News Articles

MARRIAGE DIGEST: Political maneuvering in Mass. heats up

BOSTON (BP)–With the day for legalized same-sex “marriage” in Massachusetts fast approaching, both sides in the debate have introduced bills in the state legislature seeking to help their cause.

Same-sex “marriage” supporters introduced a bill April 22 that would overturn a 1913 law, thus allowing out-of-state same-sex couples to acquire marriage licenses.

On the other side of the issue, a lone legislator has introduced a bill that would remove the four justices who issued last year’s controversial ruling for same-sex “marriage.”

The Boston Globe reported that the fate of both bills is uncertain, especially since legislators are in the middle of a budget debate.

The high court’s ruling is scheduled to take effect May 17, making Massachusetts the first state officially to recognize same-sex “marriage.”

Rep. Emile J. Goguen, a Democrat who opposes both same-sex “marriage” and civil unions, is the supporter of the bill that would remove the justices. He said he hopes the bill will cause the justices to reconsider their ruling.

“It’s not an easy thing to do, but I’ve never walked away from a challenge,” he told The Globe.

Democratic Rep. Robert P. Spellane is the sponsor of the bill that would overturn the century-old law that was passed originally to protect those states that did not allow interracial marriages. If an interracial couple could not get married in their home state, then they could not getting married in Massachusetts, according to the law.

While that application of the law is no longer valid, it apparently will now be used to prohibit most if not all out-of-state same-sex couples from getting “married,” because no other state has legalized same-sex “marriage.”

Massachusetts Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly has said the law applies to same-sex “marriage” and that it would prevent couples from at least 38 states — those that have defense of marriage acts explicitly banning same-sex “marriage” — from acquiring marriage licenses.

RECALL IN ORE.? — The four Multnomah County commissioners who voted to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples are now the target of a recall effort, according to The Oregonian. Signatures are being collected in hopes of having a recall election some time this summer or fall.

“People are just fed up, and [the commissioners] should be punished,” Christian Coalition Executive Director John Belgarde told The Oregonian.

A ‘WEDDING’ MAGAZINE? — The nation’s first magazine catering to same-sex “weddings” apparently will launch in December. Dubbed “Rainbow Weddings,” the magazine will include articles on wedding planning, honeymoons and other stories that normally would be included in a mainstream wedding publication, Crain Communications reported.

It will be published in New York and have an initial distribution of 100,000 copies. Michael Weiskopf is its founder and CEO.

ASBURY PARK JOINS SUIT — Asbury Park, N.J., which issued a marriage license to a same-sex couple in March, has joined a lawsuit in the state seeking the legalization of same-sex “marriage,” the Associated Press reported. The lawsuit was filed two years ago but was thrown out by a superior court judge last year.

The Asbury City Council approved the lawsuit April 21 by a 3-0 vote, with two members absent.

N.M. CLERK CENSURED — A New Mexico county clerk at the center of a same-sex “marriage” dispute in the state has been censured by the state Republican Central Committee, the Associated Press reported.

The committee passed a resolution April 20 that says Sandoval County clerk Victoria Dunlap, a Republican, has brought disgrace to the party. In February, Dunlap issued more than 60 marriage licenses to same-sex couples, only to have the state attorney general issue an advisory opinion saying the licenses were not valid.

MO. AMENDMENT ADVANCES — The Missouri House and Senate have passed two different versions of state constitutional marriage amendments. The House passed its version April 22 by a 124-19 vote, while the Senate passed its version in March by a 26-6 vote. If the two sides eventually pass the same version, it would go before voters this fall.

The House version bans same-sex “marriage” and anything “treated as a marriage” — apparently a reference to civil unions. The Senate’s version excludes the civil unions reference.

VA. BILL PASSES — The Virginia House and Senate passed a bill April 21 that would ban civil unions and any “partnership arrangements,” The Washington Times reported. The bill passed the House 69-30 and the Senate 27-12.

In passing the bill legislators rejected an amendment by Gov. Mark Warner that would have deleted the phrase “partnership arrangements.” Both margins are veto-proof, The Times said.
For more information about the national debate over same-sex “marriage,” visit

    About the Author

  • Michael Foust