Bay Windows has confirmed it was powerful,
national forces from the AFL-CIO, ACLU, Anti-Defamation
League, NOW and other liberals who were behind the
illegal adjournment of the vote on the Protection
of Marriage Amendment on July 17.
The newspaper also indicated that most homosexuals
are not interested in the subject. It was like pulling
teeth to get them to contribute to the effort, one
activist reported.
"This confirms what we have been saying,"
says Sarah McVay Pawlick, President of Mass. Citizens
for Marriage.
"This is not primarily about homosexuality. It's
about a powerful, liberal agenda to change our morality.
These liberals are seeking a socialist state similar
to Sweden or Cuba, with a free-love society in which
children are the responsibility of the state, not
their parents.
"That's why the national, liberal organizations
are so interested in what is happening in Massachusetts.
They are hiding behind homosexuals and others to achieve
their political objectives.
"They wish to diminish the institution of marriage
which has been the bedrock of our country since its
founding. When the state was first founded, everyone
knew what 'marriage' meant. So it was never written
down. But it's obvious to everyone that we must do
so now."
The Bay Windows editorial emphasized the importance
of liberal allies when it wrote the following: "Gays
and lesbians cannot win these fights on their own.
They must have strong and committed straight allies,
such as labor unions and the ACLU." It also listed
other organizations and said, "Our hats are off
to them."
Although Bay Windows did not say so, it is also obvious
that the powerful Boston Globe and its owner, The
New York Times, are important players in this attempt
to increase the power of the state in our lives. Both
papers reported about the Amendment only in a negative
manner that was an attempt to damage it.
Because the Bay Windows editorial appeared on August
22 and was probably written around August 19, it considered
the July 17 adjournment a victory, which gave them
every reason to celebrate. By now, they know differently.
This struggle has just started for the year.
Their August 29 edition had a more balanced story
with the headline, "Marriage Foes Target Birmingham."
The August 19 editorial acknowledged two illegal tactics
that were used to damage the Amendment.
Blockers
Hundreds of blockers were trained by the ACLU, according
to Bay Windows, to harass voters as they attempted
to sign the petition last fall. This was an illegal
violation of the rights of voters under the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that no campaigning
can be done anywhere near where people are exercising
their voting rights, but the ACLU-trained blockers
were in-their-face as the voters were in the act of
signing.
This confrontation caused everyone to worry about
the safety of the petition gatherers, says Pawlick,
and forced them to go to the expense of hiring paid
petition gatherers. The Bay Windows editorial bragged,
"As a result, the petitioners received thousands
fewer signatures than they otherwise would have."
The right to solicit signatures in public places is
clear and is protected by both the U.S. and Massachusetts
Constitutions, according to a Memorandum from the
Secretary of State on August 30, 2001.
A large smear was staged by the opponents of the Amendment,
including both the Globe and the NY Times, by saying
that the paid signature gatherers were using fraudulent
tactics to obtain signatures, says Pawlick.
"Don't forget that we had to use these paid signature-gatherers
only because of the illegal blocking by the opposition,"
says Pawlick. "The claim of 'fraud' was that
the gatherers were duping people to believe they were
signing a petition to save horses. But it was a rotten,
nasty lie that the New York Times and the Boston Globe
were instrumental in creating."
AFL-CIO, ACLU, Anti-Defamation League and NOW Are
Named
