Like their philosophical division, fans and foes of a proposed constitutional ban on gay marriage found themselves physically split on Tuesday.
With more observers than open seats in the Capitol's largest hearing room, backers and opponents of an effort to let voters weigh in on the definition of marriage were directed to separate overflow rooms to listen as a Senate panel considered - and later voted down - a proposal to protect the traditional definition of marriage in Minnesota.
After the nearly three-hour debate the two groups remained at odds over the contentious social issue, but they agreed on one thing: their work is not done.
Following the Senate Judiciary Committee's rejection of an altered version of the gay marriage ban, supporters of a proposal said they will work other avenues to get a bill approved by the DFL-led Senate. They also predicated that gay marriage will become an issue in the November election even if the proposed constitutional amendment doesn't make it on the ballot.
"Hopes are dim but they remain," Sen. Michele Bachmann said moments after the DFL-controlled Senate committee rejected an altered version of her amendment bill.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Stillwater Republican insisted the issue is far from dead. There is still time this legislative session to attempt to get a vote on the Senate floor by using one of several other related bills that have been introduced, she said.
If voters can't be heard on this issue come November, they could decide to vote for lawmakers based on the issue, she said.
"The question is will they forget by November?" Bachmann said of voters upset with the Senate majority's actions. ""We'll know by then."
Meanwhile, amendment opponents said they will continue to raise awareness and draw attention to the proposal's discriminatory nature.
Ann Marie DeGroot, executive director of OutFront Minnesota, a leading gay-rights advocacy group, said her organization will monitor the issue throughout the remainder of the legislative session. However, DeGroot said she doesn't believe the election this fall will be a referendum on where legislators stand on the gay marriage issue.
In states where lawmakers have debated a marriage amendment but not put it on the ballot, voters didn't react by ousting amendment opponents, DeGroot said.
"Once it was over it was really over," she said.
That's not how amendment supporters view the issue. Anticipating the Senate panel's decision, they said they'll keep trying to give Minnesotans a chance to decide the marriage issue.
ADVERTISEMENT
"The word's out that marriage is under attack," said Chuck Darrell, spokesman for Minnesota for Marriage, a leading pro-amendment group.
The Senate majority stacked the Judiciary Committee with urban, liberal Democrats, Darrell said, neglecting the voice of Greater Minnesota.
"Rural America has had absolutely no voice in this process," Darrell said. "We look forward to informing our grassroots network about where their senator stands on the issue."
Eight members of the Red Wing PFLAG chapter were among amendment opponents who secured tickets for seats inside the hearing room. PFLAG stands for Parents, Friends and Families of Lesbians and Gays. It wasn't the first time Bruce Ause appeared at the Capitol for the issue, and the Red Wing man predicted it won't be the last.
Ause, whose brother was gay and died of AIDS, said he believes the proposed constitutional amendment is wrong. He predicated that rather than decide if gay marriage should be constitutionally prohibited, Minnesotans will use the general election in November to remove from office legislators who back the proposed amendment.
"I hope what happens is the election will send a message to the people who are pushing this bill that it's not in the best interest of the state of Minnesota to be pursuing this kind of activity," Ause said.
