update on same-sex marriage in MA
May. 16th, 2005 11:13 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mattlistenerBased on what I read in this Globe article, the writing's on the wall now for the same-sex marriage ban in Massachusetts.
The amendment (which would also create civil unions) passed last year with four votes to spare, and would need to pass again this year in order to go to ballot for final passage. Factors stacked against it:
o Four opponents of same-sex marriage lost their seats to supporters since then.
o Speaker Finneran (active opponent) was replaced by DiMasi (active supporter).
o No-one who voted against the ban last year lost their seat in the following elections.
o No socially damaging effects have been observed.
o Public opinion in Massachusetts has shifted further in favor of same-sex marriage in the last 12 months, and now a majority are in favor of the current legal status-quo. An even stronger majority are against amending the constitution to overturn same-sex marriage.
o Some who voted in favor of the ban may withdraw their support because it would put civil unions in the constitution, leaving Massachusetts still the strongest state in the country for same-sex couples' rights. Some civil union opponents voted in favor of the amendment in '04 in hopes of creating a legal drift for the SJC to follow, to stay their decision and prevent any marriages from occurring -- which didn't work.
o The Roman Catholic church is also likely to withdraw support for the same reason.
o The clincher: this isn't the last stand for the battle against same-sex marriage in MA. It only takes 51 legislators in two sessions to put an amendment before voters, if that amendment is brought forward by a petition drive. The soonest that could go before voters would be 2008. Attention and energies are starting to divert to this plan as the current amendment looks less and less like a winner.
As of today I'm content that the current amendment banning same-sex marriage is dead, and all that remains is the matter of how they nail up its coffin. I'm sure enough signatures and legislators will be mustered to put a ballot before us in 2008, but I'm just not worried about that. We're already above 50% support for same-sex marriage in MA, and that'll only grow stronger with 3.5 years more.
By then, there'll be same-sex couples with kids old enough to give cute quotes to the press -- kids who were born after their parents got married here.
The amendment (which would also create civil unions) passed last year with four votes to spare, and would need to pass again this year in order to go to ballot for final passage. Factors stacked against it:
o Four opponents of same-sex marriage lost their seats to supporters since then.
o Speaker Finneran (active opponent) was replaced by DiMasi (active supporter).
o No-one who voted against the ban last year lost their seat in the following elections.
o No socially damaging effects have been observed.
o Public opinion in Massachusetts has shifted further in favor of same-sex marriage in the last 12 months, and now a majority are in favor of the current legal status-quo. An even stronger majority are against amending the constitution to overturn same-sex marriage.
o Some who voted in favor of the ban may withdraw their support because it would put civil unions in the constitution, leaving Massachusetts still the strongest state in the country for same-sex couples' rights. Some civil union opponents voted in favor of the amendment in '04 in hopes of creating a legal drift for the SJC to follow, to stay their decision and prevent any marriages from occurring -- which didn't work.
o The Roman Catholic church is also likely to withdraw support for the same reason.
o The clincher: this isn't the last stand for the battle against same-sex marriage in MA. It only takes 51 legislators in two sessions to put an amendment before voters, if that amendment is brought forward by a petition drive. The soonest that could go before voters would be 2008. Attention and energies are starting to divert to this plan as the current amendment looks less and less like a winner.
As of today I'm content that the current amendment banning same-sex marriage is dead, and all that remains is the matter of how they nail up its coffin. I'm sure enough signatures and legislators will be mustered to put a ballot before us in 2008, but I'm just not worried about that. We're already above 50% support for same-sex marriage in MA, and that'll only grow stronger with 3.5 years more.
By then, there'll be same-sex couples with kids old enough to give cute quotes to the press -- kids who were born after their parents got married here.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Wow
Date: 2005-05-16 04:49 pm (UTC)But its weird, it seems the Media says the opposite is true.
Re: Wow
Date: 2005-05-16 05:53 pm (UTC)I'd much rather the media post bad news, as it will make the other side complacent....
Re: Wow
Date: 2005-05-16 06:51 pm (UTC)Re: Wow
Date: 2005-05-16 06:55 pm (UTC)Yet another argument against "letting the people vote."
no subject
Date: 2005-05-16 06:00 pm (UTC)Many couples who got married already have children, most of them well-adjusted and unscarred. If there is not an effort to profile these children in some way there ought to be.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-16 06:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-05-16 06:17 pm (UTC)