|
It's about time...
..I could only be more pleased if the SJC had demanded the licenses for the 7 couples, rather than the 180 day "solution period."
I must say, I think a significant part of the problem is semantics. Many of the negative comments are from those who are all for "unions" but object to the word "marriage" -- it's troublesome that we use the same word for two entirely different situations. There's a difference between a civil marriage and a religious marriage, although most people don't often think of it that way.
I'm glad to see that the Mass SJC made the distinction very clear in their ruling. Due to the fact that many state programs and benefits use marriage to determine funding, qualification, and benefits, it seems pretty clear that the civil marriage must be available to people of all walks of life under Mass equal rights law. Conveniently, it still permits the religions to do whatever they want -- the meaning of religious marriage does not change.
Now, if we could only do something about our opposing governor...
|