Do I Dare to Dream?

Well today the MA Legislature voted to recess the Constitutional Convention until January 2, 2007, the last day of the legislative session. They did this after over 2 hours of debate on the anti-gay marriage amendment without voting on it.

Theoretically the legislature could convene on January 2, but the thinking is that that is unlikely.

Personally I'm not going to rest easy until January 3, 2007 when the session is over and any bill that wasn't dealt with is dead.

Some people say "Let the people vote". I can see the rationale behind that argument and on the surface it seems very logical and the right thing to do, but scratch a little deeper and you see the fullness of the issue.

Is it fair to ask a majority to vote to take away civil rights of a minority? What if desegregation has been put to a vote? Inter-racial marriage? Women's suffrage? Would any of these have passed? Does anyone today think that these are bad things? Would anyone today suggest we remove those rights?

If you don't want to go the route of civil rights and protecting the minority, let's look at the fact that this was put up by the legislature 2 years ago and defeated. Let's look at the fact that the process of getting signatures was a complete bastardization of the petition process. There was a sickening amount of fraud associated with the processes of bringing the petition to the legislature. Why is it that anti-gay forces excused and dismissed the fraud and deceitfulness of their process but then deigned it appropriate to hold everyone else to do "what is right" or what "the constitution intended". My mother always told me that two wrongs don't make a right, so how does pulling fast ones on unsuspecting citizens to get them to sign it then make the anti-gay groups have the moral authority to decry the gay rights groups' intentions to defeat this amendment by any means necessary?

Additionally, bills die all the time in various parliamentary procedures when lawmakers don't want to deal with it or don't want to be on the record as opposing it. How often do we hear about a bill being "sent back to committee" with everyone giving each other a knowing look because everyone knows that means the bill is dead. What makes this bill different? Only that they anti-gay forces want to be viewed as the moral high ground defending the noble process of our states vaunted constitutional process. Bullshit. All they want is this bill to pass by any means necessary.

I'm exhausted with this battle. It has been raging since 2001 when the first voter initiative was started. That sought to declare marriage as being between one man and one woman only. In the fall of 2002 it was brought to the legislature. That was defeated by adjourning the convention without voting on it. I was elated when new year arrived, the session was over and the initiative was dead.

The next 4 years were a rollercoaster of elation, excitement, frustration, disappointment and anger. It was a rollercoaster of emotions that I don't wish on anyone. Here's a timeline of events to give you an idea of the stress level that's been a constant in my life.

May of 2002 - there was a push for a federal amendment to the US Constitution to ban gay marriage across the nation. This thankfully was defeated but not before raising my blood pressure and stress level.

July 17, 2002 - Thomas Birmingham adjourns, with a vote of 137-53, the Constitutional Convention (ConCon) without voting on the first anti-gay marriage voter petition. Jane Swift asks, but does not require, the Legislature to come back to vote on the amendment. On December 31, 2002 at 11:59 pm any bills left on the table by the Legislature, including this amendment, is dead. The other side vows to resubmit.

June 2003 - the US Supreme Court decides Lawrence v. Texas which nullifies anti-sodomy laws which decriminalizes homosexual sex as well as of course any sex more adventurous than your basic missionary position given that sodomy not only includes anal sex, but oral sex and can include any sexual gratification (such as vibrators) that is not achieved by coital sexual intercourse.

November 17, 2003 - the MA Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) decides that there is no constitutional basis for denying same-sex marriage and proceeds to give a 180-day stay until their decision takes effect. Begin the countdown to May 17, 2004.

March 29, 2004 - the Legislature passes the first round of a legislative amendment to ban gay marriage. If passed in 2005 again this would end up on the 2006 ballot. Obviously since you didn't vote on it, it failed.

May 17, 2004 - Gays get married and the world doesn't end. Amazing.

September 14, 2005 - the legislative amendment is voted down 157-39. There was much rejoicing then immediately everyone got into battle mode again as a new voter initiative had already begun.

December 7, 2005 - the signed petition was presented to be voted on at the next ConCon.

November 9, 2006 - the legislature recesses without voting on the amendment.

January 3, 2007 - the day after the legislative session ends. Hopefully I can relax at this point.

So at the moment I'm not celebrating or breaking out the champagne. I barely even want to take a sigh of relief for fear of yet another shoe to drop. I probably won't rest until the tide starts to turn on a national scale so that the national religious right wing "family" organizations stop funneling all their efforts at turning back the victory we won in Massachusetts in September of 2003.

To those of you who got this far, thank you for reading this through. I know this was a long post but it had to be written and it had to be put out there.