Stay Curious. Stay Connected.
MailNewsletters♡Donate Now
Sign up
*Password must be at least 8 characters and contain one uppercase letter, one lowercase letter, one number and one symbol.
Already have an account?
By submitting, you consent that you are at least 18 years of age and to receive information about MPR's or APMG entities' programs and offerings. The personally identifying information you provide will not be sold, shared, or used for purposes other than to communicate with you about MPR, APMG entities, and its sponsors. You may opt-out at any time clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of any email communication. View our Privacy Policy.
Sign in to your profile
Forgot Password?
New to MPR News?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Reset Password

Enter the username on file and we'll send you a code to reset your password.

Still require assistance or not sure what your User Name is?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Email Verification

A verification code has been emailed to

Still awaiting the code?
Tim Pugmire
St. Paul, Minn.

Amendment to ban same-sex marriage close to Senate vote

Go Deeper.

Create an account or log in to save stories.

Log inCreate a free Account

Like this?

Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.

Show me!

A proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in Minnesota is on its way to the Senate floor.

Republicans in the Senate Rules Committee approved the measure Friday on a divided voice vote.

The Legislature can put a constitutional amendment on the statewide ballot without the governor's signature.

The proposed amendment would define marriage as between one man and one woman.

Sen. Warren Limmer, R-Maple Grove, the bill's chief author, said action this session gives the public more time to talk about the issue.

"To discuss and direct ... us in the next election where we're going on the definition of marriage, rather than let maybe even one judge make the definition alter or change," Limmer said.

Sen. Linda Berglin, DFL-Minneapolis, questioned the need to take up controversial ballot measures this year.

"We have a very limited amount of time left before the session is going to be over," Berglin said. "I don't believe using the time we have on something that can wait until next year is really the best use of time."