Last modified: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 9:44 PM EDT TO THE EDITOR: 14 Reader's letters on the gay marriage vote Legislature did the rational thing To the editor: To tell you the truth, I was pretty sure that the Legislature would vote to send the anti-gay marriage amendment forward to voters. To tell you the truth, I was pretty sure that after speaking out against the amendment I'd find a few days worth of letters splayed across this Opinion page attacking my words and my character as a gay man. I figured that I'd see nasty diatribes from the same three people who can't argue their way out of a paper bag, damning me to hell for all of eternity. I'm a worst case scenario kind of guy, but here's what I found in the days leading up to and on the day of that fateful constitutional convention: The Legislature, in a rare appearance by their rational selves, decided against letting mob rule decide the fate of an entire tax-paying population. Justice was served. More importantly, leading up to the convention, I read more and more letters from people in support of marriage for all, which really warmed my heart. I kept hearing less and less shrill voices of people who want to make decisions for other people concerning love and marriage. There were some angry people, for sure. A woman who doesn't support gay marriage attacked a man outside the State House because of her frustration and anger after the decision. This was some serious business. But God has not struck us all dead in the wake of this decision, pedophiles are not running free and organized on the streets doing a sidewalk revival of "Hair," and there is no preschooler anywhere who is declaring that he or she would like to be homosexual instead of wanting to be a firefighter when they grow up. Business in Massachusetts is business as usual. It almost makes me wish we could really vote as a state to see where we are as a test of our compassion and humanity. Almost. Hey, who knows? Kris Mineau is ready to have us vote in 2012 on the "definition" of marriage. I say we give this decision a shot for the next four years and then let Mr. Mineau have his shot. I'm a worst case scenario type of guy, but I'm willing to bet most of you would vote to keep happiness a reality for all adult couples. And thanks. Thomas Naughton Foxboro A grateful people thank state Rep. Ross To the editor: State Rep. Richard Ross is to be commended for his vote against the proposed 2008 ballot question to ban same-sex marriage in Massachusetts. It takes courage, insight and honesty to examine an issue forthrightly and make the right decision. There were many pressures from all sides in this heated debate. Yet the fundamental issue, at the very core of this question, was basic human decency and equality. The citizens of this great Commonwealth span widely diverse ethnicities and races, speak the languages of the world and practice many faiths, including the non-believers as well. These citizens include the young and the old, the well and the sick. They are bankers and housewives, students and truck drivers. They are our neighbors, and friends, and our family. And it is among these distinctive citizens that we find a particular group of people who wish as many others do, to experience the joys of family life with the protection and security of lawful marriage. Richard Ross examined his heart and saw that these people were just as deserving as every other citizen. And for that the people may be grateful. Deborah Vatcher Plainville Ross demonstrated leadership, compassion To the editor: Rep. Richard Ross is a hero's hero. Unlike other area lawmakers, Richard Ross voted to kill the same-sex marriage amendment and to preserve equality for the people of Massachusetts. Earlier this year, Ross voted to support the marriage amendment, but after meeting with loving same-sex couples and families, in good conscious he couldn't support an amendment to our constitution that would revoke rights. Ross' decision to switch his vote, understand the facts. Vote on Marriage and other groups representing the "faithful" will have you believe that Ross and other lawmakers who blocked the amendment denied the people the right to vote. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our state's constitution provides that legislators vote twice on the merits of any citizen's petition before passing to the general public for a popular vote. As for using maneuvers to delay the vote, no one complained in January when the health care bill suffered the same fate. As for state legislators (Scott) Brown, (John) Lepper and (Betty) Poirier who all voted to support the amendment, they are entitled to their vote as was Ross. But make no mistake, their vote was a representation of their personal beliefs and not their desire to let the people decide as they claim. In fact, years ago, Poirier worked with former Rep. (Phil) Travis from Rehoboth to frame this issue long before it became an issue "for the people." In addition, Poirier currently supports Bill S321, a piece of anti-gay legislation that would make it illegal for our public school teachers to utter the words "same-sex marriage," "gay," "lesbian," or "two mommies" in front of any student who wasn't granted parental consent. In closing, history will remember Ross from Wrentham for demonstrating leadership, compassion and morality. Joseph Solis Attleboro Gay marriage has been shoved down our throats To the editor: I have not given much thought to the vote by our lawmakers about placing on the 2008 ballot a constitutional amendment question that would have barred couples from gay marriage. As this question is not paramount in my mind, I have given it very little thought. However, after having jammed it down my throat time and again by the editorial board of The Sun Chronicle, plus the criticism and pressure this newspaper has constantly put upon our local legislators who do not agree with the opinions of the paper's editorial board, I had to put my two cents worth in. I believe that if the voters do not agree with their elected representatives then they vote them out of office. