Mass. lawmakers advance proposed constitutional gay marriage ban

Boston.com ^

[shineon]

BOSTON --Lawmakers in Massachusetts, the only state where gay marriage is legal, on Tuesday voted to advance a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, a critical step toward putting the measure the 2008 ballot.

[vetsvette]

They had to put their principles aside and do this -- Romney wouldn't sign their pay raises until they got off their butts on this thing.

Money usurps principle with Dim's every time.

[Paleo Conservative]

-- Romney wouldn't sign their pay raises until they got off their butts on this thing.

How much were their pay raises?

[HEY4QDEMS]

I have a question for the legal eagles among us.

What happens to the validity of the several thousand gay marriages that have already taken place if the gay marriage ban becomes law?

Are there any ex-post-facto ramifications?

[xmission]

Unbelievable.

[gidget7]

Yeah, but that isn't the end of it apparently, we will have to wait to see if they vote to reconsider their vote???

[gidget7]

Equal to or more than...........our yearly salaries!! You can bet on that.

[IpaqMan]

Our local news stated that this amendment would not affect current "marriages".

[Paleo Conservative]

Equal to or more than...........our yearly salaries!!

That's a lot of principal.

[Boston Blackie]

Earlier in the day, Gov-elect Deval Patrick had met with Travaglini and House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi to urge against a vote, calling it a "question of conscience."

Yeah, just ignore the state constitution....use it for toilet paper.

[shineon]

I suppose the ex-post-facto ramifications will continue no matter what they decide to do on the hill.

[xmission]

Goota turn on Howie. This ought to be good.

[gidget7]

From what I have read, the amendment that would have nullified them failed. The one they are voting now to reconsider, would allow them to stay.

[raccoonradio]

...and someone one scene just called Howie and said "they may not get to do a re-vote--may not have a quorum"

[SteveMcKing]

I think it depends on the wording of the new amendment. If it's not retroactive, then gays with marriage certificates might remain a small and privileged class for life. (I'm wildly guessing here...)

[HEY4QDEMS]

I usually watch Fox25 in the AM.

I've missed the last few mornings because I've been taking morning walks and working out.
This damn New Years resolution is really testing my patients.

[Just sayin]

I cannot speak to the MASS. pay raises but I know here the very first thing democrats did was refuse to vote against an automatic pay raise that saw them gain in the area of 6 thousand dollars per year.

They raise minimum wage by 2 grand and give themselves 6. I guess people approve of this because they keep voting them back into power here. In a way they were smart about it because they did it first thing so all will be forgotten by the time the next elections come around.

[ProCivitas]

Now, according to a caller to Howie's show, travelinni and dimassi don't have quorum to hold a 'reconsideration' vote. Pleased as I am that the amendment gets to go to the voters, I can't account for why the 'rats held this vote. They had seemed determined to subvert the rule of law and violate the Commonwealth's constitution... I wonder what changed their mind....or did they figure they could just kill it with this 'reconsideration' maneuver.

[HEY4QDEMS]

patients = patience

[maryz]

They have another chance to kill it next year -- it has to pass in two consecutive Con-Cons.