34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - (508) 222-7000
News
Both sides see vote as turning point
 Top Headlines Opponents of the ban called it a vindication of civil rights. But both sides of the debate agreed that Thursday's vote by the Legislature not to put the issue on the 2008 ballot was history in the making. Putting the measure on the ballot in the form of a constitutional amendment would have required 50 of 200 votes in the Legislature, but it garnered only 45 votes. That means Massachusetts will remain the only state where gay marriage is legal. State Rep. Betty Poirier, R-North Attleboro, said Massachusetts always seems to be at the forefront of American history, and it is again with the vote against the ban. "I truly believe this is a historic turning point for our state and our country. The future will decide if that is good or bad," she said. Poirier obviously believes it is a turning point for the worst. She said the Legislature ignored the will of hundreds of thousands of voters by voting against putting the proposed ban on gay marriage on the ballot so the people could decide the matter. "The Legislature has said 'we know better.' This is a violation of the public trust. We are supposed to be a government of the people, and the people's will has been thrown in the trash," she said. Opponents of the ban, such as Gov. Deval Patrick, however, said gay marriage is a civil right that should not be taken away - even by a vote of the people. They said Massachusetts is an example to the rest of the country in protecting civil rights. Both sides of the issue also said they suspect the 45-151 vote spells the end to the movement to impose a ban and overturn a state Supreme Judicial Court ruling that effectively made gay marriage legal. Fifty votes were need to advance the ban. Lawmakers said they suspect the ban will not be revived and that the Legislature will move on to other issues. Poirier said the vote sent a message to the people who worked to gather signatures to put the ban on the ballot that the Legislature does not care about the democratic process and will not listen to the people. "Why would they do it again?" she said. State Rep. John Lepper, R-Attleboro, said he has no idea what organizers of the movement to ban gay marriage will do, but time is working against them. He said a few years ago there were more than 90 votes in the Legislature against gay marriage. That number has continued to dwindle with each vote, so it is now down to 45. One related issue that could come before the Legislature soon is a proposal to allow out-of-state gay couples to get married in Massachusetts, he said. State Rep. Steve D'Amico, D-Seekonk, also said he believes this might be the end of the issue. "I'm just glad we can now get on with other things," he said, noting major fiscal issues are facing the state. "People are concerned about other things." He said putting the ban on the ballot would not only put civil rights at risk, but would result in more than a year of fighting over the issue leading up to the 2008 vote. "It would have been a very divisive issue," he said. The lawmakers said they had no idea what was going to happen in the days leading up to the vote. Originally it was thought that supporters of the ban had the 50 votes they needed to put the measure on the ballot, although some lawmakers were wavering. In the past couple of days, Patrick and Democratic leaders put on a final push to change some votes, and they succeeded. "It's nice to see we have a governor who is trying to bring people together instead of dividing them," D'Amico said. But, Lepper said it was an "appalling" use of raw power that changed the votes. "The Democratic leaders worked overtime to assure the people did not have the opportunity to vote," he said.
Post Your Comments Jake wrote on Jun 15, 2007 9:08 PM: " So true Rich D, Brown always sticks with the same position - he was, is and will ALWAYS be a bigot. " rich d wrote on Jun 15, 2007 8:43 PM: " Brown's my man, sticks with the same position " Johnny K wrote on Jun 15, 2007 6:15 PM: " ROSS, THANK YOU - you are a HERO " Wregular Wrentham Voter wrote on Jun 15, 2007 5:22 PM: " My grandmother was married with children before she had the right to vote. Lucky for her, this right to vote wasn't decided by mere men. Sorry Scott Brown and other homophobes, you are outnumbered. You had the opportunity to recognize that those born as homosexuals have the same inalienable rights as those born heterosexual. Separate is never equal, and Brown is an impediment to recognizing equal protection for all under the law. High Kudos for Rep. Ross for wearing his heart and his conscience on his shirt sleeve. He's a true man of the people. " Siked wrote on Jun 15, 2007 5:21 PM: " Conservative minority huh? It's not about stereotyping. It's about common sense...How could you be a part of a group that has for CENTURIES oppressed you and other minorities? Way to sell out. Poirer and Brown are biggots and the sooner they leave the better off this area will be.
" M Kline wrote on Jun 15, 2007 5:04 PM: " Hey Cynic, try she’s not a leader, she’s against minorities and she’s a phony who talks from both sides of her mouth, a mouth that can’t be trusted. " VOTE THEM OUT wrote on Jun 15, 2007 4:56 PM: " Reason #1: SHE's a BIGOT - does that count? See you there in November 08' " Aaliyah wrote on Jun 15, 2007 4:52 PM: " Kevin, you bible bumpers just don’t get it, but if your religious rights were up for a vote, oh boy, you would get it fast!
Be careful my dear, the pendulum is never centered….
