I saw this story today about aVermont Inn that was fined $30,000 for being honest with potential customers about their objections to same sex marriage (a more complete timeline can be seen here).

The MN marriage amendment should not be so controversial. Its passage or failure will not directly change state law. It is, as supporters claim, simply an attempt to solidify and affirm existing law, and place major changes to the institution of marriage out of the reach of an activist judiciary.

Amendment opponents and GLBT activists constantly claim that there is no “harm” in same-sex marriage. Honest opponents will admit that they will not be satisfied with its failure. Their goal is “full equality” under the law. This case in Vermont highlights one hazard in the proposition that the state should be able to make illegal what should be a matter of conscience.

If the marriage amendment fails, and “equality” is enacted, yet another small group of people with a grievance will be granted a legal weapon to coerce and punish those who disagree with them. As seen in Vermont, that weapon can be used to force people to keep their opinions to themselves.

I say the power to silence those who disagree with me is a fearsome weapon.

I will be voting “yes”.