Most people favor the proposed Constitutional Amendment for marriage because they believe having a mother and father is the cheapest and the best way to raise children.

Marriage Is ‘Hot Issue’ In Massachusetts

September 2001

Marriage will be a “hot issue” in Massachusetts this month. There are two conflicting measures that citizens will be watching closely.

1) Ballot Question - An initiative for a ballot question, which was filed by a citizen group in August in order to allow the voters to decide how to define the word “marriage,” will be evaluated by Atty. General Thomas Reilly in early September.

The citizen group, Mass. Citizens for Marriage, is seeking an Amendment to the state Constitution which would continue the definition of marriage that has been universally believed by everyone in the state, including the courts. The definition has never been written because everyone has always assumed that marriage consists of a union of one man and one woman.

Such a definition is needed today, they believe, because various groups wish to be allowed to marry even though they do not fit the definition which has always been assumed. These groups include:

Those with three or more persons, such as bigamists.
Straight couples who do not want the responsibility of marriage but wish to share its benefits.
Radical feminists who believe that women will not be free as long as there is an institution of marriage.
The one group that is stridently pushing the issue at this point in time, homosexuals.

This Amendment process, which allows the people to decide, is slow and deliberative. The earliest that the people can vote is November 2004. After the language is approved by Atty. General Reilly this month, the proponents will obtain about 65,000 signatures from the voters. Then the legislature must approve the Amendment by a 25% vote both in 2002 and 2004. Finally, the measure will go to the people in November 2004.

2) Decision by Judges - The other measure that will be watched by the citizens is the effort by gays to go around the people and have a few judges make a quick decision whether to change what has always been assumed to be the definition of marriage.

The same lawyers who filed the suit in Vermont, the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD), started a similar suit this April in Massachusetts. Then, on August 20, they filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in Superior Court. This will allow a few judges to bypass a jury and decide by themselves whether to impose gay marriage on the state. It is expected that the oral argument in the case will be held early next year. The process by the judges is quick and easy.

GLAD filed a 69-page legal brief with Attorney General Thomas Reilly, who is defending the citizens in the case even though he has publicly declared that he agrees with the plaintiffs that the courts should impose gay marriage.

The central argument of the plaintiffs is that denying civil marriage to gay and lesbian couples violates their right to equal treatment under the state Constitution.

A staunch supporter of gays, Rep. 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.”

Predicted by MassNews

The Motion for Summary Judgement was predicted in the following article in the August edition of MassNews.

“A lawsuit was filed in Boston on April 11, 2001 by the same gay activists who filed a suit in Vermont last year. They’ve filed this suit in our state because they live here and they are close friends with the judges. They seek to have the courts impose gay marriage upon the state. The Chief Justice of our Supreme Court (SJC), Margaret Marshall, has already indicated to them publicly that she will rule in favor of gay marriage.

“They can’t lose unless the judges see that the citizens will be upset by any such ruling. If the Amendment passes, it would be almost impossible for the judges to require gay marriages or civil unions. Therefore, the judges don’t want it on the ballot.

“It’s clear that the gay activists will lose if the matter is decided by the citizens. That’s why the activists are seeking to go around them and have lawyers and judges make this historic decision.

“Most lawyers expect a ‘Motion for Summary Judgment’ to be filed by the gay activists before the end of the summer which would allow the judges to decide the case without any trial being held.”

Massachusetts Citizens for Marriage, 1277 Main St., Waltham 02451, Tel: 781-647-1942, Web: www.marriagematters.com

Why does Amendment forbid ‘domestic partnerships’ or ‘civil unions’?
Text of proposed amendment to Constitution
Is this a religious issue?
Is amendment a ‘gay’ issue?