MN Bill of Rights

The Minnesota Bill of Rights.

The Minnesota Bill of Rights is framed in the state constitution and has this interesting item. It reads thusly:

Sec. 16. FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE; NO PREFERENCE TO BE GIVEN TO ANY RELIGIOUS ESTABLISHMENT OR MODE OF WORSHIP. The enumeration of rights in this constitution shall not deny or impair others retained by and inherent in the people. The right of every man to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience shall never be infringed; nor shall any man be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any religious or ecclesiastical ministry, against his consent; nor shall any control of or interference with the rights of conscience be permitted, or any preference be given by law to any religious establishment or mode of worship; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of the state, nor shall any money be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious societies or religious or theological seminaries.

Now I got to thinking about how this section might apply in today’s state government. Most specifically I thought about it in the context of the marriage amendment bill passed in the MN Senate and House this spring.

All the rules were followed. The bills, once introduced to their respective houses of government, passed through the appropriate committees.

Testimony was taken and the votes were cast.

The testimony of the proponents was comprised largely of religious leaders from the community (6 of 8 by my count). They couched their arguments on religious traditions, indeed some even claimed they had direct evidence via the bible that this is how god wants things to be, at least their version of god did.

Rereading the content of Section 16 these words sort of popped out at me,

“nor shall any control of or interference with the rights of conscience be permitted, or any preference be given by law to any religious establishment or mode of worship”

and it really seems to me that this marriage amendment stands in stark contrast to this bill of rights section regarding religion in the political sphere.

Those were religious arguments given to sustain a passing vote in committee. Seems like a preference to a religious establishment to my way of thinking.

Could it be the election certificates of certain Senate and House members should be challenged for failing to uphold and defend the MN Constitution vis-à-vis the Bill of Rights Section 16?