Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
 

Queerty Exclusive: On The Scene In Front of Massachusetts State House

massprotest14.jpg

Exclusive

As protesters and supporters take the streets in front of the Massachusetts State House as some lawmakers push to put a gay marriage ban on the lawbooks, Queerty reader Andrew (you remember him from his Macy’s window display flyer), above, is on the scene. Armed with the camera phone, Andrew has been sending in shots and eye witness snippets all day. He reports that gay marriage opponents have planes flying over the sky reading “Let the people vote on marriage.” More coverage here. For more info about Mass Equality, which organized the demonstration, you should go here.

massprotest11.jpg

After the jump you’ll find his first-hand account in photos.

massprotest08.jpg

massprotest06.jpg

massprotest03.jpg

massprotest05.jpg

massprotest12.jpg

massprotest01.jpg

massprotest02.jpg

massprotest15.jpg

massprotest07.jpg

massprotest13.jpg

And fron inside:

massprotest16.jpg

By:           editor editor
On:           Jul 12, 2006
Tagged: , ,

  • 16 Comments
    • Will
      Will

      Well a sa resident of MA I have to say that I am surprised that its actually made it to the State House for a Vote.

      TOTALLY disappointed that Attorney general Tom O’Reilly let the petitions through for the Ballot Vote considering all the irregularities and the Catholic Church (A Non-Profit Organization no less) hosting signature drives which is against the law. And then the SJC who originally showed some balls by saying that WE could marry basically said it was alright for the gay marriage question to be put on the Ballot if it makes it through the Legislature even though that would allow discrimination into the Constitution. If the legislature passes this and we wait 2 years for it to be on the ballot theres going to be a very nasty gay vs. bigot war in this state.

      The interesting thing is that The Boston Globe has recently told their gay staffers who have partners included in benefits as domestic partners were told that they HAVE to marry by Jan 1. Which means if they do get marrried and it goes to vote in 2008 and get defeated and gays can’t marry it can then be overturned due to discrimination and loss of rights.

      Jul 12, 2006 at 2:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Will
      Will

      By the way. Andrew is a kewtie. E me!

      Jul 12, 2006 at 2:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andrew and Seth
      Andrew and Seth

      Hey–

      We are in the MassEquality office right now to drop some stuff off. We’ve been taking high resolution pictures as well, and will send them when I get home tonight.

      Okay, well, we are off to go back into the state house and will keep you all updated as we hear.

      -Andrew and Seth

      Jul 12, 2006 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andrew and Seth
      Andrew and Seth

      Hey–

      We are in the MassEquality office right now to drop some stuff off. We’ve been taking high resolution pictures as well, and will send them when I get home tonight.

      Okay, well, we are off to go back into the state house and will keep you all updated as we hear.

      -Andrew and Seth

      Jul 12, 2006 at 3:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lano
      Lano

      Can someone enlighten me. Why are people afraid of a vote? Is there polling that suggests the people would approve the amendment? The Mass Equality website doesn’t seem to have any information about that. It seems to me that the gay marriage supporters are now using the same legal acrobatics that the other side has tried before the Supreme Court ruling, which sort of looks bad to me. Why don’t we as gays welcome the vote? Surely with two years till it could happen, there should be enough time to sway any polls in out favor…aren’t the polls pretty much evenly divided as it is? Can someone give more explanation?

      Jul 12, 2006 at 3:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Will
      Will

      Lano

      Its not that we are afraid of the vote. But to start out with WHY should there be a vote to start out with? Obviously you can vote to admend a States Constitution but to admend it to favor discrimination is a horrible thing to start out with. The SJC of MA ruled in favor of Gay Marriage. Just as the Supreme Court in the past has ruled on Civil Rights Cases. case in point in the 60′s with African American Rights what would have happened if the Country at that time VOTED on it? Do you think it would have passed? Does someones equality and rights needed to be voted on and granted by a majority of people?

      Jul 12, 2006 at 3:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lano
      Lano

      Yes, but welcoming a vote and winning that vote would set a much stronger legal precedent that could ultimately be used by other courts in decisions. Right now the fact that the decision was made by a court and not by a vote makes courts in other states wary of using the decision in the cases before them. Let’s move beyond questioning why there should be a vote. It just makes us look scared.

