A New Challenge to
Same-Sex Marriages
By PAM BELLUCK,
NYTimes on the Web, June 17, 2005
BOSTON, June 16 -- More than a
year after gay marriage became legal in Massachusetts, Gov. Mitt Romney said
Thursday that he would support a newly proposed amendment to the state
Constitution that would overturn that right.
"My view is that marriage should be defined as a relationship between a man and
a woman," Mr. Romney said at a news conference, adding, "I hope that this
amendment will ultimately be the one which the citizens have an opportunity to
vote on."
Mr. Romney's endorsement of the amendment is likely to inject new vigor into the
efforts of gay marriage opponents, who failed to block a court decision that
allowed the marriages to begin in May 2004.
At that time, most opponents of same-sex marriage supported a two-pronged
amendment that would ban gay marriage but create civil unions for same-sex
couples. That amendment passed its first-round vote in the Massachusetts
Legislature in March 2004 and is scheduled for the second required vote this
fall. If passed, it would go before voters in November 2006.
But because some new legislative leaders now favor gay marriage, the compromise
amendment has been given slim chance of passing its second round.
As a result, gay marriage opponents have proposed the new amendment, which,
because it was not initiated by the Legislature, would require a lower threshold
of legislative support to get on the ballot. The new amendment needs to
get signatures from 65,825 residents on petitions, and then the support of only
50 of the Legislature's 200 members, in each of two consecutive sessions, before
it can be brought before the voters in 2008. Proponents of the measure say
they have 60 votes.
The new amendment, drafted by a coalition of conservative groups led by the
Massachusetts Family Institute, would generate some unusual consequences.
It would not, for example, require that same-sex marriages that have already
taken place be dissolved or invalidated.
Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, said his group had
decided not to require that because "the homosexual marriages that occurred
happened because of a flawed decision" made by judges, and "it's unfair to
penalize those people for a bad decision made by the courts."
Asked if it would be confusing if some same-sex couples were legally married,
while others would be barred from getting married, Mr. Mineau said, "It will be
for a season, but eventually it will be a thing of the past, a brief social
experiment that happened because of court activism."
Mr. Romney said Thursday that he supported the compromise amendment last year
because he hoped that after it passed the first vote, the courts could be
persuaded to delay the onset of gay marriage until the amendment reached its
final vote.
He said he now preferred the new amendment because "it's a very clean,
straightforward, unambiguous amendment." The compromise amendment, he
said, was "somewhat confused or muddied" because it included civil unions.
Mr. Mineau said that arrangement would be like asking people "to vote for George
Bush and John Kerry on the same ticket."
Mr. Romney said that instead of civil unions, he would support "certain domestic
partnership benefits like hospital visitation rights and rights of survivorship
and so forth."
Mr. Mineau's coalition, however, opposes domestic partnerships, believing they
discourage heterosexual marriage. They favor defining same-sex couples as
part of larger group including "any two adults living together who are
ineligible for marriage," and to provide them assistance under a proposal Mr.
Mineau called a "reciprocal benefits" bill.
"It would apply to two elderly sisters living together, an uncle taking care of
a handicapped nephew, or even adults taking care of elderly parents," he said.
Gay marriage supporters said on Thursday that they hoped opposition to same-sex
marriage had decreased now that about 6,000 same-sex weddings have taken place
over the last year. They accused Mr. Romney of trying to appeal to
conservatives outside Massachusetts in preparation for a possible run for
president.
"We believe he's projecting himself to a national Republican audience," said
Marty Rouse, campaign director for MassEquality, a group that supports gay
marriages.
Still, Arlene Isaacson, co-chairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian
Political Caucus, said she was concerned that some legislators who had planned
not to support the compromise amendment this fall might support it now on the
theory that establishing civil unions would be better than losing out on both
marriage and civil unions.
"Some people in the gay community are torn about that," she said. "There
are some people who think, 'At least get us civil unions.' "
|
