MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) — Lutherans in Minnesota plan to officially voice their opposition to the proposed state constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage.

Close to 1,000 Lutheran representatives will vote on the issue on Friday at the annual assembly.

The resolution says the amendment would prevent one group of committed couples and families from having the same rights and protections afforded to all others.

In 2009, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America assembly in Minneapolis passed a policy that moved toward a more accepting response to same-gender relationships.

The assembly also passed resolutions that allowed for congregations to support leaders within the ELCA in committed same-gender partnerships.

Comments (78)
  1. politicianssux says:

    I have heard that God himself “MAY” come out in foavor of this. I have also heard that the Virgin Mary “MAY” come out against this. I have heard that Jesus Christ “MAY” come out against this and I have also heard that The Holy Spririt “MAY” come out in favor of this. What a story you have going here, someone “MAY” fly over the moon tonight in a single bound. Someone “MAY” swim the Atlantic in one day. What a crock of a story that some group “MAY” do something. You are really stretching now to make up support for a topic WCC0 is obviously opposed to. Are you now in the business of making up news, versus reportng the news?

    1. Lucifer says:

      I have no problems with peanut pushers or banjo minnow players. See you downstairs.

  2. JBenson says:

    Please note that this article is speaking about a vote by ELCA Lutherans, and that the ELCA in no way speaks for all Lutherans in Minnesota. There are several other branches of Lutheranism in Minnesota including the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, Association of Free Lutheran Congregations, Wisconsin Evangelical Synod, Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ, and the North American Lutheran Church. They views taken by the ELCA are not shared by, nor endorsed by these other branches of Lutheranism. So when speaking about a “vote being taken by Lutherans” please clarify who you are talking about and that the ELCA DOES NOT speak for Lutherans in general

    1. RR Guy says:

      Amen on that!!! More LIBERAL BIAS spinning the news to persuade and influence with inaccurate or lack of facts.

      Nothing new for WCCO or the other left-leaning “news” outlets.

      1. Manny says:


        And if they vote to support the amendment, it will NOT be reported.

    2. Ryan says:

      And… I know for a fact that WELS and Mizzou ARE against this. They’re more conservative than my former Roman Catholic church.

      ELCA is one of the most liberal Christian churches in the US and they are basically giving a big FU to their gay congregation that they’ve already accepted.

      1. Ryan says:

        Wait… I misread that. Dammit.

    3. stina says:

      Well said and I agree.

    4. PG says:

      You are correct. Thank GOD there is hope that one branch has the courage to do what Jesus did.

  3. RR Guy says:

    Not surprised if the ELCA “votes” to oppose the amendment.

    Can you say – another Schism?

    The ELCA has gotten very good at re-defining scripture and at accommodating the “world perspective.” Maybe that’s why the ELCA membership has….and will again…take a hit in membership.

    If you don’t like the established rules – claim “authority” and “change” the rules…..with a vote.

    For an institution that long ago rejected a single authority, this often fractured entity is demonstrating one of its biggest weaknesses.

    Close to 1,0000 ELCA popes will vote. That’s who they are. They would recoil at such a suggestion – but that is EXACTLY what’s going on. And it is not grounded in scripture.

    Odd isn’t it, as they reject Scripture for political correctness and “acceptability.”

    1. kate says:

      reject scripture? Like the same scripture that thinks it is ok to own slaves, beat your wife, commit genocide and slaughter woment and children? I’m surprised they support that scripture at all when it contains such poison.

      1. BethAnn says:

        I’m curious, have you ever read the whole Bible? I have read the whole New Testament, and most books of the Old Testament. I don’t ever recall reading that the scripture endorses slavery. In fact, Jesus had many women followers. Jesus brought more equality and attention of how women should be treated, and Paul talks about that in different books in the New Testament. They were main finacial givers to his ministry and afterwards as recorded I believe in the book of Acts. Jesus even went as far as to stop the “religious people” from stoning a women who was caught in the act of adultry. He said, anyone who is without sin can cast the first stone. No on is. Then He told her go and sin no more, her sins were forgiven. No where does the Bible talk about beating your wife. When you make statements like that please make sure you have the facts.

        1. Les Johnson says:

          Nor does Jesus mention an intolerance for gays.

          And if you want to get really technical, there is no scientific, physical evidence to suggest this Jesus person ever lived at all.

