A matter of Trust? The DFL are devoid of it.

ST. PAUL (AP) — The state Senate on Thursday decided against an effort to force a floor vote on a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage.

Thousands of ban opponents rallied outside the Capitol.

Sen. Michele Bachmann, the Stillwater Republican who has led the push for the ban, said Senate Democrats have denied her repeated efforts to get the bill heard.

Senate leaders countered that Bachmann, a candidate for the U.S. House, is flouting Senate rules to advance her political career.

At the same time, about 2,500 gays, lesbians and their supporters attended a rally on the Capitol grounds a few hundred yards away, organized by OutFront Minnesota.

Speakers warned the bill would not only ban gay marriage in the state constitution, but also civil unions, and could threaten domestic-partnership benefits offered by municipal governments.

"We are Minnesotans. We are Americans," said state Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, who is gay. "We always have been and we always will be. This legislature and this governor need to know this is our government too, and they have to know they can't take it away from us."

Bachmann's bill would put a constitutional amendment that defines marriage only as between a man and a woman on the November 2006 ballot.(emphasis mine)

(read entire story here

Government control uber alles!! The proletariat be damned!! That seems to be the mindset of the Minnesota DFL (and one could probably extrapolate this to the national party as well, but I digress). I did not post the whole story, because if you read the last sentence, it pretty much says it all. Over 60% of Minnesotans oppose gay marriage. A majority also oppose the legalization of civil unions. According to the poll, however, a majority of Minnesotans opposed amending the Minnesota Constitution for those purposes. All the motion does is to once and for all put the question to the voters!!!

What are Dean Johnson and the rest of the DFL so afraid of? The polls, though contradictory in nature, clearly state that most Minnesotans oppose such an amendment (though they oppose gay marriage and civil unions at the same time), so why the hesitance to let them vote on it? Could it be that upon closer examination, the voter who opposes gay marriage will want to think twice about the need for a consitutional amendment after noting what happened in San Francisco? Are they afraid that the information blitz that will certainly ensue should this get on the ballot would result in less-than desirable results (in their personal view)?

It was the electorate who made the choice to put the DFL lawmakers where they are. But, in the eyes of the DFL, that same electorate cannot be trusted to make a choice on a decision that will clearly dictate the norms of society in which they live! It would appear that the elitist members of the DFL do indeed have an issue with trust. Perhaps it should be so remembered when it comes time to "trust them" again with our votes in the next election.