Mass Gays Want Federal Benefits

Married gay couples in Massachusetts are seeking the federal benefits that regular married couples enjoy.

Mary Ritchie, a Massachusetts State Police trooper, has been married for almost five years and has two children. But when she files her federal income tax return, she’s not allowed to check the “married filing jointly” box.

That’s because Ritchie and her spouse, Kathleen Bush, are a gay couple, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act makes them ineligible to file joint tax returns.

Now Ritchie, Bush and more than a dozen others are suing the federal government, claiming the act discriminates against gay couples and is unconstitutional because it denies them access to federal benefits that other married couples receive, such as pensions and health insurance. Plaintiffs also include Dean Hara, the widower of former U.S. Rep. Gerry Studds, the first openly gay member of the House of Representatives.

In Ritchie’s case, she and her spouse say they have paid nearly $15,000 more in taxes than they would have if they had been able to file joint returns.

“It saddens us because we love our country,” Ritchie said. “We are taxpayers. We live just like anyone else in our community. We do everything just like every other family, like every other married couple, and we are treated like less than that.”

Well, to be fair, you don’t do everything just like every other family, or every other married couple.

The lawsuit was being filed Tuesday in federal court in Boston by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, the anti-discrimination group that brought a successful legal challenge leading to Massachusetts becoming the first state in the nation to legalize gay marriage in 2004.
[...]
The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, was enacted by Congress in 1996 when it appeared Hawaii would soon legalize same-sex marriage and opponents worried that other states would be forced to recognize such marriages. The new lawsuit challenges only the portion of the law that prevents the federal government from affording Social Security and other benefits to same-sex couples.
[...]
All the plaintiffs are from Massachusetts and have marriages that are recognized by the state. They include a U.S. Postal Service employee who wasn’t allowed to add her spouse to her health insurance plan; a Social Security Administration retiree who was denied health insurance for his spouse; three widowers who were denied death benefits for funeral expenses; and a man who has been denied a passport bearing his married name.

In response to the lawsuit, Kris Mineau, President of the Massachusetts Family Institute released the following statement:

DOMA passed the Congress by overwhelming, bi-partisan majorities—342-67 in the House and 85-14 in the Senate—and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.

DOMA is not a conservative or liberal law, it is an American law signed to protect children and families that has been upheld by previous federal court rulings.

Americans overwhelmingly believe marriage to be the union of one man and one woman. Forty-five states have laws supporting traditional marriage and thirty out of thirty states have affirmed marriage as one man and one woman in their state constitutions.

Same-sex marriage activists simply cannot win a public vote so they force their will upon the citizenry through select, activist judges.

The court should reject this thinly-veiled attempt to impose same-sex marriage on American citizens who have overwhelmingly voted otherwise.

Senate Turns Massachusetts Into Gay Las Vegas

Earlier today the State Senate voted to allow out-of-state gay couples to get married in Massachusetts… opening the door for Massachusetts to become the Gay Las Vegas.

The Massachusetts Family Institute, issued a press release earlier today, accusing the Senate of redefining marriage in other states:

With its vote today to dismantle a 1913 law prohibiting out-of-state couples from marrying Massachusetts if they are ineligible for marriage in their home state, the Massachusetts Senate is inviting court challenges to the marriage laws of other states.

 “The Massachusetts Senate has no right to infringe on the internal issues of how other states define marriage but that’s exactly what they voted today to do,” said Kris Mineau, president, Massachusetts Family Institute.

Dubbed falsely by same-sex marriage activists as a law with an anti-race bias, the State Supreme Judicial Court in 2006 ruled that the law was not racially motivated.

“Legislators were pressured unscrupulously by same-sex marriage activists to dismantle this law or be branded racists,” Mr. Mineau said—adding that the Human Rights Campaign hired lobbyists to work over Massachusetts legislators on this issue.

Move over San Francisco. 

Legislature Votes Against Letting The People Vote

VoteOnMarriage.org blames pressure from Governor Patrick, Speaker DiMasi, and Senate President Murray.

Boston – VoteOnMarriage.org – the campaign to allow the voters to decide on the definition of marriage in Massachusetts – expressed outrage over today’s Constitutional Convention vote on the Marriage Amendment citing the unrelenting pressure by Governor Patrick, House Speaker DiMasi and Senate President Therese Murray forcing some lawmakers to switch their positions on the issue during the 11th hour.

