August 2001   

The future of marriage in Massachusetts is going to be put on the ballot for the voters to decide.

In order to begin the process, a new organization, named “Massachusetts Citizens for Marriage (MCM),” has been formed. It is seeking an Amendment to the state Constitution. Such an organization is required by state law when a ballot initiative is proposed.

The chairman of the new organization, Bryan Rudnick, says that marriage is not presently defined in any state law or in the state Constitution because it has always been assumed by everyone that it consists of a union of one man and one woman.

MCM is seeking to change the Constitution and not create a new law because even if it were successful in passing a ballot question for a new law, that law could easily be changed by either the legislature or the state Supreme Court (SJC).

The petition for the ballot question had to be filed before August 1. The Attorney General is now required to decide by the end of the month whether the language of the proposed Amendment is satisfactory. If he approves it, his approval will undoubtedly be challenged by homosexual activists who will appeal to the SJC.

The Chief Justice of that court, Margaret Marshall, will not favor the petition because she has already indicated publicly that she is against continuing the institution of marriage.

The legislature is deeply divided over the issue. Although most legislators are in favor of the Amendment, they fear the enormous power of the Boston Globe and its ability to destroy anyone who gets in its way.

It’s a Minefield

“This whole process is a minefield,” says Rudnick. “Our lawyers are taking the time to make sure that we do everything exactly as required so that our petition is not dismissed on some technicality.”

Observers point out that enormous roadblocks could be placed in the way of the legislation by the Attorney General, the SJC or the legislature if they feel that the citizens are not watching the process. They could even prevent it from being on the ballot at all.

“This is a tremendous example of democracy in action,” stated Rudnick. “We are giving the citizens the power to make this momentous and historic decision. But it will not happen unless they make the effort to see that it does. We cannot accomplish this from our offices at MCM.”

At the very least, the citizens must be highly vocal and make the legislators and judges aware that they are being closely watched, he said.

What Will Happen Next?

Now that the petition has been filed with Attorney General Thomas Reilly, he must decide by the end of August whether he approves the language in the proposed Amendment and whether he will allow it to go forward.

The problem for the petitioners is that Reilly is already on record as being against the present understanding about marriage that is assumed by everyone. He could water down the language of the Amendment so that it would be meaningless. However, he has plans to be Governor and will not do anything that is politically unwise for himself. Therefore, he is watching closely to see what would be his smartest political move. After all, everyone knows that a majority of the citizens approve the proposal.

Even if Reilly does approve the petition, the radical feminists at the Globe and elsewhere will put pressure on the homosexual activists to appeal Reilly’s decision to the SJC, where one of their own sits as Chief Justice. 

“This is the beginning of a long and arduous journey, but one that is eminently winnable if the citizens make it clear that they desire it to succeed,” said Rudnick.

The legislature must approve the Amendment in 2002 and 2004, but only 25% of the legislators are required to vote in favor. If it is approved in both years by the legislature, the citizens will vote on the ballot question in November 2004.

Opposition Does Not Want Citizens to Decide

A staunch supporter of gays, Representative Alice K. Wolf (D-Cambridge), has admitted that the gays are afraid to let the people decide the issue because they know they will lose. According to the Globe, Wolf told it, "Gay-rights advocates have long feared that conservative groups would take their campaign to the voting booth."

Copyright ©2001 Massachusetts News, Inc. Photocopying and data processing storage of all or any part of this issue may not be made without prior written consent.