Mass. Lawmakers Reject Gay Marriage Ban

Thursday September 15, 2005 5:01 AM

AP Photo BX103

By STEVE LeBLANC

Associated Press Writer

BOSTON (AP) - The Massachusetts Legislature rejected a proposed change to the state constitution Wednesday aimed at banning gay marriage, a striking reversal that preserves the state's status as the only place in the nation where same-sex couples can wed.

A year after Massachusetts politicians appeared destined to undo a court order that has allowed thousands of same-sex couples to marry since May 17, 2004, the Legislature voted 157-39 against the proposed constitutional amendment.

It was the second time the Legislature had confronted the measure. Lawmakers were required to approve it in two consecutive sessions before the proposal could move to the statewide ballot in 2006 for a final decision by voters.

The measure, which would have allowed Vermont-style civil unions, won passage by a 105-92 last year. But the political and social landscape had changed dramatically since then.

Gone was the intensity, the seemingly endless debate and, in some quarters, the taste for stripping away the right to marry for gay and lesbian couples.

``Gay marriage has begun, and life has not changed for the citizens of the commonwealth, with the exception of those who can now marry,'' said state Sen. Brian Lees, a Republican who had been a co-sponsor of the amendment. ``This amendment which was an appropriate measure or compromise a year ago, is no longer, I feel, a compromise today.''

The proposal also was opposed by critics of gay marriage, who want to push for a more restrictive measure.

``The union of two women and two men can never consummate a marriage. It's physically impossible,'' said state Rep. Phil Travis, a Democrat. ``The other 49 states are right and we are wrong.''

Lawmakers already are preparing for a battle over another proposed amendment that would ban both gay marriage and civil unions. The earliest that initiative could end up on the ballot is 2008.

``We're excited. We're pumped. This is great. This is exactly what we wanted,'' said Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute.

The state's highest court ruled in November 2003 that same-sex couples had a right under the state constitution to marry. Now, more than 6,100 couples gay and lesbian couples have been wed in Massachusetts, though officials have barred out-of-state couples from getting married here, citing a 1913 law that prohibits couples from marrying in Massachusetts if their union would be illegal in their home states. A lawsuit challenging the legality of that law is pending.

Within a year of the first Massachusetts marriages, 11 states pushed through constitutional amendments banning gay marriage, joining six others that had done so earlier.

The Connecticut Legislature approved civil unions in April, joining Vermont in creating the designation that creates the same legal rights as marriage without calling it such. Earlier this month, California lawmakers passed a measure legalizing same-sex marriage, though Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has promised to veto it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5279415,00.html

Marriage: some little known Bible facts

Why shouldn't two women get married?

1. Eve was created as a "helper" for Adam, and child-bearing came into the picture only after they disobeyed God's command by eating the forbidden fruit and were thrown out of the Garden of Eden. God had offered Adam any of the other animals he might choose to be his helper, but Adam didn't like any of them, so God created Eve. You can read about this in the Bible, Book of Genesis: Genesis chapter 1 contains a brief summary account of the creation of Adam and Eve, but the longer account in Genesis chapter 2 gives the details.

Now if the main purpose of Eve was to be a helper for Adam, and if God was willing to let Adam have an animal as his helper, why shouldn't a man have a man as helper, or a woman have a woman as helper?

2. Sex between women is nowhere called a sin in the Bible. The only derogatory mention of it is as being "shameful" in St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, but shame is not equal to sin. (That's according to the original Greek, but some translators have distorted the text to further their theological agendas -- for example where the Greek word "desires" appears, some translators have added "sinful desires.")

3. The word "wife" doesn't appear anywhere in the Bible in the original languages, not in the Greek New Testament, nor in the Hebrew Old Testament: only the word "woman" is used in both languages, and, once again, wherever you see "wife," it is a translator imposing his or her theological agenda on the text.

4. There is no institution of marriage or a marriage ceremony in the Bible, only wedding feasts are mentioned. The famous passage in Genesis about a man and a woman becoming "one flesh" refers to the sex act, not to marriage. This is shown by the fact that St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 6, quotes that Genesis passage in describing a man having sex with a prostitute.

5. The religion of the Bible is polygamy, not monogamy. In the Old Testament, for example, in the book of Deuteronomy is a passage regulating the inheritance of a man's estate in a case where he has more than one wife. In the Book of Judges, the story of Gibeah, an incident involving a man's "concubine" is related, and the man is a Levite, of the priestly tribe. This suggests he had more than one "wife."

There's only one place in the New Testament that mentions monogamy, but that is qualified by referring specifically to church officials. Monogamy is a pagan practice added to Christianity from the Romans and Greeks. (I once asked an Orthodox Jewish rabbi about this, and he agreed that the Old Testament allows polygamy.)

Real Swiss Cheese not from Wisconsin

As the Wisconsin legislature continues its gay bashing, it's interesting to see the opinion of people who make REAL Swiss cheese.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;sessionid=JIB4RKLT0PFALQFIQMFCM5OAVCBQYJVC?xml=/news/2005/06/05/uswiss.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/06/05/ixportaltop.html

QUOTE:
Separately, Swiss voters have also approved a proposal to register same-sex partnerships, giving homosexual couples the same legal rights as married couples in areas such as pensions, inheritance and taxes.

Swiss vote for 'Schengen' and gay rights

(Filed: 05/06/2005)

Switzerland has voted by a narrow margin to join the European Union's passport-free "Schengen" zone, bringing the fiercely independent nation a step closer to its European neighbours.

