Posted on 11/21/2003 6:21:43 AM PST by 11th Earl of Mar
By JAY LINDSAY
Associated Press Writer
November 21, 2003, 2:06 AM EST
BOSTON --
The phone began ringing and e-mail inboxes clogged at the Massachusetts Family Institute almost as soon as the state's highest court ruled to endorse gay marriage. To executive director Ron Crews, these were the stirrings of a public finally shocked awake.
Calls from around the country pledged assistance, the institute was offered free legal help and Crews began considering whether he needed to hire more staffers for his small operation, which opposes gay marriage.
"It's time that the sleeping majority woke up to what's going on," Crews said.
Around the country, gay-marriage opponents said the legal setback has energized a movement that lacked a galvanizing moment until the state Supreme Judicial Court ruled that denying same-sex couples the right to wed violated the state constitution.
From e-mail campaigns to rallies at the Statehouse and preachings from the pulpit, forces opposed to gay marriage are targeting Massachusetts as the battleground over gay rights and the sanctity of marriage.
Just as New York City's Stonewall Riots of 1969 stirred the equal-rights movement for gays, critics of the court's ruling hope it awakens the movement to block same-sex marriage.
The Rev. Louis Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition in Washington predicted the ruling is such a radical example of judicial overreach that new laws prohibiting gay marriage will be passed in response.
"It's only for a few moments that (gay marriage proponents) will have the victory," he said.
The court gave the Legislature six months to change state laws to conform to its ruling. Any efforts to change the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage couldn't take place until at least 2006 -- meaning that gay couples would have a two-year window to wed before those rights could be stripped.
Gay-rights advocates are hoping that they can show during that time that same-sex marriages aren't a threat to anyone.
Sarah Wunsch, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union in Massachusetts, said any anger about the decision will abate when people realize granting gays marriage rights is a simple matter of equality and justice.
"Those who would use the issue to foment a rebellion against the court decision are making a mistake," she said. "This is a call to the best ideals and values of our society and people respond to that."
Republican Gov. Mitt Romney and state lawmakers are toying with the idea of enacting Vermont-style civil unions, rather than full-blown marriages -- and then working toward a state constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriages.
On the federal level, a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman is being pushed by U.S. Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo. She said the Massachusetts decision has given her campaign a boost by giving it a high national profile.
"When people realize that four judges from Massachusetts could define marriage for the entire nation, they are reeling, they are shocked," she said.
In Minnesota on Thursday, Republican lawmakers called for enshrining the state's ban on gay marriage in the constitution -- an effort to block any challenges to the ban that may arise from the Massachusetts ruling.
Sen. Michele Bachmann and Rep. Mary Liz Holberg plan to introduce legislation that would allow voters to decide whether to amend the constitution to say marriage is a civil contract between a man and a woman.
Anti-abortion activist Randall Terry, who led protests against Vermont's civil unions law, said he'll set up operations in Massachusetts. He plans statewide "theatrical demonstrations," such as a Caesar-like judge holding a whip over a cowering state legislator, to illustrate what he said is lawmakers' meek acceptance to the court's power grab.
Crews' group is planning to rally at the Statehouse. The conservative Family Research Council sent a representative to Massachusetts this week to mobilize clergy to rally their congregations, and discuss tactics with local allies.
* __
On the Net:
Family Research Council: www.frc.org
American Civil Liberties Union Massachusetts: www.aclu-mass.org
Massachusetts Family Institute: www.mafamily.org
Traditional Value Coalition: www.traditionalvalues.org
Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press | Article licensing and reprint options
I suppose King David lost all credibility after that ugly adultery/murder thing, too.
You should talk since you dropped Newt from your radar and the party over the same issue.
It's just something to consider, something to ponder. Sheesh. :-)
As time goes by, the vile anti-social behavior of Queers steadily gets worse and worse . . . as this current FReeper article demonstrates!!! Therefore, allow me to repeat my own personal rant one more time:
Oak Hay, so I'm very disturbed and continually puzzled about how a small bunch of contrary to nature freaks can destroy our entire civilization. . . BUT DAMMIT, THEY'RE DOING IT !!!
These unsavory and unclean sub-human creatures delight in ramming their urine exhaust pipes into the rectal relief tubes of young boys (and of each other) !!! They brag and crow loudly about their filthy behavior !!! They demand access to our young and innocent children... so they can commit sodomy and oral sex acts upon them!!! Then they scream and holler...
"Homophobe"
... when we seek to save our children from their filthy and immoral activities!!! WHY IS THIS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE IN THIS ONCE-FREE REPUBLIC ??? DO WE NOT HAVE THE RIGHT AND MORAL DUTY TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN FROM SLIME LIKE THIS ???
The Supreme Court already weighed in on that one this last summer. Perhaps you'd favor a Constitutional amendment re-criminalizing homosexuality?
It appears that he did. God took the child conceived in adultery. David was not allowed to build the temple. I'd have to say I believe that the Lord was more than a little bit disappointed in his behavior.
That was a point a lot of people would get wrong.
While you're at it, please check into the meanings of 'signature' font colors and annoying little (and some not so little) images, too.
;O)
If you're now limiting his loss of credibility to issues of marriage, you might have a valid point.
He bought a new mansion for his adulterous honey, and he needs to be in the public limelight to self-promote his "ministry."
I'm fixin' to send Terry a contribution, since $0.01 will go to support his anti-gay-marriage tirades and $0.99 to support his adulterous lifestyle.
You're absolutely right.
After David's adultery, the prophet Nathan warned him that his sins have set up dire consequencies for himself and his kingdom.
Thereafter, his daughter was raped by one of his son, and another son started a rebellion against David that lead to bloodbath of fellow Israelites.
Finally, he lost control over his army commander, who committed several crimes against known public figures.
Justice against the rapist and the murderous army commander was not served until King Solomon took over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.