Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/02/2007 12:37:28 PM PST by shineon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: shineon
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.
2 posted on 01/02/2007 12:43:59 PM PST by vetsvette (Bring Him Back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: shineon
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?
4 posted on 01/02/2007 12:44:59 PM PST by HEY4QDEMS (Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: shineon
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.

10 posted on 01/02/2007 12:47:34 PM PST by Boston Blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: shineon; gidget7

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.


18 posted on 01/02/2007 12:58:26 PM PST by ProCivitas (Each Nation Should Be Its Own Best Market First.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: shineon

This isn't over yet folks. The legislatures are now trying to reconsider the question and the vote, and they are now trying to get a majority of pro-gay marriage legislatures to "twist enough arms" to get the next vote to be less than 50 legislatures who are for the '08 ballot question. If the next vote does end up taking place and not enough legislatures (less than 50 legislatures) for for the '08 ballot question, then the legislatures will say that they didn't break any laws and then go home!


21 posted on 01/02/2007 1:07:40 PM PST by johnthebaptistmoore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: shineon

Shhhh!!! There are Freepers on another thread that are trying to make the case that Romney actually supports gay marriage and his support of this constitutional amendment is phony. Careful, they might be introduced to reality!


26 posted on 01/02/2007 2:11:42 PM PST by Reaganesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: shineon
I am quite surprised to hear this.


I still do not believe that us Massachusetts voters will be allowed to vote on this issue ever.

This matter is going to end up decided by a U.S. Constitutional Amendment.
27 posted on 01/02/2007 2:14:43 PM PST by Radix (Tag Line undergoing maintenance right now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: shineon

31 posted on 01/03/2007 3:30:59 AM PST by Silly (sarcasmoff.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson