Share your reaction to the gay marriage decision
Massachusetts's highest court ruled 4-3 that same-sex couples are legally entitled to wed under the state constitution, but stopped short of allowing marriage licenses to be issued to the seven couples who challenged the law. The court ordered the Legislature to come up with a solution within 180 days. What are your thoughts on the issue?
Page 16
Once again the minority has won. I thought Democracy was based upon the majority. There is a higher percentage of people who use marijuana, yet is illegal and punishable by jail. Why should a couple,hetrosexual or homosexual, receive any extra breaks over a single person. By not giving single persons these same breaks, the single person becomes the one to foot the bill for the married couple. I personally know a married couple, with children, who get more money back than they pay in taxes. The government helps itself to my wallet so these people can have a family. Money I could have used to start my own family. Also, marriage evolved from religion. Homosexuallity is condemned in the bible. So how can the SJC slap the church, and God, in the face like that? Can somebody recommend a good country to move to because the USA is rotting from the inside out and it will not be long till we are a third world country.
M Stevens, natick
One bad day in Mass, that's for sure. But given the liberals that Weld,Cellucci and Dukakis appointed, it it to be expected.
Joelick, Boston
There are many, many people in this state that marry simply because they are in love and want to make a committment to their partner. They are not marrying simply because they want to procreate. What about the women and men that can not have children or who do not want children? Should they not be allowed to marry? I do not understand using this argument as a reason why gays and lesbians should not be allowed to legally wed.
Jennifer, Lowell
Wow.... I don't know what to think. I'm almost 50 years old, grew up a befuddled gay child in Massachusetts and have felt out of step with the mainstream for so long that it's hard to imagine it being otherwise! Of course it was the right thing for the courts to do, and I hope other states follow in quick succession.
Jan, Brookline
While I too think it's about time not just MA, but the rest of the country have the rights to the same legal benefits as married heterosexual couples (while I understand the emotional import on both sides, I could care less whether legally we call such unions "marriage" or not ... however if legally we define gay unions as something other than language, I think the state should thereby lose the use of marriage in describing the legal benefits of heterosexual unions), I'm not sure if we should be all overjoyed at a 4-3 ruling. Close calls like this do not roll out red carpets. Rather, much like a woman's right to choose as established in federal law, the security of this right will be a fragile one till resoundingly strong and supportive legislation is enacted. Unfortunately, I sense a legislature and an electorate more likely to do what they can to chip away at the Court's split decision, working to keep homosexual members of the Commonwealth in the second class citizen status the state's thus far forced them to maintain. And one thing on this bulletin board. What do you folks writing "no offense to anyone, but gay people should not be married" is absolving you of? You ARE offending people, despite cravenly trying to escape the criticism your offense deserves.
Midnight Platypus, Alphaville
This is horrible; a blaten disregard of what God's word says. The SJC increased the moral decline of this country.
Janet , Boston, MA 02126
I am totally disgusted!!!!!!!! Totally disgusted .............what's next...........just when you think it couldn't get any worse......we are your morals, your religious beliefs, marriage is one of the holy sacraments, which is between a man and a woman.......am I the only one who believes that this is wrong? if so, maybe I'm living in the wrong state........
Karen, Everett
It's about time!! We need to stop using religion as a means to deny people their rights as human beings. We need to stop using children as an excuse to ban gay/lesbians from entering into what is a Social Contract that belive it or not, some people enter because they are in love and committed to one another. Do we deny barren couples? Or shall I not marry my fiance b/c we are not sure that we want children? And enough of this hiding behind the Constitution or using it as an excuse to serve the interests of those who cannot except progress. I hope we go all the way with this one; I am encouraged that the first steps have been taken.
Kim , Winooski, VT
Finally! But why didn't they call it like it is? Allowing one group to marry and enjoy its rights and disallowing another group the same rights is inherently wrong and unconstitutional. Now "Democrat" Finneran will have a tough time with his gay marriage ban; I'd say today's ruling bascially shoves that piece of legislation fully to the "unconstitutional" side of things. 180 days and counting, o Massachusetts Legislature.
Dan, Somerbille
The court’s ruling pleasantly surprises me. People should have equal civil rights under the law. I don’t care if it’s called marriage or a union, as long as certain financial, legal, and social rights are given. Really, call a rose by any other name and its still a rose. For all those conservatives who have moral difficulties with this issue and argue the fact that a gay couple cannot create children. It’s quite laughable to associate God’s intention of marriage with how marriage in America is treated. Any man and any woman who happens to meet in Las Vegas on a drunken weekend can get married in less than 20 minutes time. Divorce rates are high as half of marriages fail. What’s sacred about that? I think the religious groups should keep their religion & business out of my bedroom and personal life and keep it in the church.
Troy, East Boston
