Preview of the New America

The subject of gayness has been in the blog, as of late. As it has many times in history, Massachusetts is leading the way. Only this time, it is damn scary, not funny.

From the Kimberly Atkins of the Boston Herald:

In a move slammed by Gov. Mitt Romney as “the triumph of arrogance over democracy,” lawmakers took a pass on a proposed gay marriage ban and virtually dashed any hopes voters will get to decide the issue in 2008.



Same-sex marriage on the ballot:
Outraged proponents of the ban loudly protested outside the House chamber, with one of their leaders waving a copy of the state constitution.
“The oldest living constitution in the world, and this Legislature is thumbing its nose at it - is playing games with it,” shouted Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute and spokesman for VoteOnMarriage.org. “That’s not democracy. Welcome to the People’s Republic of Massachusetts!”


Backers of same-sex marriage, currently allowed in the state, said the issue is a matter of civil rights that should not be decided by voters. Lawmakers must approve the proposed constitutional amendment two consecutive times to clear the way for the issue to make the ballot.


Backers of the citizen initiative gathered 170,000 signatures, more than enough to put it before lawmakers. Under Massachusetts law, it needs the approval of at least one quarter of the Legislature, or 50 lawmakers.

Romney said the 109 lawmakers who voted to recess the Constitutional Convention session, virtually killing any chance of the question appearing on the 2008 ballot, “disgraced their oaths of office.”

By recessing until Jan. 2, the last day of the legislative session, lawmakers made it highly unlikely the measure will be acted on before the session ends.
Sen. Jarrett Barrios, a Cambridge Democrat who is gay and married, pointed to his wedding ring and warned that putting the question on the ballot will open the doors to a campaign vilifying gays.


“You don’t have to live next to us, you don’t have to like us,” said Barrios. “We are only asking you today to end the debate so that we can sleep easily knowing that while you may not live next to us or even like us that we will at least have the right to enjoy the same rights the rest of you enjoy.”

Insol: End the debate. Squash the discussion. That is what the Gay fascists in Mass. Think of the process of free speech. In spite of their cultural stereotype, they some of the most violent, uncivil and narcissistic people mingling about in their ranks. When they don’t get their gay way, you had better get out of the way.

Gov.-elect Deval Patrick favors gay marriage, which was legalized by the state’s highest court in November 2003. Romney, aggressively courting conservatives and the evangelicals in his bid for the White House, has made national headlines attacking it.
Praising the 87 lawmakers who voted against recessing, including Senate President Robert E. Travaglini, Romney said, “Whether or not you favor same-sex marriage, you should be very concerned that the rule of law and sovereignty of the vote of the people have been trampled.”

What Mitt is talking about is article 48.

-- http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/07/09/a_mockery_of_the_rules/
Jeff Jacoby

The Massachusetts Constitution could not be clearer on the point. Article 48, which establishes the right of initiative and referendum, specifies that when amendments proposed by initiative petition come before the Legislature, a roll call is mandatory. They ``shall be voted upon" as written, the Constitution directs (unless amended by a three-fourths supermajority). What's more, the Legislature is permitted to take action on them ``only by call of the yeas and nays." (Italics added)

Lawmakers are not given a choice in the matter. The Constitution requires them to vote. If it didn't, initiatives opposed by the legislative leadership could be aborted by simply refusing to bring them up for a vote. Instead of operating as a check and balance on the Legislature, Article 48 would then be a toothless sham.
--

The vote came after two hours of emotional debate.
At the urging of House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, many lawmakers were planning to block the ballot question.


Gay marrage advocates, who crowded into the State House by the thousands, praised DiMasi as “a true champion of individual and civil rights.”


Way to go, champions. Civil rights cannot be championed by uncivil, lawless behavior. Without the rule of law, none of us have civil rights.