Via MarriageDebate, the Boston Globe’s report on the legislature’s debate over gay marriage:
Back Bay Democrat Paul C. Demakis launched into a passionate and lengthy defense of the rights of gay and lesbian couples. Next up was a Milton Democrat, Senator Brian A. Joyce. Leaving no room for words to fail him, he proceeded to read, in full, a lengthy op-ed column in defense of same-sex marriage by Peter J. Gomes, a minister and a Harvard University professor of Christian morals.
As Joyce went on, opponents of gay marriage realized what was happening — a filibuster.
They tried to regain the floor by appealing to Senate President Robert E. Travaglini. But Travaglini rebuffed them, and Representative Eugene L. O’Flaherty threw the parliamentary equivalent of a tantrum. The Chelsea Democrat led about 20 fellow House members, mostly loyalists of Speaker Thomas M. Finneran’s, out of the chamber.
They chanted, “We want a vote! We want a vote!” echoing the cries from opponents of same-sex marriage that had rung through the State House hallways on Tuesday.
After a brief respite, Travaglini regained control of the chamber. As the night went on, legislators who support gay marriage went to the podium one by one.
Outside the chamber, a group of about 200 gay-rights activists, holding rainbow flags and a huge American flag, had been singing for hours, their voices as strong and loud at 11 p.m. as they had been at 3 p.m. When it became clear that the amendment would not pass, Arline Isaacson, cochairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, addressed the crowd in a brief civics lesson. Camera lights illuminated her face, and chants followed virtually every sentence.
“It’s sure a lot better to be alive at the end of the day, and have dodged all those bullets. So understand this. If midnight comes, and they have not voted to take our rights away, they’re still going to come back and they’re still very inclined to put discrimination in the constitution, to make us second-class citizens. But if they get past midnight, we’ve made it through one more day, and that will be a good thing.”
Legislators who had spoken in favor of gay marriage rights streamed out of the chamber and into the crowd, and the singers chanted “Thank you! Thank you!” and slapped their backs.
Damn, that sounds sweet.
It’s so strange for me to feel thrilled reading the news. But I love what’s going on in Massachusetts, and the torrent of gay weddings in San Francisco. I imagine it felt this way to open a newspaper and read that a woman named Rosa Parks had refused to go to the back of the bus..
That’s exactly what I thought when I read about all this in the news. This has got to be the beginning of the end of discrimination against gays and lesbians.
I sure hope it is, Darcy. Great post, Amp.
When speaking to a friend on Thursday, I likened the SF weddings to the Stonewall period, and he general civil unrest of the 60’s…. change is coming, and I definitely think the end is nigh for the battle to marry and no longer be marginalized.
Gavin Newsom and the supporters in MA are my heroes. As are the newly-married couple in SF, Lyons and Martin. 51 yrs- WOW!
This has got to be the beginning of the end of discrimination against gays and lesbians.
I believe that too. There is a feeling of inevitability; the alternative is to maintain second-class status for some citizens for no (defensible) reason, and just makes no sense. This is it; this time it’s gonna stick; history will record this as the beginning of glbt civil rights.
And, great post, Amp. I’ve been thinking about the parallels with the civil rights movement too. I wonder how it must have felt to see the beginnings of the CRM as a black person; I can only imagine how glbt folks must feel now.
Great post, Amp. I was lucky enough to be in Vermont when the civil union bill passed there, and I’m lucky enough to be in Massachusetts now–and it’s amazing to me how the atmosphere here is different. Things have changed so much in just a few years–there’s so much more excitement here and so much less fear than there was in Vermont. Part of that of course is that Vermont is a pretty small state, and the capitol (where I’m from) has a population of about 9,000, and visits from Fred Phelps and Randall Terry’s establishment of a semi-permanent office there stressed out even those of us who supported gay marriage, and made everything way more acrimonious. But I think it also has to do with the passing of time, with the fact that people have had to note that Vermont has not in fact fallen into the open pit of hell, and with a slow and long overdue shift in consciousness, which I’m positive I’m seeing here and that’s continuing daily. So, anyway, it is exciting :)
Great post, Amp. I was lucky enough to be in Vermont when the civil union bill passed there, and I’m lucky enough to be in Massachusetts now–and it’s amazing to me how the atmosphere here is different. Things have changed so much in just a few years–there’s so much more excitement here and so much less fear than there was in Vermont. Part of that of course is that Vermont is a pretty small state, and the capitol (where I’m from) has a population of about 9,000, and visits from Fred Phelps and Randall Terry’s establishment of a semi-permanent office there stressed out even those of us who supported gay marriage, and made everything way more acrimonious. But I think it also has to do with the passing of time, with the fact that people have had to note that Vermont has not in fact fallen into the open pit of hell, and with a slow and long overdue shift in consciousness, which I’m positive I’m seeing here and that’s continuing daily. So, anyway, it is exciting :)
whoops–sorry for the double post.
As good and overdue as all this commotion about the gay marriage is, I am concerned about the fact that it’s happening in an election year.
Amp, damn fine post. Reading it aloud made me cry, and more than once.
–JRC
Amp – great post; and a wonderful find, that quote. I’m with JRC; made me tear up.
I wondered what the San Fran. weddings would accomplish, other than making lots of people feel really good for a couple of days; until they wound up back in their own hometowns where enlightenment was in shorter supply. but then I thought of the numbers… and perhaps the SF mayor would inspire another – and from there another.
Unlike the sham freedom brought by BushCo, real freedom is a genie – one that will never go back in the bottle. There will be a critical number – one I think that is not too large – of married gays; and they just will be. And that will be enough to start the avalanche; the cascade. And this feels like one of those moments.
For weddings and a funeral:
I couldn’t sleep, and wound up watching Iron Jawed Angels, Hillary Swank as Alice Paul, leading the fight for women’s suffrage. It made me think of this thread. If del martin could get married, maybe we live in a world where someday aardvarks will be free to marry, or not, as they choose.
One of my best friends died a week ago. His lover had died the year before. They’d been together since WWII. To the outside world, they were a gentleman and his butler. They were not able to be open about being a couple.
Suffrage was a side issue to the real struggles of women. There are more important things than voting. But it opened a door,and further progress toward equality followed. Gay marriage is a side issue to the real stuggle for sexual liberation. There are more important things than getting another piece of paper from the government. But it opens a door. Still can’t sleep….
Charles Barkley, NBA player, just endorsed gay marriage at half time of the NBA All Star Game on national television last night, stating, “It’s their own business what they do.” Considering the homophobia traditionally found in sports, this is a huge step forward in mainstreaming the movement.
A pair of heterocoupled friends of mine happened to be down at SF city hall on Friday to get their marriage license (they’re performing the ceremony in two weeks). They said it was like sitting on the bus next to Rosa Parks. :)
If it is a battle of numbers, if resistance will suddenly fade at some threshold – and I believe that’s the case – then Newsom’s maneuver is the most tactically brilliant thing I’ve ever seen. Timing the start of the show to maximize the number of couples who can be married before a judge can possibly issue an injunction – and hitting Valentine’s Day into the bargain – is just perfect PR.
Pingback: arador's webjournal
Pingback: !blog
Pingback: Keywords
Pingback: FoolBlog