as the politicians who voted to place this anti-equality amendment on the ballot did so not out of a love for Minnesota, or a love for our nation’s Constitution, but rather in an attempt to secure votes for themselves and their supposedly  “God fearing” political party, by going after a minority group. It’s just wrong on so many levels.  

If it were up to me, all Minnesotans who value the freedom and equality promised by our nation’s Constitution would vote against those politicians who would condone enshrining illegal discrimination in our state’s laws and Constitution, while also voting against the discriminatory amendment they promoted.

There should be consequences for those who attempt to take equal rights away from anyone to satisfy their own political agenda.

Illegal discrimination is illegal discrimination – Period.