People on both sides of the debate about same-sex marriage in Massachusetts returned to the state legislature Thursday, bracing for what could be their final showdown in the only U.S. state to allow gays and lesbians to marry.
At issue is whether lawmakers will allow a proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage to go before Massachusetts residents for a vote.
Early Thursday, the fate of the proposed amendment was too close to call, although the state's new Democratic governor Deval Patrick and his fellow Democratic leaders in the state House of Representatives and Senate were within a handful of votes of killing the measure.
''We're working right down to the wire,'' Patrick said as he left his office Wednesday night. ''I'm not going to take anything for granted.''
To reach voters in a statewide ballot in 2008, the proposal needs the backing of a quarter of the state's legislators — 50 lawmakers — in two successive sittings of the Legislature. It won approval in January on the final day of the last session.
Supporters and opponents agree that eight lawmakers who supported the measure then must change their votes Thursday to keep the question from going to voters. But turnover in the newly composed Legislature — and Patrick's vow to kill the measure — fueled doubts about the outcome Thursday.
''We believe it's unconstitutional not to allow people to vote on this,'' said Rebekah Beliveau, a 24-year-old student at Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary who stood with fellow college-age amendment supporters across the street from the legislature's building.
''We're standing up not necessarily on the issue of same-sex marriage, but our right to vote,'' Beliveau said.
In a development that could affect the vote margin, state Rep. Anthony J. Verga took a tumble at the Statehouse on Wednesday and was taken to a hospital, where he was undergoing tests. He previously voted for the amendment, and his office did not answer calls seeking to find out whether he would be able to vote Thursday or whether he had reconsidered his position.
Proponents of marriage for same-sex couples fear Massachusetts voters, if given the chance, would reverse the landmark court decision that allowed the practice. Several other states offer domestic partnerships or civil unions to same-sex couples, but Massachusetts is the only state where same-sex marriage is legal.
Early Thursday, same-sex marriage advocates stood on the front steps of the Legislature waving signs that read, ''Wrong to Vote on Rights'' and ''All Families Are Equal.''
Jean Chandler, 62, came over with fellow members of her Baptist church in an effort to rebuff the image that strict followers of the Bible are opposed to same-sex marriage.
''I think being gay is like being left-handed,'' Chandler said. ''If we decided left-handed people couldn't marry, what kind of society would we be?''
At least one lawmaker who previously voted for the amendment said he was unsure now, after meeting privately with Patrick.
''I'm going to take one more night to sleep on it,'' said Sen. Robert L. Hedlund, a Republican. ''Personally, I'm not threatened by same-sex marriage ... but obviously there's a lot of people that feel strongly based on the volume of input I've had.''
Supporters of the amendment were also lobbying intensely. Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, said the group is confident the measure will pass.
''Every indication we have so far is that our votes are holding firm,'' he said. ''These are people of principle who believe in the people's right to define marriage.''
Rep. Sean Curran, a Democrat, voted in favor of the amendment in January and said he has been bombarded with calls urging him to hold firm.
''I'm not switching,'' he said. ''I'm going to keep the position I'm sticking to.'' (Steve LeBlanc, AP)
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
Be the first to comment on this story.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.
Home | Contact | Current Issue | LGBT Community Partners | Staff
Jobs | Help
Subscribe: Print Edition Digital Edition | Subscriber Services: Print Edition Digital Edition
Visit our Websites
Out.com | OutTraveler.com | HIVPlusMag.com | Alyson.com | HereTV.com | GayWired.com | SheWired.com
Privacy Policy | User Agreement | Community Guidelines | Legal Notice
Advocate.com © 2009 Regent Entertainment Media Inc. All Rights Reserved.
