BOSTON, November 20, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In considering the state reaction to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling in favour of homosexual ‘marriage’, Gov. Mitt Romney is considering offering what he believes is compromise homosexual ‘civil union’ legislation rather than homosexual ‘marriage’ legislation.
The stance comes as a disappointment to pro-family groups who recognize that giving any marriage rights to other than genuine male-female married couples will inevitably undermine the important special status of marriage. Whether called ‘marriage’ or ‘civil unions’, it is understood that the net effect in either case is seen as alarming for the future of marriage and family life. Reacting to the ruling immediately with a statement, the Governor said Tuesday, “I disagree with the Supreme Judicial Court. Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. I will support an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution to make that expressly clear. Of course, we must provide basic civil rights and appropriate benefits to nontraditional couples, but marriage is a special institution that should be reserved for a man and a woman.” He expanded on those comments later in the week saying in comments to the Associated Press. “I believe their decision indicates that a provision which provides that benefits, obligations, rights and responsibilities which are consistent with marriage but perhaps could be called by a different name would be in conformity with their decision,” he said. “Under that opinion, I believe a civil-union type provision would be sufficient.” See the Governor’s release on the issue: https://www.mass.gov/portal/govPR.jsp?gov_pr=gov_pr_031118_statement_gay_marriage.xml