      Jul 12, 2006 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • bostonian71
      bostonian71

      Lano, people in Mass. are wary of a vote because other states have had votes, and in those states voters *have* chosen to write discrimination into the Constitution. Also, the fact that the petition gained so many signatures (even counting the fact that some of them aren’t legit) is also worrisome. Yes, Massachusetts is by and large and liberal state, but we’ve also elected three Republican governors, and the last of them is no moderate.

      Jul 12, 2006 at 6:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Will
      Will

      Well I guess the politicians are VERY SCARED of voting on this after all. As of the end of they day they have voted to PUSH BACK the vote on The Gay Marriage Issue until AFTER the November Elections here. (Most probably because they will be up for re-election this year)

      Jul 12, 2006 at 6:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lano
      Lano

      Voters in other states didn’t have to contend with ACTUAL marriages being affected. There is a huge difference. Especially after what would be four years of same-sex marriage being a reality. What I’m really wondering is if there’s been any polling on this matter. I don’t think it’s hard to believe they could get the signatures. With enough money, you can get enough signatures for anything. Opponents keep talking about the will of the people, I’m just wondering what polling indicates that actually is. You know if we had all just waited 25 years, the majority of the opponents of same-sex marriage would be dead and this wouldn’t even be a problem. Polling on the issue in general shows a tremendous dichotomy between old and young on the issue. Bringing the issue to the front so soon could have done more damage than if we had just waited them out.

      Jul 12, 2006 at 8:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Homer
      Homer

      Lano- why should I have to wait 25 years?!!! I’m almost 43 years old. You think I should wait until I’m 68 to MAYBE be allowed to get married?

      I pay the same taxes as straight people. I am a legal resident of this country. I vote. The Supreme Court says I can have sex. I should have the same rights as Brittney Spears and Liz Taylor and every other straight person.

      Jul 13, 2006 at 1:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lano
      Lano

      Now! Now! Now! Me! Me! Me! Fuck the greater good…

      Jul 13, 2006 at 2:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Will
      Will

      Lano. Most of the troble comes from people with a heavily religious background. (Which i think you might be too) There is sucha thing as SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. (Learn it…Live it…Love it!) Someones religious beliefs should be seperated from the Constituion Federal and Statewise.

      Heres an idea. Lets make MARRIAGE just the “ceremony” and not give the church the ability to LEGALLY BIND 2 people. They just throw the “after party. That way everyone goes to City hall and gets married first and if they want a ceremony through religion they can do it then.

      Jul 13, 2006 at 2:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lano
      Lano

      I don’t think you’re quite getting the argument I’m making, which is the problem on a more general level. You can’t go blindly into a situation. You need to analyze the situation, then figure out the best way to go about it. I’m not sure if that was done. If I were a black man in 1900 demanding my full civil rights in public, I might have been lynched. Sure I would have been right and fully deserved full civil rights, but the reality of the situation would warrant me going about it in a different way. But to my first point, IS THERE ANY POLLING ON THE MATTER? No one seems to have that answer…

      Jul 13, 2006 at 3:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Will
      Will

      Lano. POLLING and going out to the POLLS to vote are 2 different things. If it wasn’t Both GORE and KERRY would be President.

      A Link for you.

      http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/wedding/a/MassOneYear.htm

      Jul 13, 2006 at 4:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lano
      Lano

      Thank you! from the article you sent…

      A statewide poll by Mass Equality in May 2005 found that 62% of those Massachusetts residents polled support marriage equality for gays and lesbians.

      Fully 84% of voters believe marriage equality has either had a positive impact or no impact on the quality of life in Massachusetts.

      82% of those surveyed said allowing gays and lesbians to marry has either had a positive impact or no impact at all on traditional marriages, contradicting one of the core arguments of opponents.

      While you are right about the difference between polling and going to the polls, 62% is a huge number. In all likelyhood, the number is even stronger a year later, and in two years would be absolute. I don’t see why MassEquality isn’t welcoming a vote. As I pointed out before, it would set a much stronger legal precedent for courts in other states to follow….

      Jul 13, 2006 at 4:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.