          1. dontreadonme says:

            Except for the fact that there is 5600 copies of the New Testament found with 99.5% accuracy. Compare that to Aristotle with 49 copies. That’s a pretty good historical record in my book.

            1. dontreadonme says:

              correction there are 5600 copies in Greek, there are over 24,000 copies if you include the other languages.

  4. Tom says:

    I will cedit to these ELCA Luttherans for choosing to leave the bubble and join the rest of us in reality. While the others are choosing to stay in the bubble.

    1. Jo says:

      i suppose you would argue that Jesus supports ending the life of the unborn also. Just because you do something doesn’t make it right.

      1. Tom says:

        @ Jo

        I may not agree with Abortion, but i also realize that is non of my business with what a woman decided to do, that is between her and her Dr, which is something else Social Conservatives have a problem with. It jsut seems that if Social Conservatives are not sticking their nose in other people business they are bored.

        But why do you believe that you should be able to tell what two consenting adults what they can and can not do just because it offends you?

        1. Jake says:

          What if she ends the life of her one-year-old child? Shouldn’t that be between her and her benevolent doctor? Who are you to say she has to get up at 1 AM to feed the baby? Stop sticking your nose in other people’s business and keep toddlericide safe and legal, right, Tom?

          1. Tom says:

            @ Jake

            What if she decides to end the life of her one year old child? That tells me that is possible that the mom does not have the mental stability to take care of a child. Just because woman can have a baby, doesn’t mean she should.

            If a mother chooses to get up at 1am to feed her baby that is her decision to make if that is what the schedule is.

            But you seem to be missing the point. Do you want people telling people you how you should raise your family? Do you want someone who is total stranger to you objecting to medical prodecure you are about to have becuase it offends them? I dont think you want anybody sticking thier nose into your business. So why do you believe that you should be able to do just that?

            1. Jake says:

              @Tom, I am perfectly fine with the State telling me I cannot kill my one year old child. My right to not be inconvenienced by the child does not outweigh the child’s right to live. If my inconvenience and physical discomfort justified termination of other lives, my wait in store checkout lines would get much shorter.

              You cannot logically say you do not agree with abortion and say that the government has no say. It is not the same as eating eggplant. The state has a greater responsibility to protect human life than it does to avoid inconveniencing people.

              In no other case does a parent or anyone else have the right to unilaterally decide who is and is not a human being. If there is a life interest in a baby, it is a greater interest than the physical comfort of the baby’s host.

              It’s funny. The State can force a non-custodial parent to get up and go to work two days a week for 18 or more years to pay for an unplanned, unwanted child, but somehow that is not “putting our laws on his or her body.” Yet pulling apart a developing baby with a heart and brainwaves is o.k. to avoid five months of physical trauma.

              Tom, if you don’t think a baby has human rights, you do, in fact, support abortion. You cannot credibly say you don’t, and you probably ought to avoid videos that show babies being pulled apart in abortions. You wouldn’t feel very good about yourself.

              1. Tom says:

                @ Jake

                What I am saying does make sense! If you are social conservative how can you on one hand say that gov’t needs to stay out of our private lives, but yet turn around and ask the gov’t to outlaw abortion, gay marriage, etc? You either believe that gov’t needs to stay out of our private lives or you don’t.

                I may not agree with abortion, but yet I do realize that it is none of my business as that is a decision between a woman and her Dr. None of us should assume why we think a woman is choosing to have an abortion. It could be for medical reasons, etc.

                If you dont; agree with abortion that is your opinion and you are entitled to it. But there is a difference between voicing an opinion and asking the gov’t to ban something just because you are offended by it.

                But Social Conservatives are the biggest hyprocrits. They dont mind telling people how to live their lives, but dont you try telling them how they should live their lives.

                1. Jake says:

                  @Tom, you will apparently never get it. If the fetus (aka developing baby) is a human, its rights exceed those of the mother and the state must protect it. If I were stationary and saw you walking backward toward me, I would not have the right to shoot you dead to avoid the discomfort of you bumping into me. I have a right to not be bumped into, but it is not as great as your right to live. Or maybe you’d prefer the government stay out of my private affairs?

                  Look at it from the fetus’s perspective.

