Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

  • Shop
  • Subscribe to BMG
  • Contact
  • Log In
  • Front Page
  • All Posts
  • About
  • Rules
  • Events
  • Register on BMG

The End Cannot Come Soon Enough

June 11, 2007 By massmarrier

How unfortunate that the threshold for survival of the anti-gay forces is so low. In this case, a large majority of the public and 75% of the legislature doesn’t even want to give these folk a shot at continuing their quest to strip marriage rights from homosexuals. Indeed if this odious attempt at legislating personal religion had been a legislator-generated initiative, it would have required 50% plus one of the ConCon to advance. Not bloody likely.

The pity is that they are willing to push this to the very bitter end. Without the nobility of soldiers in a lost war, they are more the Blanche DuBois of politics. In this case though, there’s no nice mental-institution caretaker to take their arm on the way.

We saw more of their position again this week, but not from their usual lobbying arms. Rather the local archdiocese paper, The Pilot, ran another of its specious and spurious editorials in preparation for the ConCon.

This was one of the most embarrassing ones yet. It recapped the illogical and simply wrong arguments that it and Sean Cardinal O’Malley have been offering for the past couple of years.  It is worth reading to remind yourself of how unfortunate and silly these folk can be.

The VoteOnMarriage sorts love to niggle with the MassEquality slogan that “It’s Wrong to Vote on Rights.” That could well be expanded into the more accurate but less powerful “It’s Wrong to Vote to Remove Rights from Any Minority.” That’s the intent, the VOM folk know that, and they are dead wrong while MassEquality is dead right.

The anti-marriage-equality folk would also have legislators as well as their own minions believe that marriage is a religious institution, authorized by churches, legalized with a cleric’s blessing, and not a right at all. Here I am appalled by even the Democratic Presidential hopefuls, all but one of whom seem to agree. Even those who favor civil unions and claim to support gay rights use phrases like “marriage is between a man and a woman; that’s the way I was raised.”

To the issue at hand and particularly the ConCon, that is not the way it has ever been in Massachusetts, not from colonial times. The Puritans escaped from theocratic intolerance and the mingling of government and religion. Here, while claiming personal religious fervor, they set church here and state there, with tall boundaries of law, regulation and custom.

The colonial governors went so far as to forbid ministers from performing marriages and only later let them speak at weddings. In Massachusetts, marriage has always been a civil contract.

The only role a cleric has in weddings here, even today, is the same as a Justice of the Peace, and one-day designated solemnizer, a town clerk, a judge or the governor has. They can act as an agent of the commonwealth in signing the government-issued marriage license.

For example, the editorial cites incest restrictions on marriage. Various states have different definitions of consanguinity. Those that permit closer ties decidedly do not have more birth defects, higher divorce rates, or laws permitting the evils irrationally linked to permitting same-sex marriage. As the pathetic Pilot piece put it, “Once marriage becomes a personal right, the institution of marriage fades. It is only a matter of time before polygamy, polyandry, incestuous relations and all other manner of partnerships will be accepted as marriage.”

It speaks to the poverty of their position and their diminished numbers that they contend first that marriage is not a civil right, second that it is a religious institution and not a government controlled civil one, and three that no one has a right to marry, per <span se. All of those are wrong and each shows a willful denial of many centuries of history and culture, of hundred of years of Massachusetts history, government and culture, of the laws of both the commonwealth and nation, and of the simple reality that the vast majority of locals and Americans wed civilly with not even the veneer of a cleric signing the state issued document that makes a marriage.

We can understand why the VOM and archdiocese leaders play those games. We are not quite over the hump on this type of civil-rights issue. They hope to be able to twist 25% of the legislature one more time to put removing civil rights from a minority on the ballot for 2008.

Yet, we hear echoes of this in such theaters as the Democratic Presidential candidates’ debates.

We have seen popular votes on stripping rights before. Sometimes it was for the majority, such as in Prohibition — the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, rejected only by Rhode Island, and repealed by the 21st. In various states after reconstruction, we also saw repressive legislation such as poll taxes and literacy requirements that effectively removed voting as a right from Black Americans. To our national shame, none of these worked and all eventually were voted out by more rational and compassionate generations that followed.

Here we are again, with a 21st century version. It is difficult to believe that anyone who can function day to day could buy into that tripe. Perhaps they are not so far from Blanche DuBois as one might suppose.

