In 2004 then State Rep. Keith Ellison (DFL-Minneapolis) and a group of fellow Democratic-Farmer-Labor members of the Minnesota State House of Representatives filed an ethics complaint against State Rep. Arlon Lindner (R-Corcoran) for a speech he made which Ellison alleged amounted to a denial that homosexuals were targeted by the Nazis and were killed during the Holocaust.
Lindner as controversial figure.
In early 2003 Ellison was among several DFL legislators who filed an ethics complaint against Rep. Arlon Lindner (R-Corcoran) representing House District 33A. At the time Lindner was already seen as controversial.
In 1997 as the case of "Baehr v. Miike" was progressing through the Hawaiian State Court system, Minnesotan social conservatives feared their state would recognize same-sex marriages performed there. They feared that the "Full Faith and Credit Clause" of the United States Constitution would require this, despite the Federal Defense of Marriage Act passed in 1996.
In response a debate over banning gay and lesbian marriage occurred in the Minnesota Legislature. On the House floor Lindner claimed that allowing same-sex marriage would open the door to "a man marrying a child or a man marrying a dog." Openly gay State Rep. Karen Clark (whose partner, parents, and her partner's parents were attending the debate) expressed dismay at the comment. Lindner told her "I don't know why you felt that was insulting. I was trying to make a point, that we've got a norm of one man, one woman. Once we begin to deviate...what's to keep us from having to pass laws to allow a man to marry several women, or a man and a boy relationship -- and there are people who would like to have that. When we start changing that definition of marriage, that does open up the door to others who will say 'Why not us?'" He told Clark that while he saw her as "one of God's creations. ...I personally don't think the lifestyle you've chosen and other homosexuals have chosen is really good for you, your partner or society. ...I'm talking in general, the HIV/AIDS problem, other diseases. It probably affects more homosexual men. ...I don't know of any [heterosexual] couple, where they've been faithful to each other, a man and a woman, has any fear of any sexually transmitted disease unless they have to get a blood transfusion. ...you're living in sin." He also stated "I don't believe adoption of children by homosexual couples is in the best interests of children." (In 1997 Minnesota enacted the Marriage Protection Act defining marriage as a "civil contract between a man and a woman" and stating that "Lawful marriage may be contracted only between persons of the opposite sex".)
In May 2001 Lindner was outraged by the news that Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama was going to address the Minnesota Legislature. In an e-mail to House members he stated "As a Christian, I am offended that we would have the Dalai Lama come and speak to a joint meeting of our Minnesota Legislature. He claims to be a god-king, a leader of the Buddha religion, which historically has been considered a cult because of its anti-Biblical teachings concerning the one true Holy God, Creator of Heaven and earth and His Son, Jesus Christ. A Buddhist would say, 'Why the big fuss about abortion and euthanasia? After all, we are all reincarnated over and over again in many lives, so why the big deal about ending one?' These beliefs are incompatible with Christian principles, and those Christian principles are or have been the governing principles of American society. There is a public religious ethic that prevails in this country, Judeo-Christian, demanding a public adherence to that standard in terms of behavior rather than belief. The Judeo-Christian ethic is the moral and spiritual foundation of our Constitution, Bill of Rights and most of our laws and it has served us well. ...I for one will not be present on the morning of May 9."
By the 83rd Minnesota Legislative Session Lindner had already faced an ethics complaint before. This was a result of his reaction to the request of Rep. Paymar. His first complaint stemmed from a May 2000 incident after the Republican Party took control of the House and some members felt that the prayers opening the session were becoming too sectarian. "For many, things went too far when House leaders recently brought in a choir to open the day's session with a musical rendition of the Apostles' Creed." In light of this Rep. Michael Paymar (DFL-St. Paul) who is Jewish said "I would like to be part of that moment where a religious leader gets up before us and has a prayer. But I would like that to be non-denominational, and I would like it to be respectful of who I am." In response to his and others' concerns a rule was passed "requiring that in the future, prayer be non-denominational." In responding to Paymar, Lindner said "You know, we're told there's one God and one mediator between God and man. That man is Jesus Christ. And most of us here are Christians. And we shouldn't be left not able to pray in the name of our God...And if you don't like it, you may have to like it-Or just don't come. I don't come sometimes for some prayers here...We have that privilege, and you need to exercise it. But don't impose your irreligious left views on me." Rep. Matt Entenza (DFL-St. Paul), called on Lindner "to rethink his comments. When Lindner refused to reply, Entenza put forth a 'protest of dissent' petition asking the House Ethics Committee to reprimand Lindner. It was signed by 60 House members, including eight Republicans." Later "The ethics panel found the comments 'regrettable', but took no disciplinary action."
Context of Lindner's remarks.
