BOSTON, March 29, 2004 ( – The Massachusetts Constitutional Convention reconvened today to cast a final vote on which marriage amendment to send to Massachusetts voters. Lawmakers settled on a measure that while defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman also allow for homosexual civil unions.

The pro-family group, Concerned Women for America, denounced the decision.  CWA’s Chief Counsel Jan LaRue said, “This is like asking for one answer to these two questions: ‘Do you want to protect U.S. currency?’ Second question: ‘Do you want to legalize counterfeit currency? Yes or no?’”  CWA had called on the Legislature to divide the amendment into one protecting marriage and another on civil unions so the people could vote for what they really supported. Legislators were not even given a chance to discuss this possibility.  “It doesn’t seem to matter what the people want. It’s now up to the governor to put the brakes on this madness,” said Robert Knight, director of CWA’s Culture & Family Institute. “He needs to make it clear that the law has not changed, and that on May 17, homosexual couples cannot make a mockery of God’s institution of marriage.”  Pro-family leaders will cite the existence of an amendment as they urge Gov. Mitt Romney to issue an executive order to allow the Legislature to finish their process.  “It will be interesting to see if the court will abide by the fact that the Legislature has spoken, and issue a stay,” LaRue said.

“Creating civil unions gives government approval to behavior that is immoral, unhealthy and destructive to individuals, families and communities,” Knight said. “It’s unjust to force the people of Massachusetts to automatically approve civil unions if they vote to support marriage.”


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.