" Pick me wrote on Jun 15, 2007 4:51 PM: " I'll vote against Betty Poirier if Gov Tax and Spend gives me the same sweet deal he used to buy votes. " Cynic wrote on Jun 15, 2007 4:04 PM: " To VOTE THEM OUT - you have nothing to be proud of. You changed the easily purchased minds of some career politicians. Come to North Attleborough, stand in front of the Post Office and call us bigots because we support Poirier and Brown. At best you will experience a cool reception. You will not come up with one good reason why we should not voter for her. " Kevin wrote on Jun 15, 2007 4:01 PM: " To votethemout: Don't change the definition of "bought" to "changed". " Mike wrote on Jun 15, 2007 3:57 PM: " I can't believe the passion that flows. I can only hope the "divide" is short-lived. I think we all need to back to living a "personal responsibility" and stop worringing so much about the other person. " VOTE THEM OUT wrote on Jun 15, 2007 3:50 PM: " yup an ARMY - the same ARMY that changed 10 votes - did you forget already?! - surely a bigot from North Attleboro will be easier pickens... " Jerry wrote on Jun 15, 2007 3:36 PM: " to: VOTE THEM OUT - That's what I like to see, a liberal who knows who should represent everybody. As a conservative minority (double whammy) I get tired of people telling me how I should think and for whom I should vote, just based on my opinion. Congrats are cementing more stereotypes. " Kevin wrote on Jun 15, 2007 3:29 PM: " To Vote them out: An ARMY From AROUND THE STATE??? More like a vocal minority that hides behind the skirt of Deval Patrick the vote buyer because they don't have enough votes to win the ballot question. " History wrote on Jun 15, 2007 3:15 PM: " Shall I tell of the way the homosexual lobby stuffed the APA with activists in the seventies and declared homosexuality normal by a VOTE and not by science. " Bigot buster wrote on Jun 15, 2007 2:57 PM: " Hey History wrote, keep squawking; your comments actually hurt your side more than they help, it just shows the readers how much of a hateful bigot you and the other radicals really are. " Don Peterson wrote on Jun 15, 2007 2:52 PM: " Hey History - your stupid comments speaks for itself. " Joe S wrote on Jun 15, 2007 2:50 PM: " Not a hero - ROSS is absolutely a hero - and a leader unlike Poirier. " VOTE THEM OUT wrote on Jun 15, 2007 2:49 PM: " Jerry, you are kidding right? This isn't about Attleboro - there is an ARMY from AROUND THE STATE who are prepared to pounce on her the next time she runs for office. We are smart, well funded and relentless. " Hey wrote on Jun 15, 2007 2:46 PM: " History is right. But I want more. I demand that creationism be taught in schools (intellectual civl rights), that I have the right to multiple men (religious freedom) and the right not to have vaccinations that are proven to prevent the spread of disease (secure in my person and effects). " VOTE THEM OUT wrote on Jun 15, 2007 2:46 PM: " Hey MATT - I'd love to see you support John Lepper if he voted against YOUR right to marry the one you loved - NO - I will not look beyond this issue - nothing else is more important than civil liberties. " Ross ROCKS wrote on Jun 15, 2007 2:32 PM: " Ross is not a hero, he is a political weathervane?? What are you kidding me? He went AGAISNT is constituents and did what was right! Ross is a true leader, unlike what the radical Christian extremists are telling you, he got nothing for his vote, NOTHING! " You blew it! (no pun) wrote on Jun 15, 2007 1:43 PM: " This all is a setback for gay rights. Soon as the Massachusetts SJC changed the definition of Marriage by judicial fiat, the rest of the country said “ Oh s***, we better write a law or amendment to protect ourselves from these overreaching homosexual activists. Now a huge majority of the states have new laws or amendments barring gay marriage. And yesterday, Gay marriage did not become part of society because we all voted and approved of this change, which I think could have happened on the ballot. The goons in the leadership used back-door tricks to buy their way to victory. Delay, until your side wins by purchasing votes. You have set yourself back in the big picture of national acceptance of your relationships. Don’t you all see that you went too fast, asked too much, and now have presented yourselves as the bad guys. Your chances of success in other states are considerably lower now. " Enough Already wrote on Jun 15, 2007 1:36 PM: " "History wrote on Jun 15, 2007 1:22 PM:
" Don't hurt me. Just accept me. I am normal. I demand marriage. I demand children. I demand my lifestyle to be taught in the schools as equal. Ah, the history of..."
What's realy interesting is if you complete the sentence with the word Christian or Muslim instead of homosexual.
What impact to homosexuals have on your life, aside from the fact that you dislike their existence on moral grounds? They have been getting married since 2004 and my heterosexual marriage hasn't been infringed upon. " History wrote on Jun 15, 2007 1:22 PM: " Don't hurt me.
Just accept me.
I am normal.
