Constitutional Convention (Thursday, Feb. 12, 2004)
«Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 · Next Page»
Rep. Demakis continued: Older voters vote overwhelmingly against extending rights to gays and lesbians. Contemplate the possibility that we could put this on the ballot and have it decided by a tiny majority and have a situation in five to ten years that we have a clear majority against it and we have to go through the cumbersome process of changing the constitution to bring it back in line with public opinion. This amendment guarantees civil unions, rights gays and lesbians have not been able to enjoy. The problem is the legal sands are shifting as well. Based on all legal analyses I have heard, there are about 1,400 rights enjoyed by married couples in the US. Only 350 of these are at the state level. There are another 1,000 or so at the federal level. In all fairness, the state of legal opinion today is those 1,400 rights would not be available to gay and lesbian rights even if the SJC decision stood unamended. It is not unreasonable to anticipate that 2, 3, 5 or 10 years down the line there will be court decisions or legislative action that will open up those rights on the federal level to gay men and lesbians and what will happen here if we have shut the door on those federal rights if the question before us is put on the ballot and passed. There is tremendous risk here in moving forward with this amendment. We will lock into the constitution the denial of 1,000 federal rights that could become available. There is a trend toward significant majority support in five to ten years toward extending full rights to gay and lesbian couples. This is not the time to act. The case has been made to allow this court decision to stand. I hope we reject this further amendment and any other further amendment.
JOYCE FILIBUSTER: Sen. Joyce said as we contemplate our vote on this compromise, I thought it prudent to reflect on remarks by Peter Gomes. I will share those with you. [Sen. Joyce began to read a newspaper column at 10:33 pm. Convention members quickly sensed the start of a filibuster].
Sen. Tolman said he is having difficulty hearing the gentleman. Sen. Travaglini asked for members to pay attention to the senator at the podium. Sen. Joyce continued. At 10:39 pm, Rep. Flynn said he could not hear and Sen. Travaglini urged members to quiet down.
Sen. Joyce continued.
At 10:40 pm, Rep. Peterson shouted Mr. President repeatedly. Other members joined in.
Sen. Travaglini recognized Rep. Peterson.
Rep. Peterson moved the question.
Sen. Travaglini said you cannot move the question while the speaker is speaking.
Sen. Joyce continued. Several lawmakers, standing at their seats, repeated “Mr. President.”
Rep. Carron said does the gentleman yield?
Sen. Joyce said no I will not. Let me get to the subject at hand. We began this convention with a surprise amendment from the gentleman from Boston. [Sen. Joyce read the amendment] We had a very heated debate on that amendment. It failed by I think two votes. The concern was there was a hope and expectancy and promise that we would address civil unions at some further date.