According to Swiss state television SF, 55 percent of voters approved the country's accession to the "Schengen" treaty, named after the Luxembourg village where it was drawn up, as well as joining the so-called Dublin accords which harmonise asylum procedures across Europe.

The Schengen agreements permit free movement between member states by doing away with systematic border checks on individuals. The Treaty of Dublin regulates and streamlines asylum issues between member states.

But the crisis in the European Union has left its mark on non-EU Switzerland, where voters were less enthusiastic about opening their borders and sharing police information with surrounding countries than opinion polls suggested just weeks ago.

Swiss voters' support for closer ties with Europe comes days after French and Dutch voters rejected a new European Constitution that was supposed to cement the bloc's union.

The treaty's supporters, which include the country's four-party coalistion government, said signing up to the Schengen and Dublin accords will improve Switzerland's security, help resolve asylum problems and bring economic benefits.

Critics, led by the far-right Swiss People's Party (SVP) whose most prominent member, billionaire industrialist Christoph Blocher, is also the country's justice minister, fear it will undermine the country's centuries-old neutrality and security.

The SVP has waged a fierce anti-Schengen campaign and collected more than the 50,000 signatures needed to force a popular referendum on the issue.

Schengen and Dublin form part of a series of bilateral treaties hammered out between Switzerland and the EU after Swiss voters in 1992 rejected joining the bloc that surrounds them.

Separately, Swiss voters have also approved a proposal to register same-sex partnerships, giving homosexual couples the same legal rights as married couples in areas such as pensions, inheritance and taxes.

"Gay Gene" Found

So it appears that in at least one species, sexual orientation, sexual desire, is determined by genetics not by Genesis.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/science/03cell.html?hp&ex=1117857600&en=e3e9903a5da949cb&ei=5094&partner=homepage

June 3, 2005

For Fruit Flies, Gene Shift Tilts Sex Orientation

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL,
International Herald Tribune

When the genetically altered fruit fly was released into the observation chamber, it did what these breeders par excellence tend to do. It pursued a waiting virgin female. It gently tapped the girl with its leg, played her a song (using wings as instruments) and, only then, dared to lick her - all part of standard fruit fly seduction.

The observing scientist looked with disbelief at the show, for the suitor in this case was not a male, but a female that researchers had artificially endowed with a single male-type gene.

That one gene, the researchers are announcing today in the journal Cell, is apparently by itself enough to create patterns of sexual behavior - a kind of master sexual gene that normally exists in two distinct male and female variants.

In a series of experiments, the researchers found that females given the male variant of the gene acted exactly like males in courtship, madly pursuing other females. Males that were artificially given the female version of the gene became more passive and turned their sexual attention to other males.

"We have shown that a single gene in the fruit fly is sufficient to determine all aspects of the flies' sexual orientation and behavior," said the paper's lead author, Dr. Barry Dickson, senior scientist at the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology at the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna. "It's very surprising.

"What it tells us is that instinctive behaviors can be specified by genetic programs, just like the morphologic development of an organ or a nose."

The results are certain to prove influential in debates about whether genes or environment determine who we are, how we act and, especially, our sexual orientation, although it is not clear now if there is a similar master sexual gene for humans.

Still, experts said they were both awed and shocked by the findings. "The results are so clean and compelling, the whole field of the genetic roots of behavior is moved forward tremendously by this work," said Dr. Michael Weiss, chairman of the department of biochemistry at Case Western Reserve University. "Hopefully this will take the discussion about sexual preferences out of the realm of morality and put it in the realm of science."

He added: "I never chose to be heterosexual; it just happened. But humans are complicated. With the flies we can see in a simple and elegant way how a gene can influence and determine behavior."

The finding supports scientific evidence accumulating over the past decade that sexual orientation may be innately programmed into the brains of men and women. Equally intriguing, the researchers say, is the possibility that a number of behaviors - hitting back when feeling threatened, fleeing when scared or laughing when amused - may also be programmed into human brains, a product of genetic heritage.

"This is a first - a superb demonstration that a single gene can serve as a switch for complex behaviors," said Dr. Gero Miesenboeck, a professor of cell biology at Yale.

Dr. Dickson, the lead author, said he ran into the laboratory when an assistant called him on a Sunday night with the results. "This really makes you think about how much of our behavior, perhaps especially sexual behaviors, has a strong genetic component," he said.

All the researchers cautioned that any of these wired behaviors set by master genes will probably be modified by experience. Though male fruit flies are programmed to pursue females, Dr. Dickson said, those that are frequently rejected over time become less aggressive in their mating behavior.

When a normal male fruit fly is introduced to a virgin female, they almost immediately begin foreplay and then copulate for 20 minutes. In fact, Dr. Dickson and his co-author, Dr. Ebru Demir of the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology, specifically chose to look for the genetic basis of fly sexual behavior precisely because it seemed so strong and instinctive and, therefore, predictable.

Scientists have known for several years that the master sexual gene, known as fru, was central to mating, coordinating a network of neurons that were involved in the male fly's courtship ritual. Last year, Dr. Bruce Baker of Stanford University discovered that the mating circuit controlled by the gene involved 60 nerve cells and that if any of these were damaged or destroyed by the scientists, the animal could not mate properly. Both male and female flies have the same genetic material as well as the neural circuitry required for the mating ritual, but different parts of the genes are turned on in the two sexes. But no one dreamed that simply activating the normally dormant male portion of the gene in a female fly could cause a genetic female to display the whole elaborate panoply of male fruit fly foreplay.