I demand marriage.
I demand children.
I demand my lifestyle to be taught in the schools as equal.
Ah, the history of homosexuals.
It's all about them trying to crush that little feeling inside that tells them they are wrong. It's called morals. Just think about the acts they perform. " Anony wrote on Jun 15, 2007 1:09 PM: " ... or the right for a city or town to tax business property owners who DO NOT VOTE in said city or town. Yeah, that's fair! " dont stop here wrote on Jun 15, 2007 12:55 PM: " This is a good start to getting more of our civil rights restored such as the right to own property without eminent domain and the right to carry firearms. " Enough Already wrote on Jun 15, 2007 11:47 AM: " Since when do 170,000 (123,000 certified) signatures on a petition grant anyone the right to vote on an issue in a referendum? The constitutional amendment process requires signatures on a petition AND legislative votes in TWO legislative sessions - only then do the "people" get to vote on an issue. It's not a god given right that the general public gets to vote on an issue simply because they're passionate about it or because they got signatures on a petition. When not even 50 out of 200 legislators will support a measure, obviously there isn't enough support for it in the general public, this is something that the proponents of the ban need to come to grips with. We are a representative republic, not a democracy where people get to vote on every issue even if a petition gets signed. We elect our officials to represent us. This has been going on since 2004 and there have been ample opportunities to elect representatives who would vote to support the ban, yet there wasn't even 25% legislative support for it and people still whine that their "democratic rights" were violated because they didn't get to vote. " Matt wrote on Jun 15, 2007 11:46 AM: " Anthony wrote: "Matt you’re a very ignorant person, you NEVER let people vote on civil rights, if you don’t believe in gay marriage DON’T HAVE ONE!"
I DO believe in gay marriage! Perhaps you didn't read my post, so I'll say it again: I don’t think that the state should hand out ANY marriage licenses… to hetero or homosexual couples. Mass. should give civil unions to all couples. Then a couple can determine what they need to do in order to be married." " Not a hero wrote on Jun 15, 2007 11:32 AM: " Ross is not a hero, he is a political weathervane. " Phil wrote on Jun 15, 2007 11:00 AM: " Richard Ross is a hero! Betty Poirier, John Lepper and Scott Brown do not understand the process and should not be in office. I don't care if they have accomplished some things over the years, they could have volunteered that service. They chose to run for elected office and take on the role as "leader," not just paper pushers and amendment filters. The reason why they supported this amendment was not to "let the people vote" but instead to discriminate. Go back before this amendment initiative and read archived Sun Chronicle articles. They never once wanted to let this go to a vote either, they wanted to push the anti-gay language themselves without you! HA - it backfired and now they will go down in history as DISCRIMINATORS not LEGISLATORS!!! " Jerry wrote on Jun 15, 2007 10:56 AM: " To VOTE EM OUT -- if Attleboroites are planning to vote out Poirier, good luck. Only a very small portion of her district is in Attleboro. Also many of us "ignorant bigots" still support her. Her vote is not for sale. I wish I could say the same as others. And to KH, as a minority - I would like to say I find the pro gay marriage camp to be very annoying in their constant comparison of the gays to the blacks. " KH wrote on Jun 15, 2007 10:35 AM: " Would Poirier and Lepper have been as eager to allow the people of Kansas to vote on an amendment to take away the rights of African Americans granted them by the "activist" Supreme Court in Brown vs. Board of Education, or to put on a ballot question to overturn the ruling of the same Mass. Supreme Court which ended slavery in Mass.? People like Poirier and Lepper are the reason we have an independent judiciary. " Anthony wrote on Jun 15, 2007 10:23 AM: " Matt you’re a very ignorant person, you NEVER let people vote on civil rights, if you don’t believe in gay marriage DON’T HAVE ONE!
As for Lepper, this issue is so much bigger than voting on a meal tax or funding for a park, get a clue Mister, the vote yesterday showed the people in Massachusetts and the world that we here in the commonwealth do not tolerate discrimination – PERIOD!!!!! It’s to bad you to tolerate it!
" Janice wrote on Jun 15, 2007 9:32 AM: " Poirier and Lepper will never get it correct when dealing with Civil rights so we MUST do the right thing and vote them OUT - Brown too!
Ross was the true Hero here, he gets it! " Proud of Porier, Barrows wrote on Jun 15, 2007 9:24 AM: " Rep. Betty Poirier and Jay Barrows are to be commended for putting the people's right to vote above the issue of the moment. Whether you agree with them or not, they at least stood their ground - and weren't bought & sold like Rep. Ross and others who took favors in trade. I'll take the legislator who has the courage to stand up for what is right no matter how tough the pressure over flip-floppers any day. Out with Ross! Out with Rep Kafka and Sen Timilty. They don't represent or defend this district - they work for the Boston leadership. " Mansfield wrote on Jun 15, 2007 9:21 AM: " VOTE OUT ROSS - D'AMICO - TIMILTY - KAFKA (what exactly does he do for the people anyway?)
