When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that homosexuals have the constitutional right to marry, there was no shortage of opinions on the matter both from those for and against the decision.
Boston University students’ questions Thursday night reflected the variety of opinions across campus on Tuesday’s landmark ruling, which has gained national attention.
Reactions ranged from complete support of the ruling to the belief that marriage should be granted only to heterosexual couples.
California native and College of Arts and Sciences sophomore Alexys Schwartz said the government should have no say in how people express their feelings for each other.
‘Gays should be able to marry,’ she said. ‘I don’t see why the government would make it illegal. I don’t think the government should have anything to do with love. I think marriage is between two people who love each other.’
First-year School of Medicine student Sachin Pandey, of Canada, agreed with Schwartz, saying homosexuals should be allowed to marry.
‘Right on,’ he said. ‘Why wouldn’t they be allowed to? I don’t understand the argument against it. If you’re part of a church that doesn’t support it, it’s not affecting you who cares, and why try to regulate morals?’
But CAS sophomore Bandar Al-Farhan said he feels differently about the ruling. Same-sex relationships should not be encouraged, he said.
‘It’s wrong,’ he said. ‘It opens the door to making homosexuality more acceptable. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Normally, it wouldn’t be accepted for everyone to see, and you don’t want children to be able to see it. I think being gay is a choice. It should be accepted in the home, and if people are led to believe it’s accepted, then they may be prepared to follow that path.’
China native and College of Fine Arts sophomore Ligiong Lio said she is not comfortable with same-sex marriages. In China, she said, the issue has been discussed on television, but the Chinese government would not accept gay unions.
‘I don’t like it,’ she said. ‘I think that marriage is between a man and a woman, and I don’t think they should have a [legal] status as a couple.’
While it appears Massachusetts homosexual couples will gain legal status as couples after the ruling, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has vowed to make the legal definition of marriage a relationship between a man and a woman.
CAS junior Dana Borenstein said she hopes Romney will not succeed in banning same-sex unions.
‘[Tuesday’s ruling] made so many people happy,’ she said. ‘I hope the constitution amendment is not passed it is a step backward. It took so long just to get here.’
The state Legislature is scheduled to vote on a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as ‘the union of one man and one woman’ on Feb. 11, 2004. An amendment would have to be passed in two separate legislative sessions and then ratified by voters in a referendum, which could take place in 2006 at the earliest. Tuesday’s ruling will take effect next May.
Staff writer Jessica Bennett contributed to this report.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