  5. scott says:

    I love the answers here so far. Not the right type of Christians I guess, And not Christian enough, and don’t put me together with those Christians. Jesus is proud. Real proud of you all.

    1. RR Guy says:

      Oh, you have a hot line to Jesus?

      Another example of arbitrary “truth.” Hidden behind what “Jesus would say or do.”

      Read a Bible.

      Lots of absolutes packed inside that publication. Many of them conflict with the “world view” espoused today.

      Like the U.S. Constitution…right? Old and irrelevant.

      Empathy for the foolish.

      1. Jennifer says:

        Leviticus 19:19 which states “You shall not let your animals breed with a different kind; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed; nor shall you put on a garment made of two different materials.”

        Yup, lots of absolutes. But in all seriousness, wouldn’t you agree that some of the most important absolutes are compassion, love and forgiveness?

        1. Tom says:

          @ Jennifer

          We are not talking about animals! What is it with conservatives bringing animals into this discussion every time it is brought up?

  6. Observer says:

    I applaud the Lutheran Church for its stand on this issue. Clearly, the U.S. has become a nation of id iots and churches have become too vociferous and political. Churches are now powerful business and policy-minded institutions which have greatly overstepped the constitutional boundaries of separation of church and state. They should therefore lose their tax exempt status. I am tired of the welfare afforded religious zea lots particularly regarding property taxes. It is high time churches paid for their politically motivated stances. The Catholic Church’s activism personifies this position. At least the Lutherans are stepping back from the brink of political activism.

    1. oNiSaC says:

      I dare say its clear you know nothing about the Christian religion.

      For one thing Observer, the church is there to save lives or souls, not confine civil liberties.

      Another words the Christian religion (through the love of Jesus Christ) is your good news, not your dictator, or enemy.

      1. Pagan says:

        @oNiSaC. Tell that to the people tortured by the Spanish Inquisition, or killed during the Crusades, and all the other victims of Christianity’s holy wars. Religion is the last bastion of bigots and oppressors in the name of religion! Religion does the state’s dirty work of controlling a population through indoctrination, ideology, oppression, and coercion.

        1. No Doi says:

          @Pagan, So we can assume that the human members of the Occupy movement who sexually assaulted women in their tents have rendered the entire movement without any merit, right? And of course 150 years ago the Democrats created the Ku Klux Klan (look it up) to kill Republican public officials, especially newly freed black folks, so all current Democrats must be assumed to agree with that behavior, true?

          Seems we could just as easily say that the liberal element in America is the NEW bastion of bigots and oppressors against religion. Not only do they disagree with the faithful, they will legislate that they must fund, recognize, and support activities that are in direct contradiction of their longstanding beliefs, because the Left doesn’t share the beliefs in their own form of non-religious religion.

          1. kate says:

            @ No Doi “@Pagan, So we can assume that the human members of the Occupy movement who sexually assaulted women in their tents have rendered the entire movement without any merit, right?”

            That was a few members of the group. Whereas the offences Pagan is talking about were commited by the organization. The church decided to go out and commit these offences.

            So you think it is wrong that groups that get money from taxpayers have to obey the same laws as all other groups that get taxpayer money? It is ok to discriminate agains groups of people as long as you do it in the name of a church?

            1. No Doi says:

              @kate. Are you dense enough to believe there is this entity called “The Church” that makes decisions? There are temporal leaders and social mores (like your KKK Democrats) at times, but you exhibit the same lazy-minded characteristic that leads to racism to permits you and Pagan to hold all Catholics responsible for all crimes committed by all others who profess to be Catholic.

              But would all people do as much charity work as my devout Catholic grandmother. Sure, if she had only been a well-educated, non-religious, big city, liberal professional, there may have been a trust fund waiting for me when I was born. But who would have fed those orphans?

              Now if only Grandma would have taken responsibility for the Crusades, kate would have approved of her faith.

    2. No Doi says:

      How unbelievably one-sided do you have to be to consider the Lutherans taking a vote on the amendment to be “stepping back” from political activism? It is no different than the Catholic Church’s taking a position, except you agree with it. Paging Dr. Hypocrisy.

  7. Realist says:

    Christians and the religious right are some of the biggest Biggots on the planet.

    Thank God Obama is a shoe in for the next 4years…

    1. Joe Hanson says:

      President Obama doesn’t support same sex marriage. Does that make HIM a biggot?