Shame on the legislators for not doing their job - providing us the opportunity to vote - NO MATTER WHAT THE ISSUE. Dems missed the boat on this one - shame on the Republicans who turned traitor on their constituants and turned their vote.They are cowards for not standing up for their convictions and then for Ross to issue a lame letter of apology to his supporters. " Matt wrote on Jun 15, 2007 9:13 AM: " Hey VOTE EM OUT:
We are very lucky to have John Lepper. He has been a dedicated and fair representative for many years. He has the best interests of the people of Attleboro in mind. Look beyond this issue before casting judgment on the man. " Matt wrote on Jun 15, 2007 9:11 AM: " Homosexuals and heterosexuals were afforded the same right long before this vote- you could marry a person of the opposite gender (as long as the person is not immediate family). Likewise, changing the definition of marriage changes the rights of all individuals- now heterosexuals and homosexuals can marry a person of the same gender. If the people of the state want to change the definition, I have no problem with that. My contention is that people should have the right to vote, especially on such a significant change.
This affects me because it is yet another example of our elected officials thinking they know better than the people they pretend to represent. In Mass, there is a long history of the legislature ignoring the voters. We voted for Clean Elections, but the legislature ignored the people, arguing that we “didn’t really understand what we were voting for.” The people OVERWHELMINGLY voted to roll back the “temporary” income tax increase to 5.0%. Again, they just ignored us. Now this. At least they should have let the people vote, then then ignored us.
I don't believe this to be a civil-rights issue, and I don’t think that the state should hand out ANY marriage licenses… to hetero or homosexual couples. Mass. should give civil unions to all couples. Then a couple can determine what they need to do in order to be married. For me, I needed a church. " Pablo wrote on Jun 15, 2007 9:03 AM: " How can so many people be so blind to such simple truths. " GOOD JOB wrote on Jun 15, 2007 8:45 AM: " Nice to see some legislators voted not to ban the peoples right to vote. Without legislators like this in the past, women would still not be allowed to vote.This vote was about the rights of our citizens to vote an amendment not about the context, the context should be left to the voters.Although in the minority these legislators were aware of what this vote was about. " Getting over it wrote on Jun 15, 2007 8:43 AM: " Let's get past this issue and on to the rest of Governor Tax and Spend's agenda. Higher meals taxes, taxing telephone poles and getting expensive cars for our "People's Governor" " Steve wrote on Jun 15, 2007 8:23 AM: " Spamalot.... Well put. Why don't people get this point(about our Republic). I agree, this entire issue brings signifigant light onto our elected officials. I believe any representitive who voted to squelch Civil Rights is not currently working in thier right profession. I do hope there is a campaign to vote them out. I for one will ensure i do my part come next election. " Mark wrote on Jun 15, 2007 8:18 AM: " Matt....The legislator did not ignore the people. I am quite sure that the vast majority of citizen believed it was a violation of civil rights. Also, 151 of our elected leaders understood this as well. This was a huge waste of time. I feel like i fell back 150 years. Our leaders did the right thing to ensure that "the people" did not trample others CIVIL RIGHTS. I am quite sure a number of years from now, you will not be Effected by this decision. " Spamalot wrote on Jun 15, 2007 8:15 AM: " In the article, Rep. Poirier states: ""The Legislature has said 'we know better.' This is a violation of the public trust. We are supposed to be a government of the people, and the people's will has been thrown in the trash," she said." Obviously, Betty Poirier STILL doesn't understand that WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY! This Commonwealth and this nation is a Republic. We elect representatives and senators to vote on everything from policy issues to the minutiae of how many rolls of toilet paper to buy for the state house each year. This is EXACTLY what this system is supposed to do. If we are unhappy with the way our elected officials vote, we organize, campaign and vote them out of office. That's how we operate. The fact that she doesn't get it speaks volumes about her qualifications to hold the office she currently has. I believe the campaign to replace her needs to begin today so we can get someone in office who actually understands the job, not to mention who we are as a people, a Commonwealth and a nation. " Matt wrote on Jun 15, 2007 6:14 AM: " "It's nice to see we have a governor who is trying to bring people together instead of dividing them," D'Amico said.
So D'Amico thinks that ignoring the people brings them together? Actually, he might be correct. The legislature has repeatedly ignored the voters, and yet we keep electing them. We rally behind them when they ignore us. " VOTE EM OUT wrote on Jun 15, 2007 6:12 AM: " Poirier obviously believes it is a turning point for the worst. Lepper said it was an "appalling" use of raw power that changed the votes.
PEOPLE OF ATTLEBORO - WE NEED TO VOTE THESE TWO "LAWMAKERS" OUT OF OFFICE.
" or
|