“The Marriage Amendment won its first legislative vote and was on track to win its second with a healthy margin. The unprecedented pressure by leaders on Beacon Hill – the rumors of patronage jobs by Governor Patrick and arm-twisting by House Speaker DiMasi – derailed the largest initiative petition drive by citizens in the Commonwealth’s history and this is a brutal loss for citizen-centered democracy,” said Kris Mineau, president, Massachusetts Family Institute and spokesman, VoteOnMarriage.org.

All three Beacon Hill leaders opposed the people’s right to vote on marriage. Allegations of bribery by the Governor and arm twisting by the House Speaker as a means of pressuring legislators to switch their vote have been reported widely in the press in recent weeks.

The fight for marriage and democracy will continue though. VoteOnMarriage.org is not giving up.

“The Governor and House Speaker have been unrelenting in fighting the natural course of advancement on the marriage amendment and the people’s right to vote,” said Mineau. “We will look very closely at the circumstances by which legislators switched their vote for ethics violations or improprieties.”

Citizens in 45 states have weighed in on the definition of marriage either through the legislative process or by constitutional amendments. VoteOnMarriage.org vows to continue the fight for the people of Massachusetts to be heard on this issue.

The gay lobby may have won a victory today, but the people will not give up to have their voices heard. The shameful and unethical behavior of our Governor and House Speaker will not be ignored. The voters of Massachusetts should have the right to vote on this issue.

This is not the end.

UPDATE: The bottom line is the people of Massachusetts lost today. The legislature, true to form, denied the will of the people, and with the help of unethical interventions by our governor, they managed to deliver a defeat for traditional marriage, traditional values, and of our democratic process.

We wanted a vote.

Despite claims by the radical-left that Massachusetts supports gay marriage, Deval Patrick and other opponents of preserving traditional marriage were apparently so afraid of letting the people have a say on what their values are, that they had to manufacture this defeat.

We wanted a vote.

Americans have fought and died for the right to vote. Instead of giving us the opportunity to vote on marriage, the legislature effectively gave the citizens of Massachusetts a vote of no confidence. They delivered the message that they do not trust us to make up our own minds about marriage.

We wanted a vote.

While the radical left and gay lobby declare victory, the state of Massachusetts has become the laughing-stock of the country.

We wanted a vote.

Legislature Stalls Vote on Marriage Amendment Vote

Legislature Stalls Vote on Marriage Amendment Vote

Constitutional Convention Recessed to June 14

Boston – VoteOnMarriage.org – the campaign to allow the voters to decide on the definition of marriage in Massachusetts – was disappointed when Senate President Therese Murray recessed the Constitutional Convention without taking a vote on the Marriage Amendment. The Convention is now set to resume on June 14 at 1 PM.

“Senate President Murray gave her word that a vote would be taken on the Marriage Amendment after the state budget deliberations were concluded, and we take her at her word,” said Kris Mineau, president, Massachusetts Family Institute and spokesman, VoteOnMarriage.org.

Hundreds of Marriage Amendment supporters who came to the State House from all over Massachusetts to support the amendment were disappointed that they would again have to come to the State House hoping for a legislative vote.

In the fall of 2005, more than 170,000 signatures were gathered in support of the Marriage Amendment. It took the legislature a full year after the Secretary of State certified the Amendment to take the first of two constitutionally prescribed votes on the measure. If approved at the next Constitutional Convention, the Marriage Amendment goes before the voters in November 2008.

# # #

Massachusetts Conservatives Looking To Rally

Boston Magazine writes a piece on conservatives in Massachusetts looking for someone, or something, to rally the cause, highlighting talk radio and activist Brian Camenker. The article also mentions the grassroots, and the role of blogs, such as Hub Politics and Deval Patrick Watch.

For many conservatives, particularly those turned off by the one-downmanship of talk radio, grassroots activists represent the best hope for the genuine expression of right-wing principles in this state. They look to people like Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation, who has made a career out of being a thorn in the liberal establishment’s side. They look to Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, who was instrumental in getting the legislature to finally vote on the gay-marriage ban. And they look to Aaron and Matt Margolis, creators of the websites Hub Politics and Deval Patrick Watch—authors of such unambiguous headlines as “Patrick to legislature: Screw the constitution.”