    2. See BS says:

      Compared to who? Stalin? Lenin? Adolph? Chairman Mao?

  8. LBJHHH says:

    Some one should remember that the ELCA does not represent ALL Lutherans in MMinnesota. There are other Sinods in MN that probably represent more Lutherans than the ELCA that are infavor of the Ammendment. Maybe you should have the other side.

    1. move over says:

      Agreed. Also, not all ELCA churches feel this way either; I know mine doesn’t.

  9. Andy says:

    Again, who cares what the so called religious think? This is a state issue. Vote no on the ammendment.

  10. angus says:

    Why do many religious people preach religious freedom but yet want to force their religious views on people who don’t agree with them?

    You may beleive anything you want as long as your actions do not harm other people and do not try to change mine.

    1. Bill says:

      Why are sodomites trying to force their unnatural lifestyle down our throats?

      A majority of us are just trying to hold on to what little remains of decent civilization. Preservation of the traditional family is one of these values.

      1. Andy says:

        I don’t think anyone is trying to force a lifestyle down your throat. They just want to marry the one they love, and have it officially recognized by the state. As to sodomite, do you know some male gay couples don’ teen engage in “sodomy”. I believe you are taking the normal christAin hypocrit stance to this.

      2. kate says:

        Who is trying to get you to be gay? How does allowing a same sex couple to marry force you to change your lifestyle?
        And if you are so big on ‘traditional family’ are you going to outlaw divorce? Or go back to the biblical way of having multiple wives?

      3. aeiou says:

        Yes, please Bill, ask that the hetero paraplegic man who filed the lawsuit to remove the sodomy laws in MN, because, the only way he could make love to his wife was – drum-roll- against the law.

        Still so smug mister?

      4. Les Johnson says:

        Bill, what happens to decent civilization if the guys down the road from you have a piece of paper stating their relationship is a legal binding contract just like mine or yours?

        Similarly, please describe what happens to “the traditional family” if two women can marry each other.

        Thanks in advance for your answers.

  11. Cindy says:

    ‘In 2009, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America assembly in Minneapolis passed a policy that moved toward a more accepting response to same-gender relationships.’

    And lightning struck the church they were meeting in that day – guess they didn’t learn anything. Wonder what will happen this time????

    1. saint ramer says:

      It wasn’t lightning, it was a tornado (on August 17). And that same tornado devastated most of my neighborhood except that my house was spared and I’m the only gay homeowner on my block. Explain that. I thought God hates me.

      Or maybe both are coincidences.

      1. Cindy says:

        Lightning did strike the church they were meeting in as well as well as the tornado you experienced. I’m glad your house was spared and you weren’t harmed.

        1. Andy says:

          Religion has nothing to do with this. Take the bible and shove it.

          1. Cindy says:

            I will pray for you Andy

            1. Andy says:

              Please don’t, instead pray for the ability to get past you religious nonsense, and let people have their marriages recognized by the state.

      2. Bruce Almighty says:

        He was just running down your property value. Everyone else get’s a new house.

        1. saint ramer says:

          Not so. My house was, and still is, the nicest one on the block. The point I was trying to make was that weather is caused by weather and it’s not messages from God.

          1. Bruce Almighty says:

            I have seen your house. It’s not that nice. It’s even decorated like a straight man lives there. You might want to hire someone.

    2. Les Johnson says:

      Cindy, so does god hate fa.gs like Reverend Phelps has repeatedly suggested? Is that what you’re saying by insinuating your god struck a church with lightning for discussing not outwardly shunning gays? Seriously?

  12. jack says:

    please change the headline to read ELCA may voice …….
    The elca does not speak for all lutherans in minnesota or america or the world.

  13. Jason says:

    I didnt see the journilst who wrote or published this.

  14. jack says:

    Also this is just the Mpls arena synod of the elca .so it is not even the whole state of minnesota just one synod of the elca in minnesota

  15. Martin Luther says:

    The ELCA is an apostate pseudo-Christian cult. They are not a Christian denomination. Let them have their gay pastorettes and cut up bibles. They’ll reap what they sow. They’re playing church.

  16. oNiSaC says:

    Clearly most of you are misinformed with regards to the Christian religion. Jesus Christ has never hated anyone for any reason. Christians hate sin, not the sinner. And that is the appoach we all should take.

