My predictions
It's been a few days since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court handed down a decision that said that gay and lesbian couples should have the same access to marriage as straight couples. And, I've calmed down a bit.
I think it is a process that all of us have to go through. And, if you are on the receiving end of discrimination, it's not a pleasant place to be. I just go through life the best I can. I worry what will happen should Kent or I die. What will happen to who is left? We aren't getting any younger. If one of us gets sick, will we have visitation rights? Married couples take everything for granted.
But, I guess there is not much I can do to affect that, other than try to have the necessary papers in place and just hope that they will be honored if contested. I get my hopes up because with marriage, there would be no issue. I would not have this on my mind. I have some predictions on the future.
I predict there will be a nasty backlash against gay couples in the political arena.
I predict that the next presidential election will largely center around "protecting the sanctity of marriage" from... us.
I predict that President Bush will eventually cave in to the radical right and openly endorse a constitutional amendment defining marriage as "one man, one woman".
I predict that while that constitutional amendment will be mauled around in the congress, as well as that news services, it will go nowhere. It will only serve to further alienate a segment of society and formally define them as second-class citizens.
I predict that all the Democratic candidates will shy away from endorsing gay marriage and will opt for "civil unions" instead. Nominee Dean has already proudly stated that he endorses such an idea, as though he came up with it in the first place.
I predict that Democrats and Republicans alike will view "civil unions" as being the perfect answer to this mess that the gays have put all of us in.
I predict that no one will address (or care) about the larger problem with "civil unions", that they will not be recognized from state to state. And, they will not be recognized by the Federal Government. With "civil unions", there will be states here and there (not many to be sure), who will give gay couples "most" of the rights of marriage. If you move to another state that does not honor "civil unions", you are out of luck.
I predict that the issue of being able to divorce if you are a gay couple will be a problem since a state that honors "civil unions" will probably not go to the trouble of passing legislation specifically to dissolve a "civil union". And, if you go to a state that does not honor "civil unions" and try to get it dissolved, there will be no legal means to do so.
Unless as a nation we go to extraordinary lengths to create a totally parallel set of laws that will cover all the states and the federal government to cover legal "civil unions" that are exactly the same as marriage, we will not have equality. And, if those opposed to gay marriage were totally honest about it, this is not about protecting marriage. This is all about preventing public recognition for what we have.
Finally, I predict that gay marriage will happen. This is inevitable. But, before it happens, much of what I outlined above may happen. A US Constitutional Amendment could possibly pass. If that should happen, it will eventually be taken out of the Constitution, but only years later. I think that somewhere in the next generation of gay people, we may actually achieve full marriage for our relationships.
3 Comments
Leave a comment
"So what you're saying is that there will be no marriage in six months?" - Dan
No, I'm not necessarily saying that. The decision the Supreme Judicial Court handed down was a good thing. People are correct when they say that the laws are best left to the legislature to hand out - that is why they exist, to pass laws. That is really not the court's function. What the decision from the court did for us was to basically tell the legislature to get off their collective butt and do it! And... we'll give you 6 months to accomplish it.
They further said that gay couples deserve full marriage rights.
Now, the legislature has three possible courses of action they could take. They could:
1) Do nothing. This of course would be in defiance of the high court and would have legal ramifications. If this happened, even the scholars of law are not quite sure where that puts us (this is uncharted territory). I don't think that will happen. The legislature will act.
2) The legislature will agree with the court and allow marriage licenses to be given to gay couples. Given that the governor would absolutely veto that, along with fear from their constituent base, I don't believe the legislature will take that route.
3) I think the legislature will come back with a "Vermont-style" civil union law that grants to gay couples MOST of the rights and privileges of marriage.
This is where it gets sticky. That is not what the high court said. They didn't say that granting gay couples MOST of the rights of marriage would be ok. They said that, based on state constitution, it was unconstitutional to deny gay couples the right to marry. That means FULL MARRIAGE LICENSES, nothing less!
So, I think if the legislature returns with a civil unions law, the high court will have an issue with that. Where we go from there, who knows? Uncharted territory once again.
However, it's very interesting to note the change in attitude that Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had to the ruling. When the court's decision was handed down he stated that there would be no way that gay marriage would happen, and that they would change the state constitution to not allow gay marriage. That included not allowing civil union rights of any kinds. He was adamant about that.
The next day, his position softened somewhat. He said he would not allow gay marriage, but was open to "some sort of" civil union arrangement, until the state constitution could be amended to outlaw such unions.
The interesting issue here is that the Governor himself is starting to realize that legally, the state is on very shaky ground here. If I were a betting man, I would be willing to bet that pigs would fly before a liberal state like Massachusetts would pass a sweeping constitutional amendment stating that gay couples will never be able to marry.
I have to disagree with Rhode Island being next. That state is far too Catholic.
So what you're saying is that there will be no marriage in six months?
Do you think the comservative legistlators will present a civl union or domestic partnership bill that will be strong enough for the state supreme court?
I agree with your predictions, except that I believe we will have marriage in MA but only there for atleast a generation. I also believe Rhode Island might be next, but not for a while.
Dan