If we have four or five legislators who find that reason, compassion and courage now, we won’t have to endure the bitter campaign to drastically alter our commonwealth’s marriage laws to conform for the first time to narrow religious doctrine. We won’t for the first time in Massachusetts join the list of repressive and regressive states that try to strip small groups of citizens of existing rights.

A word to the wise…a word to the compassionate…a word to the lovers of liberty…no on this hateful amendment.

Cross-posted at Marry in Massachusetts.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0
0

Filed Under: User Tagged With: amendment, concon, marriage-equality, same-sex-marriage

Comments

  1. john-hosty-grinnell says

    June 11, 2007 at 4:44 pm

    I am so glad to see this here. How Well put! Everyone needs to make their opinions known and their voices heard between now and the Con-Con on Thursday. Let’s not give this Amendment a chance to ruin the next two years…

  2. john-hosty-grinnell says

    June 11, 2007 at 4:46 pm

    Everyone knows they can recommend an article, AND comment on it, right? (hint-hint)

  3. john-cercone says

    June 11, 2007 at 6:41 pm

    I will never understand the appeal of direct democracy.

    <

    p>
    Virtually every article of the Bill of Rights is designed to be a check on the power of the majority AND the government.

    <

    p>
    Happy Hosty?

    • amberpaw says

      June 11, 2007 at 8:56 pm

      Or, maybe the “majority” is consumed by cowardice, I do not know.  Were the majority of Germans REALLY in favor of exterminating jews?  Or just too afraid to speak up.

      <

      p>
      Again, I agree with Charlie – marriage is no business of the states and a civil contract for partnership.  If folk want to also get a religious blessing, well, “God Bless” to them.

      <

      p>
      And, the truth of the matter is that personal honor and commitment are what actually cause any marriage to last.  No one “loves” let alone “likes” any other human being 100% of the time.

      <

      p>
      From time to time I teach a class called, “The secrets of making a marraige survive – from a Divorce Lawyer”…so I should know.

      • joets says

        June 11, 2007 at 10:16 pm

        Just shut your mouth and do what your wife tells you.

      • paul-jamieson says

        June 12, 2007 at 7:49 am

        As a teacher – I can’t believe you would say something like that.

        <

        p>
        You have no respect for people havING an opinion or point of view based on their religion?

        <

        p>
        Leave your Nazi imagery and divorce lawyer tactics at home.

        <

        p>
        And stop using the Holocaust when talking about this issue.

        • massmarrier says

          June 12, 2007 at 8:55 am

          My, my, my…are we a bit defensive here, and do we have some control issues — ordering commenters about?

          <

          p>
          If you give AmberPaw’s comment a read, you’ll see that she alludes to the ovine critters, those who would be sheep-like herded by the extremists. Also, it is you making the Nazi comparison and you jumping from one particular to the other with your religion interjection.

          <

          p>
          Deborah notes the risk of passivity in the face of those who would harm others, regardless of how they go about it. I concur that this is what is happening here. We should not get pushed around like sheep because some group feels strongly. They are entitled to their emotions, but that doesn’t mean we have to agree with them and certainly not that we should vote their way.

        • raj says

          June 12, 2007 at 10:12 am

          …the denial of equal rights for homosexuals, viz. same sex marriage, is part and parcel of the right wingnuts’ plans to roll back equal rights for homos across the board. 

          <

          p>
          If they can accomplish it in Massachusetts, they will be able to accomplish it anywhere.  And they know it, and that is why the wingnuts are putting so much stock in Massachusetts–the state that was the birthplace of the Abolitionist movement.

          <

          p>
          Apparently, you are also ignorant of the fact that the Nazi Endloesung–the “Final Solution”–was the result of the fact that, despite Nazi entreaties, other countries, including the US, were unwilling to accept Jews who wanted to escape Nazi domination.  That showed full well that the other countries didn’t give a tinker’s damn (I would call it a flying f*ck) for Jews. 

          <

          p>
          And it’s obvious that more than a few people in the US don’t give a tinker’s damn for gay people.

          <

          p>
          So, yes, there are more than a few parallels.  Fortunately, IBM is not working for the US government now to categorize gay people, like they did with the Nazi government in the 1930s regarding–Jews and, yes, gay people.

          • eury13 says

            June 12, 2007 at 3:16 pm

            It’s not to mess with Raj when German history is the issue.

            <

            p>
            Well said.

    • sabutai says

      June 11, 2007 at 10:35 pm

      “I will never understand the appeal of direct democracy.”

      <

      p>
      Hmm….sounds like I’m not the only one who just got back from open town meeting….

