Students and faculty respond to Massachusetts Supreme Court decision on gay marriage

In one of the most controversial decisions in recent years, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has become the first State Supreme Court to rule that homosexual couples have the legal right to marriage, two weeks ago.

In a 4-3 decision, the Court ruled the State's ban on gay marriage to be unconstitutional, giving the Massachusetts legislature six months to rewrite the state's marriage laws to include a provision allowing for gay and lesbian couples be married.

"We declare that barring an individual from the protections, benefits and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts constitution," Chief Justice Margaret Marshall wrote in the decision.

At Tufts, approximately 35 students gathered at the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT) Center to celebrate on the night the decision was announced. Junior Patrick Brown, who is the community representative for the Tufts Transgender, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Collective (TTLGBC) in the Tufts Community Union Senate, has no current plans on getting married but would consider it in the future. "It's certainly incentive to stay in the state," he said.

Although LGBT Center Director Dona Yarbrough will not be attending any same sex marriages soon, since the legislation is still pending, "I know faculty and staff members who have been proposed to and have accepted proposals since the decision, but are waiting to see what happens," she said.

While the decision is certainly a victory for LGBT rights, Yarbrough realistically acknowledges that this is only a "celebration of a beginning."

"The court case is just the first step to what will probably be a long political and legal battle," she said.

Many feel that the decision is a triumph in the rights and acceptance of the LGBT community. "It's symbolic of the greater acceptance of queer people in society," Brown said. "The decision was inevitable considering the Lawrence v. Texas case this past summer."

In that case the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas state law against sodomy, effectively saying that citizens' sexual lives should be private, and the government should not have discretion in such cases. This will pave the way for gay marriage, the conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said.

"That didn't affect us in Massachusetts, but it is a government acknowledgement that LGBT people have real and meaningful relationships," Yarbrough said of the Lawrence v. Texas ruling.

Ex-College lecturer, Robyn Ochs, who teaches classes in gender and sexuality studies, registered with her domestic partner, Peg Preble five years ago. The recent decision does not change their relationship. "For all intents and purposes we are married, we have been together for seven years, and have every intention of spending the rest of our lives together," Ochs said.

Ochs says that their decision to register in Cambridge was mainly "pragmatic," so that her partner could get her health insurance benefits.

"I [used to] view marriage as something primarily symbolic, but... I came to realize that marriage is much more than a symbolic institution. It's an entire program of benefits and protection," she said.

Marrying for health insurance benefits and tax deductions is not unique. There are 1,049 federal benefits and approximately 350 state benefits given to legally married couples, according to Ochs, whose course this semester explored the issue. Because same sex marriage is not federally legal, Ochs pays more than an extra $100 a month to cover her partner in her health insurance.

"Same sex couples work, pay taxes, and do not have equal access to rights and benefits," she said. "It's grossly unfair; I put in the same amount and get so much less back."

For college students, many of whom are not yet ready to marry, the proposed legislation poses a different kind of significance.

"This decision is a validation of their identities," Yarbrough said. "It's a government acknowledgement that LGBT people have real and meaningful relationships."

But the decision did not draw only passionate responses supporting the decision. While homosexuals around the country were rejoicing, many conservative politicians, including President Bush, expressed harsh criticism of the outcome.

"Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman," Bush said immediately after the decision was released. "Today's decision ... violates this important principle. I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."

Senior and former President of the Tufts Republicans, Rachel Hoff, is also strongly opposed to gay marriage

"I think the decision is a dangerous interpretation of a very old document that was clearly never meant to allow for homosexual marriage," Hoff said. "The Massachusetts Constitution was written by John Adams, a long time ago, and what the Supreme Court has done is said that the writers of the constitution said, in the spirit of that document, that gay marriage is constitutional."

Republican Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney also denounced the decision and said he would work for a constitutional amendment to overturn it.

Many conservatives have other concerns as well. Some have cited the fear that allowing homosexuals to marry will open the door for others to gain legitimacy for their intimate relationships, such as polygamy and incest, which are currently illegal in the United States.

"Levitation of sodomy laws is going to take on the form of allowing people whose romantic lives fall outside of the law in other ways to have a defense for constitutional protection of their practices as well," Hoff said. "I think it's a dangerous slope that our country is going down and we are opening the doors to allow a lot of things other than just the intended allowance of homosexuality."

For such opponents of the decision, there is the option of appealing the decision to the US Supreme Court during the next six months.

According to CNN, the Massachusetts State Legislature now has two options. Either, the legislature can write laws legalizing same-sex marriages, or it could not act at all and let the ruling go forward.

Ochs looks forward to what she hopes is a positive outcome. "I visited the Netherlands after it legalized same sex marriage and had dinner with friends, a same sex couple. They showed me their wedding books, and I'm not generally a big fan of marriage and weddings, but I started crying," she said. "[Marriage] is something we deserve, and it seems possible now -- and I want it."