Even though not voting violated their oaths of office, said the SJC, the only punishment could come at the ballot box. I think we’ve proven to legislators time and again, that voting for marriage will not harm them. It was purely pressure that made them vote. And then not to vote on the healthcare amendment. Yee gods.
Incidentally, I find it interesting that anyone thinks it’s OK to amend the constitution with language that, if it were merely a law, would be unconstitutional.
As much as I’d like to kill this amendment procedurally, I think it is critical to defeat it on its (lack of) merits. That is the only way to stop the anti-marriage forces. They’ll have to regroup and try to win the way we are winning, by voting out pro-marriage legislators and starting over. That’s just going to get harder and harder as marriage continues and no one sees life as we know it disintegrating.
When the hand that holds the gavel is not friendly (Travaglini), why expect any help? Whatever happens needs to happen without him, or despite him, if it is to be to our benefit.
We can Monday-morning-quarterback this till the Super Bowl, but nothing in the past changes.
Really, the clearest message we could send the anti-gay crowd (they really aren’t anti-marriage. That’s just a convenient tag for now. If the marriage controversy ends, they’ll find something else.) would be to have this go to the ballot and be defeated. I’m just not sure I want to go through that.
They’ve had it easy so far. “Let the People Vote” is a catchy slogan that can attract supporters even if they would vote it down. If this does go to the ballot, how quickly will that slogan change? And to what?
We do not have the luxury of the ballot fight in Arizona where older voters helped defeat an amendment that would have outlawed marriage as well as civil arrangements that they could also use. We have to win this vote by convincing people that not only are we worth it, but also that restricting our rights restricts their own. If not now, then sometime, somehow, for sure.
We need to take to heart the campaign of Deval Patrick. No matter how nasty Kerry Healey got, he kept above the mud, kept to his positive message of an optimistic future for our state, and he won. We won’t win by going negative. The other side will and we can let them drown in their own mud. We have to show that we are the good people we really are and deserve to be included, just like everyone else, in marriage.
(why she didn’t post here is probably fodder for another discussion) Excuse me? QueerToday is a queer blog, and Grace is queer first of all. Secondly I have a relationship with Grace through the community, and interviews and chats I have had with her. Third, Grace is new to blogging and I have taken the time to help her out. It was in her best interest and the best interest to the LGBT community to post her writings on our blog. Sheesh!
Seems to me Grace Ross can post wherever she wants đŸ™‚ But thanks to Kira for bringing her comments over here…
Not to re-open a wound, but I don’t think David really understands how many gay people he drove off this site.
<
p>
I used to be a regular reader; my only visits in the last few months were following a link from DK after the con con and following a link from a friend to this.
<
p>
An interesting note on this. A friend from Seattle was ranting about Tim Eyman and the slew of initiatives he got through almost entirely with the support of paid signature gatherers. My friend’s point is that the rise of said gatherers has greatly skewed the process.
<
p>
http://en.wikipedia….
This state needs Grace to have a bully pulpit!
<
p>
but first we (who are so inclined) should help Grace pay off her modest campaign debt so that she can focus on providing statewide leadership on this issue as well as so many others that people care deeply about.