It's a sign of a welcome culture shift that Massachusetts senators
voted unanimously to strike down a discriminatory marriage law on the books
since 1913.
The House is expected to follow suit and the governor has pledged to sign the
repeal of the law, which denies marriage licenses to nonresident couples if
their union would be illegal in their home states.
Not long ago, such a move would have drawn protests and controversy.
After Massachusetts became the first state, by judicial fiat, to permit
same-sex marriages in 2004, the archaic law was cited by then-Gov. Mitt Romney
to justify denying the right to couples from outside the state.
Good riddance to it. The law was rooted in racism. It was a response to the
high-profile interracial marriage of heavyweight boxing champion Jack Johnson,
according to the Boston Globe. Many states at the time banned interracial
marriage or enacted provisions preventing mixed-race couples from crossing state
borders to marry.
In the light of the 21st century, such overt racial discrimination is
unthinkable. May it be so soon with gay and lesbian couples who want to make a
lifelong commitment and yet are prevented from doing so in all but two states.
Outside of Massachusetts and California, they are treated as second-class
citizens.
It would be heartening to know that the Massachusetts decision was based
solely on the desire to rid the state of a shameful law, and to support giving
all committed couples the same rights, regardless of gender. But part of the
motivation was economic.
A study commissioned by Massachusetts says the migration of marriage-minded
couples from New York, Connecticut and other New England states could bring $37
million a year in extra revenue, as well as create permanent jobs. The catalyst
was competition: California recently invited same-sex couples from other states
to tie the knot there.
If economic incentives are what it takes to get states to do the right thing,
bring them on.
