Article four, section four of the U.S. Constitution guarantees "to every state in this union a republican form of government." My home state of Massachusetts is in violation of this part of the U.S. Constitution. Massachusetts's elected officials, and a few of the unelected ones, are in violation of the state's constitution as well.

Almost three years ago, the state's supreme court voted four to three that the Massachusetts Constitution, the oldest (allegedly) operating constitution in the world, contained a right to gay marriage. It doesn't. Such notions somehow eluded John Adams and the men who wrote the document 226 years ago. But what did they know about rights, huh? Gay marriage also failed to garner support in any of the many amendments to the Massachusetts Constitution. The courts ordered the legislature to pass a law granting homosexuals marriage rights. Instead of telling the court to mind its own business, the legislature allowed the four unelected usurpers to dictate. They caved as cowards.

Opponents of gay marriage, using the provision for ballot initiatives in the state's constitution, have collected the greatest number of signatures ever collected for a ballot measure in the history of the Bay State. The process dictates that if the citizens collect the necessary number of signatures, as affirmed by the attorney general and then the secretary of state, then the state legislature must consider the petition by "yea" or "nay" vote. The state legislature has refused to do this. After collecting 170,000 signatures, all the ballot-initiative organizers have to do is to get about 50 state legislators to vote "yea" on their ballot measure. With more than 200 legislators voting in a Constitutional Convention, gaining the support of 50 or so state legislators--even in Massachusetts--is not that difficult a task. The proponents of gay marriage know this, so they have blocked a vote--a vote that the state's Constitution demands.

The Massachusetts Constitution clearly states that, ultimately, the "legislative action in the joint session upon any amendment shall be taken only by call of the yeas and nays." It doesn't say may be taken. It says shall be taken. As if anticipating interpretive shenanigans, the document says that the up-or-down vote is the "only" course available. There are no options, only a command.

A bare majority of the legislature has voted to not vote on this matter (as if they had a choice). Because the state constitution demands that this process of approval be repeated in two successive legislative sessions, blocking the vote forces the proponents of the initiative to start the process all over again. And the longer gay marriage is on the books, the harder it will be to get it off the books.

After the state's top court violated the people's rights to a republican form of government by ordering a law, the state legislature has again violated the people's rights to self-government by dismissing the Constitution's dictates in favor of the gay lobby's. Court-made law derailed republican government in the Bay State. Lawless legislators, who are blocking the process by which the people can unmake that law, are sending democracy further off track. "My prediction is that when we in Massachusetts vote on this--and we almost certainly will in 2006--the reality will have overtaken the fears," Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank claimed in 2004. It hasn't yet, which is why they won't let the people vote.

But what is the solution? Mitt Romney would like the SJC to put the issue on the ballot, but that also goes against the Constitution.

Ewwww.

Gay people are so disgusting!!!

Those icky boys make the boom boom with other boys!!

Ewwww.

Let's take away their human rights.

They're ICKY!!!

Thanks HeHe, for that enlightening commentary.

Massachusetts State Constitution, Part The First, Articles II-III:

"Article II. It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship. [See Amendments, Arts. XLVI and XLVIII.]

Article III. [As the happiness of a people, and the good order and preservation of civil government, essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality; and as these cannot be generally diffused through a community, but by the institution of the public worship of God, and of public instructions in piety, religion and morality: Therefore, to promote their happiness and to secure the good order and preservation of their government, the people of this commonwealth have a right to invest their legislature with power to authorize and require, and the legislature shall, from time to time, authorize and require, the several towns, parishes, precincts, and other bodies politic, or religious societies, to make suitable provision, at their own expense, for the institution of the public worship of God, and for the support and maintenance of public Protestant teachers of piety, religion and morality, in all cases where such provision shall not be made voluntarily."

Right to gay marriage, indeed.

This about sums it up.

