On Feb. 8, I attended a rally on Boston Common in support of an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution defining marriage as a heterosexual union only. Why? Because I was and still am a conservative Catholic who believes that homosexual acts are sinful and wrong, and that gay couples should not defile the sacred institution of marriage.
Nevertheless, the result of that rally was my complete opposition to this amendment. To some, this may come as a surprise, but when one looks closely at the issue, it becomes clear that this amendment, as well as many of its supporters' arguments, is absurd.
First, an amendment defining marriage as "between a man and a woman" has no place in the constitution of Massachusetts. As Martha B. Sosman and Francis X. Spina, justices of the Supreme Judicial Court, noted in their dissenting opinion on the Court's affirmation on Feb. 5, which ruled that "civil unions" do not fulfill their decision in Goodridge v. Department of Pub. Health, "This does not strike [us] as a dispute of any constitutional dimension whatsoever, and today's response from the Justices - unsurprisingly - cites to no precedent suggesting that the choice of differing titles for various statutory programs has ever posed an issue of constitutional dimension." The proposed amendment is of a type similar to the 18th Amendment (Prohibition) in the 1920s, and would most likely fail as miserably as did that one.
Indeed, adding an amendment of this sort to the Constitution opens up a slippery slope for the addition of more extreme applications of partisan morality. If we ban same-sex marriages, where will we stop? Will we ban adultery? Will we ban premarital sex?
Furthermore, Gov. Mitt Romney (R) stated lasted Wednesday, "I believe that policy of the nature that's being discussed is best not put in the constitution, but rather considered legislatively by statute." Unfortunately, Gov. Romney has been forced to support the current amendment because he sees it as the only way around the ruling of the SJC. Despite this fact, it seems clear that a constitutional amendment, even if it is the last apparent option, is still not one worth taking.
Spring Break