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't a four judge majority of the Supreme Court force the citizens of Massachusetts to accept gay marriage whether they wanted to or not? Am I also correct when I state thousands of citizens of this state believe just as passionately as the editorial board that a ballot question is their only option to right a wrong? Please members of the editorial board, don't keep telling me over and over again that gay marriage is a cherished civil right. Up until three years ago, it was not even a right. I also remember members of the Supreme Judicial Court stating that by their vote for gay marriage it would force the legislative branch to do their job and vote on this legislation. Let me also commend legislators Brown, Lepper and Poirier for standing up to the constant attacks from this newspaper. When it comes to gay marriage this newspaper has almost a Jihadist sentiment. What makes the proponents of gay marriage so sure that the people of Massachusetts, the most liberal state in the country, will not agree with their side of this issue? Personally, gay marriage hasn't and won't effect me in my everyday life, I just don't like someone dictating to me whether I can or can't vote on this or any other issue. Jim Rowan Attleboro Thank you, Rep. Ross, from a former aide To the editor: As a resident of Massachusetts for the past 22 years, a registered Democrat, and an employee of the Massachusetts Statehouse, I would like to express my absolute happiness in the outcome of the gay marriage vote Thursday on Beacon Hill. It truly was a landmark decision in the protection of equal rights and a bold statement that will surely resonate across the nation. More importantly, I have a deep respect and sense of gratitude for the legislators who made the difficult and heart-wrenching decision. I know many of them had been struggling for months with their feelings on the issue and tried to approach it as open-minded as ever. Specifically, I was pleasantly surprised to read that Rep. Richard Ross, the Republican leader who represents my hometown of Wrentham, changed his mind and voted in favor of banning the amendment. As a former intern of Ross', I have seen first-hand his compassionate and personal approach to politics, and I know that he too has swayed back and forth on the issue of gay marriage. Ultimately, it was his heart and not his head that told him how to vote, a respectful and rare trait in elected officials. I was lucky enough to witness the highly emotional and triumphant atmosphere of the Statehouse yesterday, and it was a day I will never forget. It is satisfying to know that party affiliations do not always dictate the actions of a legislator. Thank you, Mr. Ross. Elizabeth Andreozzi Wrentham Our lawmakers did the right thing To the Editor: Although there is a small victory in the spectrum of our entire country, I am pleased that there are enough fair-minded people voting to keep civil rights out of the hands of a popular majority. I have been an Attleboro resident all of my life and can only hope that a younger, more accepting population inhabits our town that they elect more officials who consider the well-being of all an every day practice. I have two children and will try to raise them to stand beside those who come from same sex families and not believe the negative, slanderous things that come form the ignorant people who believe they are less or insignificant. I know (Rep. John) Lepper has been a constant force against the rights of gay people and I can only hope that in the near future this town elects someone who has more vision for a brighter state. I wish that all of the money and time that was spent on this debate were better used for things that truly affect our children such as murderous drug dealers and molesters. I encourage you to invest your time passing laws such as Jessica's Law, which gives a mandatory sentence of 25 years in jail for child molesters. Then maybe you can say you have done something good for our children. Debra Calandrelli Attleboro Ross' vote a true 'Profile in Courage' To the editor: I am very happy to nominate Rep. Richard Ross of Wrentham for "The John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage" award. Whether you agree or disagree with Ross's vote one must respect anyone who casts a heartfelt vote believing it is "political suicide," as he himself stated. At a time when too many people in elected and un-elected positions do things for correctness or to please a group or constituency it is a wonderful thing to see someone take the "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune," and be true to one's self and upbringing. His vote and the reasoning behind it exemplify what then Sen. (John) Kennedy wrote in his magnificent book. I hope others will applaud Ross's courage and take time to contact the JFK Library to further recognize his selfless act. Bill Darcey Mansfield Civil rights should not be decided in elections To the editor: I want to commend Rep. Richard Ross for voting not to put a constitutional amendment on the 2008 ballot to ban gay marriage in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. As a teacher of history (American, World, and Ancient), I am too familiar with the history of denying civil rights to particular groups. We are a nation founded on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all groups. I cannot understand why individuals believe they should vote on rights for groups of people. Our job in a democracy is to preserve rights for everyone, not vote on whether or not those groups should have them. Thank you Mr. Ross for doing the right thing. Roland Moffitt Randolph Gay marriage: it's a matter of civil rights To the Editor: For those members of the legislature who looked within themselves and voted to defeat the marriage amendment, thank you so very much. This argument gets easy to vet when one takes the time to think about the importance of putting one's basic rights up to a vote. Despite the obvious incorrect application of the Federal Defence of Marriage Act, American gay people should not have to fight for rights they already have under the 14th Amendment. Despite the votes in other states, the effort to vote for discrimination is wrong and I am proud our Legislature had the guts to stand up to those who want their beliefs to trump the law, constitution, and basic rights. Should we put their religious and close-minded beliefs up to a vote? Of course not. On another note, consider this thought. If your marriage is so flimsy and fragile that the private activities of gays would affect