 |
I sent a version of the following to a number of my neighbors....
Your name (or someone with the same last name as you) was listed as having signed the petition to amend the Massachusetts Constitution to annul all the existing same-sex marriages. This vote, if passed would prevent future same-sex marriages or civil unions (thereby breaking apart thousands of families and leaving tens of thousands of children with un-married parents).
It has been proven that there was a concerted effort to obtain signatures through tricks and fraud by professional signature collectors (this was so well documented that the State Senate passed a special resolution to deal with it). In any case, you can find out if your name was added against your wishes by clicking here. |
If, on the other hand, as I hope is not the case, you did sign this petition, I'd love to spend some time talking with you about your motivation and concerns. We could do this by email, by phone or in person, at your convenience.
Currently there are thousands of children being raised by same-sex couples in Massachusetts. Every professional and expert who has studied the question agrees that these children are far better off if their parents are married; they feel safer, do better in school, have fewer emotional and physical problems, are better protected by law, are more financially secure; there is no benefit, and great harm to them if their marriages are annulled. At the same time, since same-sex marriage was legalized, the divorce rate in our state has remained unchanged; one of the lowest in the nation. Not one church or other religious organization was “forced” to perform a same-sex ceremony, nor has there been any other measurable harm done in any way.
I grew up with the understanding that the Constitution is supposed to protect the least powerful and most marginalized. No one's rights should ever be put to a vote.
Finally, we know that at least some of the amendment's backers are playing politics. Right-wing political organizations and Republican Party representatives have publicly stated their intent to use marriage as a wedge issue in coming elections.
The argument that the SJC justices overstepped their lawful duty is a misunderstanding of the role of the judiciary. In 1967, The Supreme Court of the US overturned laws prohibiting so-called miscegenation when over 90% of the public supported those laws and when they had been lawfully passed by dozens of state legislatures. That is the role of a Supreme Court, to protect the constitutional rights of the minority trumping even an overwhelming majority’s wishes.
So, if your name was added by mistake, please take action to have it removed, and if it was intentional, then by all means, let's discuss your concerns, because I know you, and I find it hard to believe that you would intentionally destroy existing marriages, and put the children of those marriages at risk, especially if you had the opportunity to meet some of these families.
Thanks,
Jesse Liberty
9:01:41 PM 
|
|
