Massachusetts court okays gay marriage

No link available yet, but apparently the decision is out.

Here's a link (courtesy of Adamocrat)

http://www.boston.com/

i can do without the debate from right wing knee jerk reactionairys.
it just gets too stupid for words.

Then plan the attack to make other States recognize Mass laws!

...but I believe other states MUST recognize a legal marriage from any other state.

The "Full Faith and Credit Clause" of the consititution requires that each state recgonize the marriages of other states. It is doubtful that the DOMAs of those 37 states would stand. So we are going to see the right push the FMA, and put the Democrats on the spot. And this will be a real hot button issue.

http://www.boston.com/news/daily/18/gay_marriage.htm

Massachusetts court rules ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional
By Associated Press, 11/18/2003
BOSTON -- Massachusetts' highest court ruled Tuesday that same-sex couples are legally entitled to wed under the state constitution, but stopped short of allowing marriage licenses to be issued to the couples who challenged the law.

The court ruled 4-3, ordering the Legislature to come up with a solution within 180 days.

The Supreme Judicial Court's ruling closely matches the 1999 Vermont Supreme Court decision, which led there to the Legislature's approval in 2000 of civil unions that give couples many of the same benefits of marriage.

The decision is the latest in a series of victories for gay rights advocates, but fell short of what the seven couples who sued the state had hoped to receive: the right to marry their longtime companion.

The Massachusetts question will now return to the Legislature, which already is considering a constitutional amendment that would legally define a marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The state's powerful Speaker of the House, Tom Finneran of Boston, has endorsed this proposal.Snip>

Either 37 or 38 states have Defense of Marriage Acts (DOMA) plus there is a Federal DOMA that Bill Clinton signed. Probably they ae unconstitutional. So there is a Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) in the House. The opposition to gay marriage is about 2-1 among the electorate, and it is a hot button issue. It is major battleground in the culture war so it will energize lots of people, but it easier to energize people against something than it is for something. So expect the right to get super inflamed about this. So what? Hey, they vote and will probably turn our in record numbers for this.

How many congresspersons & senators will be willing to risk the heat in an election year to vote against or even try to stall the FMA? Remember, they want to get re-elected.

It will probably quickly pass & go to the states. Since 38 states are needed for ratification, and since that many already have DOMA laws, then the odds heavily favor swift passage.

The Reps will be campaigning as the Party to Save Marriage.

This is a prediction. It does not indicate my personal stand.

that's why Dean's previous experience with the right-wing attacks will serve him well because he knows how to deal with this issue.

How will this play in the west & south? How about Latinos? They are almost completely Roman Catholic and not friendly to gay rights. If you get a 5% sift in the Latino vote, what happens. Most black churches are rather literal on the Scripture. What happens if we have to take even a 2% shift in the black vote?

Remember, the geneal public is 2-1` against gay marriage.

of interacial marriage?
some things are just right -- more especially since we all sign off on the people being created equal thing, and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
but we musn't let little things like that get in the way of whats right, must we?
we must hang on to our prejudices, clutch them to us, for fear the neanderthals will look our way and growl.
no, no -- musn't attract too much attention or appear to have convictions -- can't have jerry fallwell upset.

The simple fact is that the country is 2-1 against gay marriage and it is a hot button issue.

Politics is about the art of the possible. Which is better: Victory & do what you can, or defeat and lose everything else too.

This issue is a big time loser.

look like the petty anti-american KKK losers they really are.

Repuke hatred will turn voters off. The Democratic party is clearly the party of inclusion. Voters who would normally vote dem and switch to repuke over gay marriage are so few and far between that they won't tip the election to AWOL.. not even close.

AWOL will lose because he is the worst president this country has EVER seen. The possiblity of gay marriage being legalized in this country isn't going to make everyone forget what the sh*thead has done to this country.

American oppose gay marriage by over 2-1.
37 states have DOMAs & even Clinton signed a federal DOMA.
There is a Federal Marriage Amendement in the House.

That doesn't sound like the country will oppose the Reps on this one. The Reps will be giving the country what they want, and the Dems that stand up for gay marriage will have to explain it to a populace that is 2-1 opposed to gay marriage. No how many politicians, ours or theirs, will oppose their own districts, when the district overwhelmingly takes a stance?

Your emotion is not a substitute for reason based on facts. And the facts are not friendly to our side.

This issue is a big loser for us.

and i'm afraid it's you who is succumbing to fear.
get a grip -- and try being aggressively on the right side of the issue.
people may have some moments of backsliding -- but it's superstitious fear and the lie that x{gay people} group is going to take something from y{straight people} group.
if dems act like they are fearful on the subject -- then yes repukes will see it as a weakness -- much like the point of view you are promoting.

My lack of well chosen words got me flamed to no end. You said what I was trying to say. If Bush wins, no one will have any civil rights. Didn't mean to suggest that court shouldn't have ruled the way that it did. But sensitive people took me to task for it.

please pay closer attention to the issue before you discard it

the MA State Supreme Court ruled that a BAN on same-sex unions is unconstitutional. as of yet there are no provisions established for uniting same sex couples in the state of MA (legislature has six months to review the situation and propose a solution.) plenty of time for the whole issue to go down the drain.

basically, the MA Supreme Court said that discrimination based on sexual orientation is just that--discrimination.

how many people are against civil union because they are not marriages? do I have to mention separate but equal again??

as for the people who are not in support of civil unions or gay marriage...I don't know what to say except get used to it.