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 49
Congratulations Massachusetts on a very well thought out decision by your Supreme Court. They certainly get it and understand that gay couples also need and deserve the benefits and responsibilities of marriage. Great decsion not hopefully the legislature doesn't do anything reactionary!
Joey M, San Francisco, CA
This is awesome. My partner and I just had a commitment ceremony on November 9th. I am pleased to know that the word LAWFULLY that the minister took out of our vows can now added back in.
Darlene, Somerville
I'm a supporter of gay marriage, but I don't understand how the SJC could acknowledge that right without allowing a remedy. To me, the decision is a hollow victory for equal rights because it still refuses to grant a remedy like a marriage license. The SJC's decision will only serve to inflame the debate because it will infuriate the intolerant groups who oppose gay marriage while still denying same sex couples to actually exercise the right that the SJC recognized.
pam, westwood ma
Domestic Partnership – Yes "Marriage" – No What a joke this state has become.
Stephen, Boston
So if we should be free to marry anyone we want, no matter how "immoral" it is, then we should next eliminate the prohibition against marrying a close blood relative? If I want to marry my sister I should be able to. Justice Greaney wrote: "The plaintiffs are members of our community, our neighbors, our coworkers, our friends. We share a common humanity .... Simple principles of decency dictate that we extend to the plaintiffs, and to their new status, full acceptance, tolerance, and respect. We should do so because it is the right thing to do." Well, let's remember that Jeffrey Dahmer was our neighbor, the Boston Strangler was a member of our community. Should we all support their preferences as well?
Dan, Boston
This ruling is a disgrace. Marriage is the union of a man and a women. I hope that Legislature will clarify this in the months ahead. Our society is regressing back to times of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Jake, Cambridge
I am atheist, but try to be quite about it so that I dont offend anyone. I am neither against nor for gay marriage. Historically - the term marriage was defined as a sacred union between a man and women who took an oath to be together until death. The key objective was to have children and grow a family. But if we look at the rate of divore and adultry in the Western Civilization - almost all men and woman are pretty much sluts and sleazy. So if someone quotes bible or something else against Gays or lesbian - I would ask that person to look herself/himself in the mirror. At them same time, I have to be critical of gays/lesbian in this context. They are misusing the "marriage" gain recognition and benefits... Why can they come up with a new term "union" or something they gives them almost all benefits all the hetros. At the end of the day they still need to cross over to the opposite sex to have a child. I guess they dont want a child... May be we should promote gay/lesbian theory in china and india to control the population.
John, Watertown
Funny how those who have posted to this list who are not in favor of the ruling feel the need to do so anonymously. Because today, especially in liberal Massachusetts, the PC police will jump all over you for not believing in gay rights. Just look at the article in the Globe today about the reverend who lobbied against the ruling. He was all but branded a complete religious crackpot. I mean, what other kind of person would be so callous as to oppose the ruling? Sheesh. The bottom line is, the opinion of those who oppose the ruling, from whatever basis they form their opinion, is just as valid as those who oppose it. Even if their opinion is based on their religion. I believe that the state shouldn't be in the business of defining marriage in the first place. Just another example of the government digging further into our lives than it has to. Ironically, if the cultural values of the citizens were the arbirter of such things instead of the courts, as the Consitution intended, gay marriage would have been widely accepted long ago. The ruling is correct - barring any contrary statute, gay marriage should be allowed. It is also correct in that people fundamentally should be allowed to live their lives in the way they see fit, as long as it doesn't interfere with others. This issue meets both these criteria.
Bob, Natick
I am so proud to be a part of Boston and the state of Massachusetts right now. It's about time this verdict was passed. We are one step closer to equality and to granting our citizens the same rights that others take for granted. Thank you to the justices who have recognized my rights as a person of this Commonwealth.
R. G., Boston
It's about time.
Jeff, New Bedford
