Massachusetts betrayal on marriage.
This is the second time the Massachusetts legislature has thumbed its nose at voters supporting traditional marriage; the first occurred in 2002, when the legislature refused to put a similar (though superior) initiative on the ballot. The legislature voted to adjourn even though the 48th amendment to the state constitution requires that "a proposal for an amendment to the state constitution introduced by initiative petition shall be voted upon in the form in which it was introduced ... [and] Final legislative action in the joint session upon any amendment shall be taken only by call of the yeas and nays." (Emphasis added.)
The initiative would have defined marriage as a man and a woman under state law, but would "grandfather in"--as it were--those same sex ceremonies already performed under the state Supreme Judicial Court's 2003 Goodridge v. Department of Public Health decision. The grandfathering clause was necessarily flawed because the state constitution bans initiatives directed at reversing judicial decisions.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||The New American|
|Article Type:||Brief article|
|Date:||Aug 7, 2006|
|Previous Article:||War presidency as limited-term dictatorship.|
|Next Article:||Mired in Iraq's inter-communal war.|