Mass. Awaits Historic Gay-Marriage Vote
Massachusetts lawmakers, thrust into the center of the national debate over gay rights by a landmark court ruling, convened Wednesday to consider rewriting the state constitution to ban same-sex marriages.
The proposed amendment was near the bottom of the agenda, but lawmakers, recognizing the importance of the vote, suspended the rules to take the issue up immediately.
People from across the country swarmed into the normally sedate Statehouse amid tight security and a throng of reporters. Impromptu rallies erupted outside the two-century-old building, while inside lawmakers and advocacy groups held last-minute news conferences to champion their cause.
A joint session of the House and Senate convened in the afternoon to consider an amendment that would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. A compromise proposal, floated by bipartisan Senate leadership, would ban gay marriage but legalize civil unions in November 2006, the earliest an amendment could be placed on a ballot for voter approval.
At that time, any gay couples married under the state Supreme Judicial Court’s November ruling that found gay marriage constitutional would be stripped of their licenses and considered part of a civil union.
The first state-recognized gay marriages in U.S. history are to start taking place in mid-May, giving couples more than two years to get married before a constitutional amendment could take away those rights.
The Massachusetts Legislature is tightly controlled by the Democrats, who hold 170 of the 199 seats. (One seat is vacant.)
While the Senate compromise appeared to be winning support of moderates, it was also serving to unite gay-rights advocates and their conservative opponents, who both harshly condemned the proposal.
The proposed ban also has drawn political foes together, including Republican Gov. Mitt Romney and Democratic House Speaker Thomas Finneran. Senate President Robert Travaglini, a Democrat, has not revealed his position on the amendment, although he has said he favors civil unions and opposes gay marriage.
“It’s still very fluid,” said Senate Republican Leader Brian Lees, a sponsor of the compromise. “When you have the far left and the far right both saying almost the exact same thing, I feel pretty good.”
The votes will force lawmakers to finally declare their stand on a divisive social issue that most would prefer to avoid, especially with all 200 legislative seats up for grabs at the November elections.
Originally proposed in early 2003, the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage took center stage after the state’s highest court ruled in November that it is unconstitutional to bar gay couples from marriage – a 4-3 decision that the court definitively reaffirmed last week.
If gay marriage takes place in Massachusetts, federal lawsuits would probably ensue as gay couples seek recognition in other states and by the federal government. While marriages performed in one state are normally recognized in other jurisdictions, 38 states and the federal government have approved laws or amendments barring the recognition of gay marriage.
Adopted in 1780, the Massachusetts Constitution is the oldest still-governing written constitution in the world. It has been amended 120 times, most recently in 2000.
Busloads of people on both sides gathered outside the Statehouse hours before the scheduled vote, waving signs, singing and getting into arguments.
“I’m against discrimination in any form,” said Karen Doyle, a 49-year-old gay-rights activist. “I don’t care if you’re purple, green, yellow, polka-dotted. We are all taxpaying citizens with rights.”
Inside, James Meola, 57, a health care administrator wearing a tie with Bible passages printed on it, was one of the people selected for one of the coveted 120 public seats in the House gallery.
“God has laid down the moral absolutes for all mankind in his Holy Scriptures, and the cornerstone of civilization is the institution established by God called the family,” he said.