Massachusetts Equality Opponents At It Again
Seems the folks in Massachusetts that are against equality- you know, the ones who think marriage is only for them, not everyone, the laws and systems cannot be shared equality without having them get cooties- have successfully petitioned the Attorney General's office to get a ballot question to repeal the .. um repeal of the 1913 ban on out of state folks getting married here.
Why? Because they hate anything that smells like equality for gays and lesbians.
Why? Because they are certain all of the LGBT movement is aimed at sending them to hell.
Why? Because. Oh, just because they have money in their pockets and clearly nothing positive to contribute to society.
And I have to point out, Brian Camenker quoted in the piece? His group is about 100 people. Total. Statewide. Equal time in the press, tiny group. But don't get me started...
AG RULING GIVES BOOST TO GAY MARRIAGE OPPONENTS’ BALLOT MEASURE
By Kyle Cheney
STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE
STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, AUG. 25, 2008.....Validated Monday by Attorney General Martha Coakley, a citizen petition to undo a recent law favored by advocates for the gay community is shaping up as the newest confrontation in the Bay State over the rights of same-sex couples.
The petition would reverse the July 31 repeal of a 1913 law that banned same-sex non-resident couples from marrying in Massachusetts. Proponents hailed the repeal as a blow to discrimination while opponents blasted Massachusetts for “exporting” its marriage policies to other states.
Having passed the attorney general’s review of its constitutionality, the petition must now garner 33,297 signatures by Oct. 29 – 90 days from when Gov. Deval Patrick signed the original law – to appear on the November 2010 ballot. Meanwhile, petition opponents are contemplating countermoves.
“I don’t think we’re going to have much trouble getting the signatures,” said Brian Camenker, a gay rights opponent who spearheaded the petition. “People have just had it up to here with this social experiment being pushed in their faces. The Legislature has been just so disconnected from the people in Massachusetts.”
Camenker, who heads MassResistance, described the same-sex rights lobby as a “small special interest group” and said lawmakers “underestimated” the anger and passion surrounding the issue.
Camenker was particularly incensed that lawmakers attached an emergency preamble to the 1913 law repeal, a fairly common practice but one that prevents petitioners from delaying the law’s implementation. Under the rules governing referendum petitions, if backers gather the required signatures within the allotted timeframe, the underlying law is suspended until the voters weigh in. But laws treated as emergency measures by the Legislature are not subject to delay.
Backers of the bill contend that adding an emergency preamble was always part of the plan for the bill.
“In some ways this is kind of crazy,” said Gary Buseck, legal director for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. “Today, I don’t think they could pass this [repeal]. I don’t think there’s any interest in going backwards.”
Buseck said GLAD was eyeing the petition process before deciding whether to take action.
“We’re interested in seeing if they even muster the signatures,” he said.
If they do, he said, GLAD attorneys could file suit against the secretary of state and attorney general to attempt to invalidate the petition, “a tried and true mechanism that’s also happened a goodly number of times.” Such a move would put the case before the Supreme Judicial Court.
In a statement, Coakley said her approval of the initiative petition did not signify support for the substance but allowed petitioners to move on to the signature-gathering stage of the process.
-END-
8/25/2008
Serving the working press since 1910
http://www.statehousenews.com
Why? Because they hate anything that smells like equality for gays and lesbians.
Why? Because they are certain all of the LGBT movement is aimed at sending them to hell.
Why? Because. Oh, just because they have money in their pockets and clearly nothing positive to contribute to society.
And I have to point out, Brian Camenker quoted in the piece? His group is about 100 people. Total. Statewide. Equal time in the press, tiny group. But don't get me started...
AG RULING GIVES BOOST TO GAY MARRIAGE OPPONENTS’ BALLOT MEASURE
By Kyle Cheney
STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE
STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, AUG. 25, 2008.....Validated Monday by Attorney General Martha Coakley, a citizen petition to undo a recent law favored by advocates for the gay community is shaping up as the newest confrontation in the Bay State over the rights of same-sex couples.
The petition would reverse the July 31 repeal of a 1913 law that banned same-sex non-resident couples from marrying in Massachusetts. Proponents hailed the repeal as a blow to discrimination while opponents blasted Massachusetts for “exporting” its marriage policies to other states.
Having passed the attorney general’s review of its constitutionality, the petition must now garner 33,297 signatures by Oct. 29 – 90 days from when Gov. Deval Patrick signed the original law – to appear on the November 2010 ballot. Meanwhile, petition opponents are contemplating countermoves.
“I don’t think we’re going to have much trouble getting the signatures,” said Brian Camenker, a gay rights opponent who spearheaded the petition. “People have just had it up to here with this social experiment being pushed in their faces. The Legislature has been just so disconnected from the people in Massachusetts.”
Camenker, who heads MassResistance, described the same-sex rights lobby as a “small special interest group” and said lawmakers “underestimated” the anger and passion surrounding the issue.
Camenker was particularly incensed that lawmakers attached an emergency preamble to the 1913 law repeal, a fairly common practice but one that prevents petitioners from delaying the law’s implementation. Under the rules governing referendum petitions, if backers gather the required signatures within the allotted timeframe, the underlying law is suspended until the voters weigh in. But laws treated as emergency measures by the Legislature are not subject to delay.
Backers of the bill contend that adding an emergency preamble was always part of the plan for the bill.
“In some ways this is kind of crazy,” said Gary Buseck, legal director for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. “Today, I don’t think they could pass this [repeal]. I don’t think there’s any interest in going backwards.”
Buseck said GLAD was eyeing the petition process before deciding whether to take action.
“We’re interested in seeing if they even muster the signatures,” he said.
If they do, he said, GLAD attorneys could file suit against the secretary of state and attorney general to attempt to invalidate the petition, “a tried and true mechanism that’s also happened a goodly number of times.” Such a move would put the case before the Supreme Judicial Court.
In a statement, Coakley said her approval of the initiative petition did not signify support for the substance but allowed petitioners to move on to the signature-gathering stage of the process.
-END-
8/25/2008
Serving the working press since 1910
http://www.statehousenews.com
Labels: LGBT families, LGBT issues, lgbt rights, marriage equality
posted by Sara at 5:29 PM
2 Comments:
Speaking of marriage equality, I wrote a blog post that turned out to be a sort-of-conservative-christian sermon about marriage equality. Kinda weird for me, but I got into it with a bunch of christians lately, and it just happened. I'd be interested in your thoughts on it, if you've got the time, and patience to work through all the jesus jargon.
gave it a shot... I'm a little out of my league with those folks.
Post a Comment
<< Home