Family advocates determined to defend traditional marriage ultimately proved too strong for Massachusetts legislators to cross, pro-family analysts said today -- one day after Bay State lawmakers surprised just about everybody by voting to advance a marriage-protection toward the ballot.
The vote -- which brings the state one step closer to defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman in its constitution -- came after three years of division, obstruction and strife. The Legislature must now approve the amendment -- again with at least 50 votes -- in the 2007 legislative session before it will go to the 2008 ballot.
Mona Passignano, state issues analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said the victory in the Legislature was in large part due to those who tirelessly sought to defend the family.
"After a 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision made the state the first to allow same-sex couples to marry," she said, "citizens immediately began the process of reversing what has been called one of the worst cases of judicial tyranny and legislating from the bench in United States history."
Tuesday's vote, she said, was a result of the efforts of organizations like the Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI) and VoteonMarriage.org.
Kris Mineau, executive director of the MFI and spokesman for VoteonMarriage.org, called the vote a "historic day."
"Not only did our marriage amendment pass the first vote in the Legislature, but it's the first time in some 20 years that a citizen's petition has been honored by the Legislature and voted upon," he said. "So this is a real breakthrough for democracy in Massachusetts."
The journey to gain legislative approval for the amendment was an arduous, 18-month process riddled with challenge and obstructionism, he said. In 2006, VoteonMarriage.org collected 170,000 petition signatures to move forward the marriage amendment.
"In Massachusetts, once you get the signatures, you still have to go through the Legislature -- we're the only state that requires that," Mineau said. "We collected the greatest number of signatures ever gathered in the history of Massachusetts, so we knew we had an electrifying issue."
In July and again in November, the Legislature refused to vote on the amendment -- resorting to a procedural move that allowed it to recess until Jan. 2 -- the last day of the session. The move kept outgoing Gov. Mitt Romney from calling a special session.
Frustrated, Romney asked the state Supreme Judicial Court to force the Legislature to fulfill its constitutional duty to vote. Simultaneously, VoteonMarriage.org filed a separate lawsuit in federal court against the 109 lawmakers who voted to recess.
"Last Wednesday -- after Christmas -- the Supreme Court issued their ruling," Mineau said. "And though it did not order the Legislature to vote, they went through a seven-page, unanimous opinion that the Legislature was constitutionally obligated to vote and that anything else would be a violation of their oath of office."
Nonetheless, Passignano was surprised not only that the Legislature did its duty -- but that it approved the marriage amendment.
"It was the last day of the session, and I honestly thought they were going to let this thing die by ignoring it," she said. "The Legislature did not want to vote on this issue and they have had tremendous pressure from homosexual-lobbying groups to kill the amendment. I read an article earlier this week that the governor-elect (Deval Patrick) had even urged the Legislature not to vote."
Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said it was pressure from pro-family organizations and the court that ultimately convinced lawmakers to vote at the last minute.
"Up to now the Legislature has ignored its constitutional duty," he said. "The Supreme Judicial Court called them on that and out of a sense of public shame, they decided they better do the right thing before voters caught on and punished them in the next election."
But such a public tongue-lashing from the court comes as a shock, Hausknecht added, because it is from the same liberal court that OK'd same-sex marriage in the first place.
"When the Legislature voted to recess in November, the vote was very close," he said. "Now, after lawsuits were filed and the Supreme Judicial Court pointed out that legislators were violating the constitution, I think it swung a few votes."
Passignano said, regardless of motive, the vote has brought the marriage amendment one step closer to being decided by the people of Massachusetts instead of the courts.
"For too long in Massachusetts," she said, "the issue of marriage has been in the wrong hands."
Mineau said he is extremely grateful for the long-term continued support for the battle for marriage in the state.
"The battle is far from over, but we're halfway there," he said. "It's like in the world series. There are four bases: The signature drive was first base; we slid into second yesterday; third base is another vote in the new legislative session; and home plate is the election of 2008."
TAKE ACTION
If you live in Massachusetts, urge your state lawmakers -- representative and senator -- to vote again to let the people decide how marriage should be defined in the commonwealth. For contact information, visit the CitizenLink Action Center.
(Paid for by Focus on the Family Action)