In 1993 Minnesota passed a provision that added sexual orientation to the state's human rights law. The provision has been characterized by its supporters as protecting "gay and lesbian teachers and students from discrimination". In early 2003 Rep. Lindner claimed that the provision was a shield for the promotion of homosexuality, "In some of the schools, we've got children as young as three, in pre-school, on up through the years that are being taught homosexual practices. And it doesn't mean they're going to be homosexual, but unfortunately they hear about some of the sexual activities of the homosexual, and they're being told that it's safe and so forth and healthy, and it isn't." He claimed "parents have complained to the schools, and administrators have told them that there's nothing they can do because of state law." Lindner co-authored a bill to repeal this provision and worked to get it a hearing by a House committee. Meeting with homosexuals opposed to his bill Lindner stressed "I don't hate any of those people. I know they accuse me of hating and wanting all kind of terrible things to happen to them, but I don't hate any of them. I do love them. Actually this would benefit them if they were to leave that lifestyle or if they would maybe be more faithful to one partner, if it's got to be that way. But it's my understanding that gays have hundreds and even thousands of partners over a lifetime." His remarks were seen as offensive by many Minnesotan homosexuals who said "most gays and lesbians are in committed relationships." They also took issue with Lindner's suggestion that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice.
Holocaust remarks.
The complaint from Ellison and company came after Lindner made several comments he made on the floor of the House while he "introduced a bill that would repeal the state's pro-gay human rights amendment and remove sexual orientation from its hate-crimes law." Lindner said "Most of my life, when the word Holocaust was referred to, it usually referred to the Jewish suffering and death that occurred under the Nazi occupation. It's just been within the recent two or three years that it's been brought forward that homosexuals also suffered like that...It never happened. I was a child during World War II, and I've read a lot about World War II. It's just been recently that anyone's come out with this idea that homosexuals were persecuted to this extent. There's been a lot of rewriting of history."
Response to Lindner's remarks.
Linder's comments not only drew a response from members of the DFL, but also from Hinda Kibort, an 82-year-old holocaust survivor who had lived in a concentration camp in Germany from 1941 to 1945. She said "[h]is obvious lack of knowledge concerning Nazi barbarity in World War II is appalling." She stated that the Nazis identified homosexuals in her camp with pink stars, and that "[u]nlike Lindner, I did not learn about World War II and the Nazi holocaust by reading books. I was in a concentration camp and can testify to the fact that homosexuals were indeed persecuted based on their sexuality."
Some of Lindner's critics invited him to join their upcoming trip to in Washington, D.C. for Holocaust Remembrance Day. Lindner said he would only consider the offer "if others pay for his trip and time off." Lindner claimed that "no one can fully know what happened 60 years ago..." and said "I just think it's strange that over 58, 60 years it's just willing to come out about that. We know there's been a lot of rewriting of history lately and in my mind that's possibly an area where that's happening."
Lindner responds to the controversy.
On March 10, 2004 Lindner complained that critics of his remarks were not focusing on the real motives of his bill and his speech. He said "that homosexuality, the rise in sexually transmitted diseases, and comprehensive sexual health education could prompt a future 'holocaust' in Minnesota". On the House floor he said, "[w]hat I am trying to prevent is the holocaust of our children getting STDs, AIDS, and various other diseases that are going to affect their lives. If you want to sit around here and wait until America becomes another African continent, well, then, you do that, but I'm going to do something about it." Whatever his intentions, Lindner's new remarks only managed to offend more Jews and Gays, while upsetting many African-Americans within Minnesota. With respect to the accuracy of his claims that gays weren't targeted via death camps, Lindner said he was continuing his "research " on the issue.
Ethics complaint is filed.
Ellison, one of only two African-American state lawmakers at the time (the other being Rep. Neva Walker of District 61B), became the spokesman of the DFL group that filed with the Ethics Committee against Lindner. Besides Ellison the group consisted of Representatives Karen Clark, Frank Hornstein (whose mother is a Holocaust survivor), Margaret Anderson Kelliher, Neva Walker, Lyndon Carlson, Ron Latz, and House Minority Leader Matt Entenza. The complaint held "that when Lindner expressed his belief that homosexuals may not have been persecuted during the Nazi Holocaust, his conduct violated 'accepted norms of House behavior' and that his comments 'bring the House into dishonor or disrepute.'" Ellison stated that they sought "censure of Lindner and his removal as chair of the Economic Development and Tourism Division of the House Commerce, Jobs, and Economic Development Policy Committee." Ellison's group exhibited letters from out-of-state residents who said they cancelled vacation plans in Minnesota after learning of Lindner's comments. Ellison stated "There's a question mark hanging over the State Office Building. The question is 'Do the people of the state of Minnesota and the legislators that represent them share the viewpoint that people who were victims of Nazi persecution were in fact not victims of Nazi persecution?' Mr. Lindner has insulted not only the House but members of the community at large." The Session Weekly reported "'The fact of the matter is his conduct calls for discipline,' said Ellison, who added that a censure penalty does not prohibit Lindner from saying what he believes. 'It would just be a denunciation, a condemnation, of what he said.'" Ellison told Minnesota Public Radio "That question mark sitting over this building is whether we represent all the people of this state or not. And whether or not an elected official, a person who holds an election certificate can spout bigoted language, mean-spirited, untrue statements designed to injure members of the community and members of this body. That is the issue."
Walker-Black letter.
In