Constitutional Convention (Monday, March 29, 2004)
«Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 · Next Page»
Rep. Kulik was recognized. He said we are nearing the end of it today. The debate, the votes, are at an end. We’re at the basic point where we were when we started this debate. The main issue before us is whether or not we should write discrimination into the constitution. We’re also debating whether we should create a second class of civil rights for our citizens. Separate is seldom equal. And in this case it would certainly not be equal. It would be discriminating and would be creating second class citizens. For that reason, I have sat here and cast a number of votes over the last several days, but waited to get to this point. I will vote against this amendment. Fundamentally, this is a civil rights issue. It’s about civil rights for our citizens. If we deny them that, we undermine the very equality we created in this constitution.With Sen. Menard in the chair, Rep. Paulsen was recognized.Rep. Paulsen said I rise to speak in opposition to adding discriminatory language to the constitution. When we discussed marriage during this debate, we are talking about heterosexual activity and homosexual activity, but there are many other parts of a marriage that can be shared between people. My husband and I have been married for many years. Our marriage is much more than a sexual union. It is true, that as life goes on, there are other pieces of a marriage that go forward. All of these ingredients have been strengthened because we are married. Our children and our extended families think of us different because we are married. We can lean on each other and we can take each other for granted. No one asked what we are, they don’t have to because we have a civil contract. We all agree that our country is better served when we expand the rights of our citizens, not deny them. There is commitment and loyalty and responsibility built into a marriage institution. I hope that this amendment is not adopted. That we realize that it really is time to make sure that people can have the same benefits that we have enjoyed. I beg my colleagues not to approve this constitutional amendment.Rep. Festa was recognized. He said I want to start by observing that the gentleman from Holliston really hit the nail on the head. This is the vote that really counts. This is the vote that sends the message on what our judgment is. We have never felt throughout this entire process that an amendment to the constitution was the right thing to do. If our judgment were expressed, it is that we do not want a constitutional amendment to take away the rights of the people. This has been a process that has been convoluted for sure. But as we take this final vote, we are delivering a message to the public and to ourselves. It’s a reminder as to why we ran for office. And I want to say that I never ran for office to take away the rights of people. Public service is about helping those who need the help of the government. We must reach to them and be conscious of their suffering and their ability to maintain the American dream. And really that is what that comes down to. The gentleman from Holliston said he cannot bring himself to vote for an amendment for something he does not believe in. I applaud and respect that judgment. I have never agreed with him, but I do respect and I do agree with the conclusion he finds now. The fact that the matter is, that this amendment would for the first time, in the constitution of this commonwealth, change it in a way that takes away rights and creates a class of second citizens. I am grateful to my colleagues for understanding that we did not use this process in a way that is deceptive, but to ensure that we got to this point where this was a vote of conscience. As we take that vote, I would ask that you join me and vote against amending this constitution. I have heard, over and over, and maybe this will be the deciding question - that the people need to take this vote. Who among us in this chamber would question the judgment of the wisdom and the honor of someone who takes a vote for justice? Those of us who have said, you ask us for our judgment that we should never be put in the position to amend the constitution to take away the rights of others.
«Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 · Next Page»