President Obama re-election campaign and Governor Dayton gave proposed Minnesota Constitutional amendments banning gay marriage and requiring voters' photo IDs a thumb's down and veto stamp Monday, respectively.

But what does Fridley think about changing the state Constitution, now that both questions are on the November general election ballot?

Share your opinion in comments below and add your voice to the poll above.

Here is what Kristen Sosanie, spokeswoman for the Obama for America-Minnesota campaign said about the marriage measure, according to MPR, and how Republicans in Minnesota responded. (See this post for more on Dayton and the photo ID amendment.)

"While the President does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the record is clear that the President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same sex couples. ... That's what the Minnesota ballot initiative would do—it would single out and discriminate against committed gay and lesbian couples—and that's why the President does not support it."

Republican Response
Republican Party of Minnesota Chair Pat Shortridge responded:

"While it’s flattering that President Obama thinks so highly of Minnesota to weigh in on our ballot initiatives when he has so much else on his plate, I’m pretty sure we can decide these questions for ourselves. By putting these critical issues on the November ballot, the Republican legislature has given Minnesotans the opportunity to make their voices heard on these issues."

(A Minnesota GOP spokesperson did not return a call to clarify whether "weigh in on our ballot initiatives" meant Obama had also taken a stand on Minnesota's proposed photo ID amendment.)

Amendment Text
Here is the text of the bill that sent the constitutional marriage question to the voters of Minnesota on the 2012 general election ballot:

A bill for an act proposing an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution; adding a section to article XIII; recognizing marriage as only a union between one man and one woman.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

Section 1. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROPOSED.
An amendment to the Minnesota Constitution is proposed to the people. If the amendment is adopted, a section shall be added to article XIII, to read:

Sec. 13. Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota.

Sec. 2. SUBMISSION TO VOTERS.
The proposed amendment must be submitted to the people at the 2012 general election. The question submitted must be: "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?