Protecting Gay Marriage in Massachusetts
U.S. Congressman talks to Gay City
News
Volume 75, Number 28
| 14 - 20 July
2005Protecting Gay Marriage
in
MassachussettsGAY
CITY NEWS
U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, a gay
Massachusetts Democrat, gave the keynote address
in a pro-marriage gathering in Maplewood,
New Jersey, last week and took time to
talk about the situation in his home state and in New York
City.By SETH J.
BOOKEYAfter an historic ruling from the
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in November 2003, same-sex marriage
became a reality in that state the following May, more than a year
ago.Yet, opponents of gay marriage
continue to press for a way to roll back that gain—either through an
amendment to convert the marriages into civil unions, in a ballot measure that
could be voted on in November 2006, or through the outright elimination of
same-sex marriage, with no alternative put in place, in a referendum that can
happen no earlier than November
2008.Democratic U.S. Rep. Barney Frank,
the longest-serving openly gay member of Congress, is optimistic that gay
marriage in his home state can be
preserved.At last Saturday’s
pro-marriage gathering in Maplewood, New Jersey, Frank told Gay City News that
the efforts by some conservatives to convert gay marriages into civil unions via
a 2006 amendment referendum is likely to fail, both because the anti-marriage
caucus in the Massachusetts’ Legislature lost seats since last
November’s election and because the gay community’s staunchest
opponents would rather eliminate gay marriage outright rather than replace it
with civil unions.Frank noted that two
Democrats opposed to gay marriage were defeated in their re-election bids and
another three retired. In order for the civil union amendment to get on the 2006
ballot, a majority vote of the state Legislature, sitting in joint session, is
required before then. The first of the two required legislative votes, last
year, just squeaked by.But Frank made
clear that right-wing opponents of gay marriage are really looking to 2008, in
any event. The effort for a 2006 amendment, he said, “is probably going to
lose. The right wing has decided to not fight for the amendment because it
mandates civil unions and they hate
that.”Frank noted that the harshly
anti-gay Massachusetts Republican governor, Mitt Romney, has repudiated the 2006
amendment.“If it comes up [in the
Legislature], it will be voted down,” Frank
predicted.Many conservatives are now
focused instead on gathering petition signatures for an amendment that would
only require 50 votes out of the 200-member state Legislature, in two successive
sessions, to make it on to the 2008 ballot. The wording of that amendment would
simply bar same-sex marriage, without providing gay and lesbian couples with any
compensating benefits.Frank also voiced
optimism that this initiative would
fail.“It wouldn’t get on the
ballot until 2008, and by then, marriage will have been around for four years,
and public opinion will have shifted some, and fears about gay marriage will
have dissipated,” Frank said.When
asked about the February decision by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg to appeal
a State Supreme Court ruling ordering the city clerk to issue same-sex marriage
licenses, Frank said, “It was outrageous. It’s an example of how
Republicans who say they mean well are still under great pressure to go against
us.”Frank argued that the example
of same-sex marriages taking place in New York City would have had a powerful
impact on other courts considering marriage challenges elsewhere in the
state.“One of the things that
helps us win is to have [marriage] in the first place,” he said.
“When same-sex marriage is in place, it
shows.”While acknowledging that
the city ruling would inevitably been affected by higher court rulings in New
York, he said Bloomberg’s appeal “deprives us of the chance to show
how same-sex marriage has no negative impact on society. Had Bloomberg not
appealed, New Yorkers would have been allowed to marry. The appeal would have
come, but after there had been some
marriages.”“Nothing defeats
prejudice more decisively than the reality,” he
said.Asked to speculate on how New York
might arrive at the place where Massachusetts is already, Frank responded,
“Exactly how you get there, I don’t know.”
Posted: Thu - July 14, 2005 at 10:14 PM
|
Quick Links
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat
|
Categories
Archives
XML/RSS Feed
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Jun 20, 2009 07:03 PM
|