Uptown 'Vote Yes' billboard is vandalized, MN for Marriage draws absurd conclusions [PHOTO]
|We question Minnesota for Marriage's decision to spend precious resources on a billboard in Uptown, of all places.|
-- Michael Brodkorb says marriage amendment is cynical MNGOP get-out-the-vote ploy
-- Minnesota marriage amendment "looks like a toss up," says new poll of likely voters
-- MN for Marriage blatantly misinterprets parenting study in new anti-gay clip [VIDEO]
Nonetheless, that's the analysis the brain wizards at Minnesota for Marriage are running with.
It kinda seems Minnesota for Marriage was asking for it, doesn't it? You plaster a 'Vote Yes' billboard in one of the most liberal parts of town, across from one of the most hard-drinking bars, this is what you get. It's the old 'mess with the bull, you get the horns' thing.
Here's some excerpts from a Minnesota for Marriage press release that makes it sound as though we'll wake up in a Brave New World on November 7 if the marriage amendment fails.
Yesterday, a Vote Yes billboard in Minneapolis was vandalized. The destruction demonstrates the kind of environment Minnesotans can expect if marriage is redefined in Minnesota.You see, it's not about enshrining discrimination into the state constitution or the effort to make sure that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, have equal rights. Your lifestyle is at stake, people! Vote no, and next thing you know, billboards throughout the state will be defaced in a tidal wive of pink paint.
[T]he vandalized billlboard... show how citiziens [sic], like most Minnesotans who believe marriage is the unique union of one man and one woman, are certainly not living in a "live, let live" society.
"This kind of disrespect is a perfect example of what Minnesotans, who simply believe marriage is between one man and one woman, can expect if marriage is redefined," said John Helmberger, Chairman of Minnesota for Marriage...
"Minnesotans need to understand that when marriage is redefined, the lifestyle is not simply one of 'live and let live.' Instead, an entire institution is upended, leaving no room under the law or in civil discourse for those who disagree with this new genderless definition of marriage for religious, cultural, or other reasons," said Helmberger.