Anti-gay marriage amendment much more likely to pass than people are admitting

[yesthattom]

People are saying that the anti-gay marriage constitutional amendement ("FMA) will not pass because it doesn't have enough votes in the house or senate. TODAY we don't have enough votes to stop it, but most of the votes on our side are conditional... and once the radical right starts flooding their phone lines with callers, those votes will switch. They're changing the language of the bill over and over to gather more votes. Soon the people that gave a conditional "no" will switch. "Oh, I was only against it because it prevented states from having civil unions too, but they removed that.", etc. etc.

This is why it is so important that everyone contact their elected officials right now. If you are in NJ, simply click here. Outside NJ please go to HRC's web site

Comments

[cos]

Help MA: Romney has less than two months to stop gay marriage, and it's gonna be hard. If we hold it back that long, we'll get a flood of unquestionably legal gay marriages. Once that happens, any federal amendment that tries to bar state courts from making gay marriage legal, would have the effect of nullifying these legal marriages, and we can start tarring it as the "divorce amendment". I think when gay marriages are a fait accompli, an amendment like that will be harder to pass. (Might it be voted on before May 17th?)

Support MassEquality.