Just what are they afraid of?

The issue of gay marriage was front and center again at the Capitol on Monday. The chief justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court said no members of the court ever discussed the issue with Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson, who Johnson has been criticized over the past week for saying he had assurances from several Supreme Court justices that they wouldn't overturn the state's law banning gay marriage. Last week, Johnson apologized for damaging the integrity of the court and said a conversation with one justice was more of an informal chat. But Minnesota's chief judge said no justice ever talked about the issue with Johnson.

St. Paul, Minn. —

In a conference call with reporters, Chief Justice Russell Anderson said he was "incredulous" when he heard about Johnson's statements that justices had made assurances to him. Anderson says he asked each member of the Minnesota Supreme Court, including former chief justice Kathleen Blatz, to see if anyone ever talked about Minnesota's Defense of Marriage Act. The law defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Anderson says all justices said "no." And he made it clear it's not appropriate for an elected official even to ask a judge about an issue.

"I have been a trial judge and appellate court judge for 23 years and I have never been approached by a legislator or a county commissioner or a township officer or a mayor asking me for a commitment or even a conversation about a matter that is before the court or might become before the court. We just don't do that in Minnesota," Anderson said.

	Sen. Dean Johnson

Anderson's comments come just three days after Johnson's apology. The Senate Majority Leader told a group of pastors in January that he had received assurances from several Supreme Court justices that the courts would not overturn the Defense of Marriage Act.

Several groups have been lobbying for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage because they're concerned that the courts will overturn the law. On Friday Johnson said he embellished his description of a brief conversation with one justice. He didn't name the justice but it was clear from his comments that it was Chief Justice Blatz.

All the pro-marriage amendment people want is a chance for the vote to go to the Minnesota electorate, who are the best judges of what should be the social norms of where they reside. But the DFL members of the Minnesota Senate are doing their level best to keep that from happening. This not only begs, it screams the one word question:

Why??

What is the DFL afraid of? Do they see their constituency as uninformed, hayseed, medieval hicks, and are afraid that the majority of Minnesotans may not see things the way that they, the self-annointed "enlightened," do?

One does not need to think too hard about it before coming up with a feasible answer, does one?

(Filed under limousine liberals)