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 38
It's about time.
Valerie, Cambridge
I am fine with this. Don't have a problem with gay marriage. Never have. Why it upsets people so much has always baffled me. No one is getting hurt by gay people getting married. If people argue that marriage should only be between men and woman, I need to understand WHY. Just because "it's always been that way" doesn't work for me. Gay people have the right to be loved, and know that they are forever bound in a loving relationship with another person. End of story.
Amy, Dracut
The decision is great, but the timing is awful. On the eve of the election season, this decision will create a feeding frenzy for the Republicans. If the SJC had done this a year ago, or waited until after the election, we would be much better off. Now the gaybashing and vehement backlash will define the next year of politics. The negative repercussions could be enormous.
Ken, Boston
Since the State House, the Governor, or the SJC have not defined which God we follow, banning secular gay marriages because of religious grounds is wrong. The SJC was not telling the Catholic Church, Protestant Church, Muslim clerics, or Rabbis that they have to allow gay marriages. By allowing some legality to gay marriages, the SJC is actually showing some fairness here. Gay Marriages will have to follow the same rules and restrictions as heterosexual marriages. There are tax issues, legal issues, and child issues that traditional married couples have to follow, and these issues will have to be address by gay marriages. Banning gay marriages is short-sighted. People who want the government to ban gay marriages are short-sighted. It is a short-sighted view since gay couples will still exist and those couples will have some of the pluses of marriage without any of the legal disadvantages of being married. On the religious note, for Christians, Christ also violated portions of the Old Testament, and he showed mercy and understanding to those considered unworthy or evil.
N., Beverly
Good, I've had no luck with women, so now I guess now it is all right to give men a shot!!
fred, southbridge
Excellent news! Welcome to the 21st century! Another relic of discrimation crumbles. Congratulations to he SJC for, as the Justice Greaney said, "doing the right thing"
Larryd, Chelmsford
Uniting same sex couples in marriage does not threaten the "fabric of society" but anger and intolerance toward each other does. I am proud to be part of the first state to recognize gay marriage.
mb, Brookline
I'm tired of all of the posts stating that we have separation of church and state in this country. Let me give you a little constitutional law lesson. First, the phrase "separation of church and state" does not exist in the Constitution. What we have is the Establishment Clause, which prohibits the establishment of a religion as a state religion. Second, we also have the Free Exercise Clause, which allows people to practice the religion of their choice. And, finally, we have Freedom of Speech, which allows citizens the ability to speak their minds without fear of penalty from the state. Among those citizens are RELIGIOUS PEOPLE, including Catholic bishops, priests, and lay people, all of whom have a right to express their views on this matter. When a Catholic bishop lobbies for laws which are in concert with the beliefs of the Catholic Church, he is merely exercising his Constitution right of free speech. The Catholic Church and its clergy, as well as any other religious institution, has the right of free speech. You may not agree with it, but they have a right to it and their speech has nothing to do with "separation of church and state," as that concept is misunderstood.
Bill, Peabody
I look forward confidently to the day when all who work for a living will be one with no thought to their separateness as Negroes, Jews, Italians or any other distinctions. This will be the day when we bring into full realization the American dream -- a dream yet unfulfilled. A dream of equality of opportunity, of privilege and property widely distributed; a dream of a land where men will not take necessities from the many to give luxuries to the few; a dream of a land where men will not argue that the color of a man's skin determines the content of his character; a dream of a nation where all our gifts and resources are held not for ourselves alone, but as instruments of service for the rest of humanity; the dream of a country where every man will respect the dignity and worth of the human personality. - Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Today's decision by the Supreme Judicial Court is a significant step toward the "full realization the American dream." The Court recognized that all citizens deserve equal protection and opportunity under the law, regardless of whom they choose to love. Our legislature should take the opportunity to lead on this issue as well, staying true to the traditions of liberty and equality that form the foundation of our Commonwealth.
Tom, Boston, MA
There are many excellent reasons why gay marriage is needed - visitation rights in hospitals, protection of mutual property, recognizition of everyone's right to love, among any others...to paraphrase barney frank....this will not harm heterosexuals at all...yet it will aid thousands, possibility millions of homosexuals. God was all about love. He does not want to hear all the hatred seething from those opposed to gay civil rights. He wants tolerance, and love for all. It's clearly written in the Bible. Those spouting "God' as a reason for hatred, however, fail to see that. Here's hoping that we can remember to love one another, and let everyone have basic civil rights.
CJ, formerly of JP
