Amending North Dakota's Constitution to deny or threaten to deny rights to North Dakota citizens contradicts the document's historic purpose. The marriage amendment that would both define marriage and prohibit extension of civil benefits to same-sex couples does exactly that. It should be turned down.

The amendment has two provisions. The first conforms to the state's Defense of Marriage Act which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. If that's all the amendment did, a "yes" vote would be in order. The legislative act accomplished what North Dakotans wanted regarding the definition of marriage by properly using the legislative process. We agree with the act's definition.

But the second provision of the ballot measure aims to tell anyone and everyone (including private sector employers) that they cannot, under any circumstances, offer civil benefits to committed same-sex couples. Indeed, the provision could be interpreted to mean employers that currently provide benefits to same-sex couples (there are several of them in North Dakota) would be violating the state constitution. The potential for a litigation nightmare is clear.

Second, same-sex marriage is not a huge issue in North Dakota. The amendment is unnecessary. The concern among supporters of the amendment that "activist" judges will overturn the Defense of Marriage Act is overblown. North Dakota is not a bastion of so-called activist judges, nor is it a litigious state.

(By the way, the real definition of "activist judge" has nothing to do with liberal or conservative ideology. It's merely a judge you disagree with.)

Third, a perusal of the state constitution will find that amendments historically have been either extensions or confirmation of rights, or house- keeping measures to bring the document up to date. For example, North Dakota was one of the first states to give women the right to vote. More recently, an amendment confirmed the right to hunt, fish and trap. Never - never - in the state's history have the people of North Dakota condoned misuse of the constitution by a special interest group to erode citizens' rights. And never has the state's basic civil, secular document been perverted to impose one group's religious beliefs on the citizenry.

The North Dakota Constitution should not be corrupted in that way. Vote "no" on the marriage amendment.

Forum editorials represent the opinion of Forum management and the newspaper's Editorial Board