    The word of God has never changed. From the first Chapter of the Bible to the last, they are all connected and alined with each other. It is our good news, and not sin. It is our only hope, and not sin. Jesus Christ is our savior, and not sin.

    Those are the facts with regard to the Christian religion. And if any of you knew anything about the Christian religion you wouldn’t be making such foolish statements about religion.

    We are asked to live a certain life style. That is not a restriction but an open door (through Jesus Christ) to ever lasting life. How can that be a threat to the human race?

    Sometimes a little knowlege is dangerous. Please feel free to read the entire Holy Bible.

    1. Andy says:

      Ahh…the bible the book of contradictions, and bs. No thanks.

    2. CaSiNo says:

      With 462 admonishments toward heteros and only 6 against gays, we can conclude that heteros need much more supervision. So pull the plank out of your eye and leave me to the splinter in mine.

    3. gcr says:

      Ahhh, must have been looking ibn the mirror with that little knowledge statement.

  17. oNiSaC says:

    Andy clearly you know very little about the Bible. The contradictions are mankinds problems not Gods. You keep trusting mankind if you like. I’ll stay with the word of God as explained in the Holy Bible.

    1. Pagan says:

      @oNi. Jesus would not recognize the religion he founded as practice in today’s churches. I daresay he would be appalled.

  18. Andy says:

    I know the bible very well that’s why I can make that statement

  19. HDS says:

    Take a breath, give yourself some time to reflect. Each time man has went fromfollowing Gods word….man suffers. The Lord has given us rules to live by for our own well being. A life following the rules is a lifeof joy in service to the Lord.

    1. Gilbert Moore says:

      A life following the rules of God is a life of disappointment propping up the power hungry rich people who run the church. I believe in God. I am a deeply spiritual person. I just don’t believe in religion. Religion has been the foundation and safe haven for the greatest mass murderers and genocidal megalomaniacs in all of history. It took until the twentieth century before the body count from secular wars began to give religious intolerance a run for the top spot. The previous 5000 years of western civilization were all in the name of religion.

  20. CaSiNo says:

    In the beginning God created man, and man being such a gentleman, returned the favor. – Mark Twain

    I am glad that Jesus has been recreated into a conservative Republican, hijacked by the party for its own purposes. If He’s such a hetero, why didn’t he have children? Why can’t he be more like Santorum or Bachmann?

    He will be, in due time. All in due time.

    1. or maybe says:

      Oh well, if Mark Twain said so I guess that’s just the last word on that subject. Actually there was nothing to stop Jesus from having children. He was a considered a Rabbi and it was perfectly acceptable to have wives and children. In fact, texts rejected by the Catholic Church indicate he may have been married. Everybody in a conflict claims to have God on their side. Both sides may be mistaken.

  21. Gilbert Moore says:

    Here’s a sick thought for you all: politicians support whatever their campaign contributors tell them to support. He who has the gold makes the rules. Obama doesn’t support gay marriage because his financial backers tell him not to. For myself, I will oppose gay marriage when someone can tell me (without religious hysteria or political hype) how allowing two people of the same gender to marry, with all the rights and privileges therein, will affect my 21+ year marriage to my wife. Does Jim and John, or Jody and Jen, getting married mean that I don’t love my wife anymore? Or will I love her less? What does this have to do with me?

  22. ShaonBowers says:

    I predict another mass exodus from the ELCA. They’re bringing it on themselves.

  23. Hank Rearden says:

    The ELCA has lost members for 20 years in a row, 7 percent last year. Giving,attendance, missinarries are down. The ELCA will slowly go away.

  24. Dale Gribble says:

    ELCA is the traitorous church of Satan. They are dominated by Obammy and the UN. The ELCA must be immediately outlawed and all clergy arrested. Their property must be seized and turned over to White Christian churches that support American Liberty and Freedom.

  25. Lot says:

    Sodum and Gomrrah called and said “It’s all about love and why are you all such haters?”

  26. Drew says:

    I really don’t see where religion has a “say” in this. This is a state issue, and a civil rights issue. Let them marry and have equal rights. It doesn’t impede on “traditional marriage” in any way, shape, or form.

    Besides, there is no god. So…yeah, stop your bigotry and stop impeded on MY life. Idiots.