Recommended Posts

  • No posts liked yet.

Recent User Posts

Predictions Open Thread

December 22, 2022 By jconway

This is why I love Joe Biden

December 21, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Garland’s Word

December 19, 2022 By terrymcginty

Some Parting Thoughts

December 19, 2022 By jconway

Beware the latest grift

December 16, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Thank you, Blue Mass Group!

December 15, 2022 By methuenprogressive

Recent Comments

  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftSo where to, then??
  • Christopher on Some Parting ThoughtsI've enjoyed our discussions as well (but we have yet to…
  • Christopher on Beware the latest griftI can't imagine anyone of our ilk not already on Twitter…
  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftI will miss this site. Where are people going? Twitter?…
  • chrismatth on This site (will be disabled on) December 31, 2022I joined BMG late - 13 years ago next month and three da…
  • SomervilleTom on Geopolitics of FusionEVERY un-designed, un-built, and un-tested technology is…
  • Charley on the MTA on This site (will be disabled on) December 31, 2022That’s a great idea, and I’ll be there on Sunday. It’s a…

Archive

@bluemassgroup on Twitter

#mapoli

headlineoptics Headline Optics @headlineoptics ·
3 Apr

OTR: Diana DiZoglio discusses potential retaliation from Mass. Legislature over audit https://www.masspolicyreport.com/2023/04/03/otr-diana-dizoglio-discusses-potential-retaliation-from-mass-legislature-over-audit/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter @masspolicy #MApoli #Massachusetts

Reply on Twitter 1642902408245420032 Retweet on Twitter 1642902408245420032 Like on Twitter 1642902408245420032 Twitter 1642902408245420032
masspolicy MassPolicyReport @masspolicy ·
3 Apr

Mass. Conservatives Win Big in Second MassGOP Caucus: Crush Baker 2.0/Establishment Candidate https://www.masspolicyreport.com/2023/04/03/mass-conservatives-win-big-in-second-massgop-caucus-crush-baker-2-0-establishment-candidate/ #Massachusetts #MApoli #bospoli #MassPolicyReport

Reply on Twitter 1642902143123202050 Retweet on Twitter 1642902143123202050 Like on Twitter 1642902143123202050 Twitter 1642902143123202050
sabadosama Lindsay Sabadosa @sabadosama ·
3 Apr

A huge pleasure to join @RepDylan as he launched the #Massachusetts Friends of UK Legislative Caucus at the home of the @FCDOPeterAbbott. It was wonderful to talk about how we can collaborate to benefit constituents and deepen long-standing ties! #mapoli

2

Reply on Twitter 1642900909020569600 Retweet on Twitter 1642900909020569600 Like on Twitter 1642900909020569600 Twitter 1642900909020569600
theaaholcomb Thea Holcomb @theaaholcomb ·
3 Apr

If you're familiar with #mapoli I have questions for you!

My intern is applying for an internship there - obvs I'm thrilled. 😊 What should she know about how the MA legislature is staffed? What other essential knowledge would you pass along?

Reply on Twitter 1642899676125970436 Retweet on Twitter 1642899676125970436 Like on Twitter 1642899676125970436 1 Twitter 1642899676125970436
masspolicy MassPolicyReport @masspolicy ·
3 Apr

Mounting evidence that the citizens of MA are over taxed https://www.masspolicyreport.com/2023/04/03/mounting-evidence-that-the-citizens-of-ma-are-over-taxed/ #Massachusetts #MApoli #bospoli #MassPolicyReport

Reply on Twitter 1642898875705970690 Retweet on Twitter 1642898875705970690 Like on Twitter 1642898875705970690 Twitter 1642898875705970690
erintiernan Erin Tiernan @erintiernan ·
3 Apr

It's April in #mapoli which means budget season is in full swing. The House will soon pitch a tax relief proposal alongside their 2024 fiscal plan.
- @MBTA staffing shortage cou;d keep trains from running on time
- Auditor DiZoglio won't back down
https://masster-list.com/2023/04/03/massachusetts-house-tax-package-could-be-a-tango-with-healey/

Reply on Twitter 1642898790221770752 Retweet on Twitter 1642898790221770752 1 Like on Twitter 1642898790221770752 Twitter 1642898790221770752
Load More

From our sponsors




Google Calendar







Search

Archives

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter




Copyright © 2023 Owned and operated by BMG Media Empire LLC. Read the terms of use. Some rights reserved.