We here in the Republic of Massachusetts have been held hostage by our overwhelmingly Democrat legislature for some years now. Initiatives and referendums launched and supported by a majority of the people? Don’t matter. There will be few choices and little real representation for the people and until decent alternative (read: Republican) candidates stand up and are voted in to balance out this current lunacy, there will be little incentive for our alleged legislators to give a fat rats a$$.

Under-worked; over-paid; indifferent; incompetent. That’s the Massachusetts way when it comes to politics.

How well publicized are the violations of the Massachusetts Constitution in that state? Is ignorance of civics so prevalent that the citizenry is unaware?

What human rights are being taken away from the gays?

ASDF:
Do you think any decent alternatives to the status quo will be appearing soon? It seems (from an outsiders perspective) like the left wing has Mass. locked up for the foreseeable future.

For those paying attention, most of the public has been made aware of how our Legislature has failed in the execution of the duties they’ve taken an oath to uphold as television and print news has been all over this. But, as the majority of the general court are Democrats with Democrat leadership and, come January, a Democratic Governor and considering that they rarely get voted out of office, they don’t much care.

For his part, in response to the public outrage, my understanding is that if the Legislature fails to vote on the question by the final day of their session (Jan. 2) our lame duck Governor Romney will file a legal action to request the state’s SJC to order an anti-gay marriage amendment question onto the ballot. The same court, by the way, that ok’ed GM in the first place.

The GM proponents, with the help of the courts, general or otherwise, will continue to block all legal processes until opponents go away without getting their say on the issue. In Mass., this might be entirely possible.

Well, if the majority of Mass. residents stand for their government acting in this way, they deserve it. Same goes for the country, if you won't get off your dead ass to vote, you merit what you get.

Yep. Couldn't agree more.

This is the second time that an anti-gay marriage amendment was unconstitutionaly squelshed by the Legislature. Nothing happened then; nothing will happen this time.

Eeewwww!!!

Boys kissing BOYS????

Eewwwwww!!!

Take away their rights!!!

The lack of action on the part of the legislature represents a lack of the rule of law. Unless there is some representation to the contrary, I cannot see it otherwise. The laughable reaction of some of those supporting gay marriage would be quite different had the outlaw behavior worked against their petty issue. All issues become petty measured against our form of government. I support gay unions but not at the expense of throwing out all sense of legal order. Unfortunately too many get lost in the smaller issues that may be rendered superfluous in the absence a meaningful legal system.

"Eeewwww!!!

Boys kissing BOYS????

Eewwwwww!!!

Take away their rights!!!" -HeHe

Which rights?

Gay marriages are not illegal. The government will not bust down the doors of a church which is performing a gay marriage, and arrest those participating.

The government does not provide to gay marriages the same special status is provides to heterosexual marriages. This represents not that gay marriage is illegal, but that society does not officially give its stamp of approval to gay marriage. They are assertions a world apart, and weigh heavily on the debate.

Simply put, GM is not "marriage". But, the pink Nazis can't accept the fact that their ceremonies, as well intended and touching as they may be, are in a majority of places not recognized as real marriages. But, as the inscrutable Mr. Fong once said: it's all about the green. And outside of the touchy feely issues around social acceptance (read: G agenda), that's the point.

"The Gay Agenda" ??

You people really are Neanderthals.

HeHe: I heard the Neanderthals died out because they got gay.

Will liberals ever tire of evolution jokes about the homo sapiens who dare disagree with their agenda for the future of the species?

What happens over the rainbow stays over the rainbow.

OMG a BOY making out with a BOY???!!!

GROSS!!!!!

I can't understand them.

So they must have an AGENDA against me and everything I hold dear.

If only that were so hoho, there would be no issue. But it isn't and "the love that dare not speak its name" is now screaming from the mountain tops. Most people could care, but are also sick of hearing about it.

Sick of hearing what?

The only reason its even an issue is that people like you bring it up.

There will always be gay people in the world.

Rather than cry to your "god" about how these people are "sinning", just get used to it.

Repent or burn hehe. REPENT OR BURN!