Massachusetts Convention Approves Amendment Protecting Marriage     3/12/2004
By Robert Knight

Measure also creates civil unions; final approval still needed later this month.

Meeting as a constitutional convention, the Massachusetts Legislature voted three times last night to pass a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman, but also establishing “civil unions” with identical benefits, privileges and rights of marriage. They then adjourned without taking a necessary fourth vote, and will reconvene March 29-31 to take it up again.

CBSNews.com called the amendment votes a “same-sex defeat,” but both sides were wary about the outcome. Legislators still have not voted on the “MA and PA” marriage amendment proposed by Rep. Phil Travis (D-Rohoboth), which protects marriage and prohibits granting marital benefits to other relationships.

Another proposed amendment, sponsored by Rep. Paul Loscocco (R-Holliston), would ban homosexual “marriage” in the constitution, and leave it to the Legislature to deal with civil unions. That measure was not brought up, but supporters say it might emerge when the convention reconvenes.

At the next convention, marriage supporters will try to split the amendment into one protecting marriage and another allowing civil unions. Whatever emerges would

face another test at a convention next year, and then go to the voters in November 2006. Pro-family groups aligned with the Coalition for Marriage said that they felt confident that voters would support the marriage amendment and reject the one with civil unions.

Several thousand demonstrators filled the State House on Beacon Hill and the grounds outside during the deliberations.

CWA Massachusetts State Director Sandi Martinez was among those on the outside, where pro-homosexual chanting was so loud that it nearly drowned out her cell phone conversation. She said that coalition volunteers had passed out 6,000 stickers for people to wear supporting marriage.

“Rep. Travis spoke eloquently against the Finneran-Travaglini Amendment,” she said. "And Rep. Vinny deMacedo (R-Plymouth) gave a strong speech outlining why it’s a threat to religious liberties.” DeMacedo reminded the legislators that the Massachusetts colony itself was founded in Plymouth to secure the Pilgrims’ religious liberty.

The amendment sponsored by House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran and Senate President Robert E. Travaglini “won initial approval with relative ease, 129-69, after only three hours of debate, as thousands of protesters gathered outside and inside the State House,” the Boston Globe reported. “A second question also sailed through the Legislature last night, 136-62.”

The final vote was 121-77, as liberal and conservative lawmakers switched votes for strategic reasons, preparing to fight another day.

"We must trust the people to answer this question, whether they uphold the [SJC's] Goodridge decision or whether they reject it and replace it with something else," said Representative John H. Rogers, a Norwood Democrat and a top Finneran ally, as reported in the Globe. "The only entity that can answer this question, of whether or not there should be civil unions in Massachusetts, is the people themselves."

Robert Knight is the director of the Culture & Family Institute, an affiliate of Concerned Women for America.

Printer Friendly Version

Recent Articles

Guest Commentary! Hate Crimes Legislation: The Politically Correct Way to Silence People of Faith

Threats and Violence Across the Nation Following Votes for Traditional Marriage

Marriage Wins in Three More States

Homosexual Activists Turn Angry and Violent Over Marriage Votes

Support of Traditional Marriage Continues to Grow in California

German Officials Interfere in U.S. Election

The Tale of a Mother and her Daughter

Taxpayers Fund “Gay Wedding” Field Trip for First Graders

Connecticut High Court Imposes "Gay Marriage," Threatens Religious Liberty

U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Lisa Miller Case