your marriage in a destructive way, then you really should consider marriage counseling over supporting discrimination. It's really that simple. We have had several thousand marriages over the time period gay marriage has been permitted. Has there been one person in this state or any where else gay marriage is allowed been able to prove without a doubt that the private activities of gay people directly influenced their marriages? Of course not. That argument has always been a strawman that will finally be able to be put aside once and for all. Finally, I encourage the legislature and the governor, who helped make this grand reaffirmation of civil rights possible in the Commonwealth, to stand up one more time and end the travesty of the 1913 law that prevents the gay citizens from coming to the Commonwealth to marry. I hope the use of the Massachusetts marriage certificate will help gay couples with the tools to build a foundation for legal challenges in their respective states. Change is coming, Rhode Island now will recognize the Massachusetts certificate and other states are still looking to affirm rights I strongly believe gays already have in the first place. I challenge all who believe in civil rights to use this moment to take the fight further until we finally can truly eliminate discrimination on the basis of race, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Its time to stop ignoring the 14th Amendment. Darren Major South Attleboro Lawmakers not fit to serve after vote To the editor: This letter is addressed to state Rep. Betty Poirier and state Sen. Scott Brown, who represent North Attleboro. By your "yes" votes for an amendment to our Massachusetts Constitution to ban gay marriage, you have proven yourselves not to be defenders of liberty and therefore you are unworthy to represent me in our government. You have undone any good you have done in the past. You have lost my vote. Tom Richards North Attleboro Lawmakers deserve our thanks for vote To the Editor: Thanks to the legislature for supporting everyone's right to marry. A special thanks to area lawmakers who have reconsidered their positions over the last three years and voted Thursday to support marriage equality; Rep. Richard Ross and Sen. Jim Timility. Shame on the anti-equality groups who insult these thoughtful legislators by blaming their switch on "bribes and arm-twisting." Christine Robins Foxboro What kind of society are we leaving children? To the editor: I was so discouraged to hear that our elected officials on Beacon Hill do not think that their constituents are competent enough to vote on an issue as important as how to define the ancient institution of marriage. These social engineers have insulted me again by not allowing my voice and the voice of the voters of the state to express their opinion on how they think marriage should be defined. The voters have twice worked hard within the political system rules to procure the needed signatures to allow the voters to speak. Twice they have been ignored and snubbed. Next time you vote, keep in mind who you are putting in office. This moves us further down the slippery slope of moral decline. Already in the works are initiatives for K-12 public schools to teach about "marriage" between all types of people. Parents will be shocked by the content of these lessons. Also in the works is an attempt by our governor to repeal the age-old law of allowing residents of other states to come and get married in Massachusetts. We are going to gain quite a reputation. Additionally, on the federal level, debate is already occurring with House Bill 1592 and Senate Bill 1105 to make it a hate crime to preach the scriptural references that teach of the unnatural practice of homosexual behavior. By the way, only 50 of 200 votes were needed to allow our voices to be heard (25 percent of our elected officials!!). Only 40 voted to allow the voters to have their rights, including Rep. Poirier, Rep. Lepper and Sen. Brown. Thanks goes out to them. We are responsible for the society we hand to our children. It is past the time to let your voice be heard. Otherwise our elected officials will continue to assume that everyone is just sitting around watching television, unconcerned about the nature of the world we are giving to the children of tomorrow. That would truly be a crime. Shawn Seybert Attleboro Ross took power from the people with vote To the editor: Please, enough already with the "Profiles in Courage" pieces on Rep. Richard Ross. I did not vote for Ross for his views on whether men and women should be able to marry one another. I voted for Ross, among other things, in anticipation he would respect the intelligence of area voters to make reasoned decisions on important issues when brought before them through initiative petition. For Ross to facilitate the undermining of the citizens' right to follow a legal procedure and place important issues on the ballot demonstrates a remarkable indifference to the voters' legally stated concerns and suggests his belief that perhaps the voters are less capable than he to apply intellect, spirituality, and heart to their decision making, unless it agrees with his. This apparent lack of confidence in his constituents is unfortunate and condescending. In a state run by people whose zeal for personal gain is matched only by their audacity in concocting schemes for placing relatives on the payroll and milking every last dime from the taxpayers, one would have hoped Ross would have resisted "business as usual" at the Statehouse. What I see is not a courageous ally of the people but rather the birth of yet another Massachusetts pol. Doug Sprague Wrentham Demonstrators at mayor's house are wrong To the Editor: I write this column as someone who supported placing the question of marriage on the ballot for voters to decide. With that said, what occurred outside of the Mayor's residence Monday evening was wrong. Mayor Kevin Dumas had no role in the vote that took place at the Statehouse last week. He is merely a private citizen who took advantage of the laws of this Commonwealth. This misplaced protest does not honor the 170,000 people who participated in government to try and change something they do not agree with. Any protest should be directed towards local officials who did not support their views. Sorry Mr. Timilty. Neil T. Finn Attleboro