Anti-gay organization aims to reinstate Mass law against marrying out-of-state residents

[meegbear]

The gay marriage fight in Massachusetts might not be over after all.

Opponents of same-sex marriages are seeking a ballot question that would prevent gay and lesbian couples from getting married here if their union wouldn't be legal in their home state.

Brian Camenker of the group Mass Resistance said Friday lawmakers and Gov. Deval Patrick bowed to the will of the "gay lobby" last month by approving the repeal of a 1913 statute that banned such marriages.

Patrick, the state's first black governor and the father of a daughter who recently announced she's a lesbian, said the 1913 law had racial undertones from a period when interracial marriage was discouraged.

"The Legislature and the governor changed our marriage laws to please the well-connected minority and force a social experiment into other states that's very offensive to a majority of the people, at least the way the votes have been going," Camenker said, referring to recent votes in favor of gay marriage bans in other states.

He was particularly critical of an emergency preamble attached to the repeal. It bypassed a normal 90-day waiting period and made the law effective immediately. Opponents typically use the 90 days to present signatures and delay the law until it can be put to a ballot vote.

"The fact that this happened the way it happened just adds to the sense of sleaziness and underhandedness of the whole process," Camenker said.

The group will need about 32,000 signatures to get their question on the ballot.

<snip>

http://pageoneq.com/news/2008/Antigay_organization_aims_to_reinstate_Massachusetts_law_against_marrying_outofstate_r_0816.html

[justinboston2008]

1. Ahhh... The fundies

They just never give up..

[Falcon_Lights1916]

2. Yep, You're Right....

the fundies never give up. And neither should we. The tide is slowly turning in our favour, but it's definitely no time to be complacent. They can't get same-sex marriage repealed in Massachusetts for some time to come, so they're going to try to keep non-resident same-sex couples from marrying. These people are despicable.

I'm a bit up there in years (55), but I may well see same sex marriage legal in my lifetime. I like that Canada has same-sex marriage, thus in effect telling their fundies, "You certainly have a right to your religious beliefs, but you do NOT have the right to limit the rights of others.". Also, that Canada kindly extended that right to non-citizens to marry. I am aware they did not have to do that and yet they did. My spouse and I took advantage of Canada's kindness last fall and am happily, legally married, if only in Canada and those few states who currently permit same-sex marriage.

I am angry that this battle has to be fought over and over and over in this country. But this is the price of having let the fundies run wild in the U.S. I have no problems with freedom of religion, except when that freedom is used to limit mine. However, unless the Supreme Court gets a drastically different make-up, this will not change. Even if it does, it will take Justices who are not afraid of the Religious Right and are willing to actually DO justice.