Barney Frank: “as I listen, I am struck anew by the ability of preprogrammed rhetoric to resist the facts. We have heard talk about…”

“as I listen, I am struck anew by the ability of preprogrammed rhetoric to resist the facts. We have heard talk about activist judges, Federal judges. No Federal judge has been involved here. There is not a pending decision that is now in force by a single Federal judge. That doesn't stop people from invoking it, because facts are irrelevant to this kind of rhetoric. In fact, this amendment is being described in ways that are not accurate. It is not an amendment to prevent judges, activist judges, pacifist judges, any kind of judges, from deciding. It is an amendment to prevent anybody from deciding. In the State of Massachusetts, we have had same-sex marriage for over 2 years. None of the negative consequences that people have predicted came true. In consequence, I believe the political community of Massachusetts is prepared to say, if two men love each other and are prepared to be committed to each other legally as well as emotionally, that is rather a good thing and we will say it's okay. If the voters of Massachusetts, in a referendum in 2008, which we might have, were to ratify same-sex marriage, this amendment would cancel it out. It has nothing to do with activist judges. It has to do with a decision that says no State by any political process can make that decision. The legislature of California, not judges in California, voted to allow two women who love each other to be legally responsible for each other.…”