Smoke and mirrors: attacking marriage in Massachusetts

Smoke and mirrors: attacking marriage in Massachusetts

The pro-gay marriage forces in Massachusetts are prepping their bag of underhanded legislative tricks to undermine the efforts of mainstream supporters of marriage to protect the institution and doing so under the guise of “anti-discrimination.” At the Blue Mass. Group, a leading liberal Massachusetts blog, one of their supporters has listed steps that the Legislature could take to thwart the will of the people. Keep in mind that “anti-marriage minority” means folks who are trying to protect marriage from being perverted to include same-sex (and other) relationships that cannot be marriage. “Marriage supporters”, by their reckoning, are those who seek to make it meaningless by expanding the definition. Note, as well, the common trope that any opposition to such efforts are inherently hateful and discriminatory and the oft-refuted claim that signatures on the marriage protection amendment were gained fraudulently. Here are their proposals:

1. A majority of either chamber can pass resolutions deploring violence and hate rhetoric against gays (and marriage supporters).

2. Either chamber can hold hearings on signature fraud, keeping the spotlight on this seamy aspect of the anti-marriage campaign.

3. A majority of the joint session can refer the amendment to a study commission, to be recalled only if demands for a full debate are met, and at a time of the majority’s choosing—if at all.

4. As part of the above, the majority can determine when the amendment will be put before the voters: 2008 if voted on in time for the 2008 ballot, 2010 if after that.

5. A majority of the joint session could approve its own proposal to amend the constitution to outlaw discriminatory amendments.

6. In fact, this majority could cause such an amendment to be on the ballot in 2010 and, by delaying the anti-marriage amendment until then, cause both proposals to be before the voters at the same time. The majority could word the ban on discriminatory amendments to apply to the anti-marriage amendment if both passed.

7. A majority of the legislature could amend the general laws to recognize marriage for all, putting an end once and for all to the “activist judges” meme.

8. In fact, the majority could rewrite marriage laws so as to make marriage rights for everyone unseverable—so that the effect of the anti-marriage amendment would be to completely invalidate the law that defines marriage itself. A vote for the anti-marriage amendment would then be a vote to outlaw marriage for everybody.

Emotion and demagoguery

Technorati Tags:, , , , ,

  • Regarding #7, this is what the SJC told them to do before.  They didn’t have the testicular fortitude to to take that up before…I don’t know what’s different now…

  • I think people are fighting with their feet. When society doesn’t support marriage this is what happens…. From the Lowel Sun

    Young adults are earning their college degrees in Massachusetts and leaving town, taking their eager work ethic, vitality and young families with them, according to a new study.
    The Massachusetts population has dwindled over the past 14 years, but young adults ages 25 to 34 are disappearing the fastest, according to a study out of the Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire.
    And they’re not just leaving the Bay State. All six New England states rank in the top 10 in the country when it comes to losing members of Generation Y…..
    “We have a very aging population and we have one of the best benefits systems, but you need those young entrepreneurial working-class people to support that system. Losing people in the 25-to-34 age group hurts us today, but it hurts us even more 10 years from now when those people would be getting into the prime of their business careers,” Panagiotakos said.
    Although several universities in the state attract young adults, we’re unable to keep them, leading to a “brain drain” of skilled workers…..
    Massachusetts has lost 20 percent of its young adults during the past 14 years, tying with Rhode Island. Vermont and New Hampshire lost even more, each with 27 percent, followed by Maine at 29 percent. Connecticut has lost the highest percentage of young adults at 30 percent.
    Part of the loss is because the young-adult generation isn’t as big as the Baby Boomer generation. But other states, such as Nevada and Utah, are seeing increases in young adults by up to 60 percent