Civil Union ‘Compromise’ Never Gave Legislature A Chance

To the editors:

The use of the label “judicial activism” against the leader of the executive branch is a strange contortion of logic indeed (“An Unlikely ‘Activist Judge,’” editorial, Sept. 20).

Marriage supporters, including Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, abandoned the Travaglini-Lees Amendment long ago because of its flawed compromise on civil unions. Since civil unions are same-sex “marriage” in nearly all but name, they remain an unacceptable compromise to most marriage supporters. Consequently, the ultimate failure of the Travaglini-Lees Amendment was a foregone conclusion when it passed the first time.

You can safely dispense with the fear-mongering over the voting process if you believe the will of the people has already been exercised and 56 percent of the voters favor same-sex “marriage,” as you contend. However, it is worth noting that there has not yet been a vote on marriage itself by the people or the Legislature. The Travaglini-Lees compromise foreclosed any opportunity for the constitutional convention to vote on an amendment relating to marriage only.

The assertion that life has not changed since same-sex “marriage” was imposed on Massachusetts is irrelevant. Nobody expected the sky to fall. It took several generations for the adverse effects on children of no-fault divorce to be understood, and the research is ongoing. Similarly, the negative cultural impact of redefining marriage will be revealed over several generations, not in several years.

“Well-reasoned debate” is desirable, but it cannot occur without honest presentation of the facts. It is reasonable to expect more of the student newspaper at the nation’s leading university.

GLEN E. LAVY

Scottsdale, Ariz.

September 21, 2005

The writer is senior vice president of the Marriage Litigation Center of the Alliance Defense Fund and a graduate of Harvard Law School.