Everyone around here - IMPORTANT!

[kitchen_kink]

If you live in Massachusetts, DO THIS NOW, as in, right now:

http://www.wheredoivotema.com/bal/myelectioninfo.php

Find out who your State Senator is, call them and tell them to vote against the anti-gay constitutional amendments going up for vote today.

Do it now! They're voting in, like, an hour!

Comments

[redheadedmuse.livejournal.com]

Boston.com has posted the roll call for the two votes on supposed "compromise" resolutions yesterday, so you can see exactly how your rep voted. I found this information really useful when calling my reps, because it helped me tailor my message (which, for lucky, lucky, lucky me was: I want to thank Rep. Stanley and Senator Baddour for their ongoing support of civil rights in Massachusetts).

[deadwinter.livejournal.com]

Now I am confused....according to the roll call, Sen. Barrios voted nay on the first one byt yai on the second one.

Rep. Honan can kiss my ass, though.

Re:

[redheadedmuse.livejournal.com]

there was a last-minute plan last night for supporters of gay mariage rights to vote yes on the bipartisan compromise bill (the second vote) at this preliminary stage, removing the possibility of a worse outcome (like a total ban on gay marriage) and then to switch votes and fail to pass it at a later time. it didn't work because even though the gay rights lobby advocated it, it was a sudden change in tactics and many lawmakers who found the proposal homophobic still voted against it. so Barrios is probably a) supporting gay rights and b) quick on the uptake. Both of my reps did the same thing, and they're both strong supporters.

Re:

[deadwinter.livejournal.com]

Well, given that Jarret did write me an email saying that he was a strong supporter of gay rights, I was confused. Thanks for explaining that. It saved me an angry email :)

Re:

[redheadedmuse.livejournal.com]

dude -- barrios is like the golden boy here. this is from boston.com:

One pending amendment, offered by state Sen. Jarrett T. Barrios (D-Cambridge), would codify same-sex marriage in the constitution.

[dot_fennel]

What it actually says is "the union of any two people" should be considered marriage. Whether it's some parliamentary strategic thing, or an attempt to cut the feet out from under people who say "but then what will stop people from marrying their pets?", I don't know.

Re:

[redheadedmuse.livejournal.com]

one more on Barrios:

In his talk to the convention, state Sen. Jarrett T. Barrios (D-Cambridge), who is proposing an amendment to allow same-sex marriages, acknowledged that he will be viewed as biased on the issue because he is gay. He is biased, he said, because he has a partner and children who will be denied many rights and benefits if same-sex marriage is banned.

Re:

[deadwinter.livejournal.com]

Yep, he can't be objective about the pros and cons of being prejudiced against, the bastard.

Thanks for the info, btw.