Petition Vs. Gay Marriage Advances

The Boston Globe ^ | Raphael Lewis

[Andy'smom]

Petition vs. gay marriage advances Number of signers breaks state record By Raphael Lewis, Globe Staff | December 22, 2005

Backers of a constitutional ban on gay marriage in Massachusetts have shattered a 20-year-old record for the most certified signatures ever gathered in support of a proposed ballot question.

[Andy'smom]

I'd say the citizens want to vote on this...

[sgtbono2002]

Too bad they cant get a petition to recall Kennedy and Kerry. At lest with this they are on the right track.

[sgtbono2002]

Too bad they cant get a petition to recall Kennedy and Kerry. At least with this they are on the right track.

[Gay State Conservative]

You heard it here first,boys and girls....the sodomy lobby and its very,very good friends in the Massachusetts Politburo (aka:the Legislature) will never,ever allow homosexual marriage to be outlawed here.

[scripter]

HA ping

[massgopguy]

The web-site crashed, everyone wants to see thier own names. HA! I wasn't going to sign the petition until they threatened to publish the names. That's intimidation and I must poke them in the eye.

[Andy'smom]

It either crashed or it was hacked. I wanted to sign the petition but I didn't see any signature gatherers in my town. They probably could have gotten twice as many signatures.

[DBrow]

If more than 50% of the petition signers were "tricked" into signing it, they'd better put it to a vote on the next ballot; then you will get a much better count with little trickery.

I suspect that the pro-homosexual lobby there would do literally anything to prevent letting the people vote.

They published the names and addresses of the signers? Unbelievable. Will they publish the names of those who challenge their signatures? If not there is a big fraud potential here.

[trebb]

Opponents of the ballot question say the eye-popping number of signatories does not reflect a tidal wave of support for overturning the Supreme Judicial Court's landmark 2003 ruling that declared same-sex matrimony legal. Rather, they said, it shows that paid signature-gatherers were particularly effective at tricking unsuspecting voters into signing a petition they didn't support.

Typical Dim view on things - if the People don't agree that my pet perversion is a good thing, then they must be stupid or are being tricked.

[DBrow]

I looked at their "Fraud affidavit" and noticed that while it requires a signature, it does not require notarization or a witness. Anyone can get the name and address from the Know Your Neighbor website.*

There is also no feedback to the website- you can't check to see if someone falsely tried to nullify your signature on the petition with a fraudulent affidavit.

I bet the total number of affidavits reported brings the petition signature count down below certification levels, and that will be that, no investigation.

*How interesting that a site supposedly providing a service for deceived petition signers would be named as though it was intended to dime you out to your neighbor if you signed.

[pabianice]

Meaningless. The Libs will NEVER allow it to come to a vote.

[Squat]

Wish we could get it done here in California.

[Y2Bogus]

"Hundreds of Bay State residents complained to gay organizations and state officials this fall that they were duped into signing the antigay marriage measure when they thought they were backing a proposal to allow supermarkets to sell wine."

I'm curious as to why liberals operate under the assumption that their voting base is full of idiots?

[cloud8]

> I wanted to sign the petition but I didn't see any signature gatherers in my town.

Same here. I don't like the homo lobby's charge that people were "duped" into signing the petition; frankly I don't believe it. How about if folks who had wanted to sign were allowed to add their names to a supplemental petition--it of course wouldn't have any legal standing, but might have the effect of overwhelming force. Because once the list approaches 2 million, the legislature is going to have to listen.

[Andy'smom]

I guess the gay marriage supporters have duped themselves (thanks to the Globe) into believing that only a tiny minority of mass. citizens are against same sex marriages. "There MUST be massive fraud!" "Only a bigot would have signed that petition!"

[DirtyHarryY2K]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

FReepmail me and little jeremiah if you want on/off the ping list.

Free Republic homosexual agenda keyword search

[MissyMa]

I was looking to see where I could sign it too, but they won't let you :o).

I did leave them a comment on their blog and told them how disgusted I was that they are publishing the names.

[RonF]

I have spoken with proponents of same sex marriage who are quite open about the fact that they opposed letting people vote on the matter. Their position is that marriage is a basic civil right that should be open to all couples regardless of their gender, and that civil rights should not and are not open to majority vote. They draw the parallel of civil rights for blacks; there was a time in this country where equal civil rights regardless of race did not have majority support.

[DBrow]

Yes, rights for Blacks did not have majority support for quite a while, but eventually Congress and the states passed the legislation that guaranteed the demanded rights.

Not allowing a vote because the issue is "obviously a basic human rights issue" will eventually eliminate the need for most votes- a few people will decide "what's right" and the rest of us must accept it.

Like the current issue with homosexual marriage up in Mass- four people decided it was a "right", and apparently that's that.

It's considered a basic civil right to give illegals special tuition breaks, and some feel it's a basic civil right for illegals and nonresidents to vote as well. Maybe it's a basic civil right to have taxpayer supported "free" medical care. I could go on and make up a very scary list but I think the point is made.

[BostonianRightist]

I'm curious as to why liberals operate under the assumption that their voting base is full of idiots?

The Liberal voting base is mostly college students. So yes, they are idiots.