Feb 13, 2004  |  By: JOE CREA  | COMMENTS     

Democratic presidential frontrunner Sen. John Kerry indicated this week he would support an amendment to the Massachusetts state Constitution banning marriage, despite his opposition to a similar effort two years ago and his current opposition to a federal marriage amendment.

In an interview with National Public Radio on Monday, Feb. 9, Kerry was asked if he would support “a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a heterosexual union”; the questioner did not clarify whether she was referring to the Massachusetts Constitution or the U.S. Constitution, and Kerry made no distinction in his answer.

“Well, it depends entirely on the language of whether it permits civil unions and partnership or not,” said Kerry. “I’m for civil union; I’m for partnership rights.”

Kerry added, “What ought to condition this debate is not the term marriage as much as the rights that people are afforded.

“Obviously under the Constitution of the United States you need equal protection under the law. And I think equal protection means the rights that go with it,” Kerry said. “I think the word marriage kind of gets in the way of the whole debate, to be honest with you, because marriage to many people is obviously what is sanctified by a church. It’s sacramental. Or by a synagogue or by a mosque or by whatever religious connotation it has. Clearly there’s a separation of church and state here.”

“Marriage is a separate institution,” Kerry said. “I think marriage is under the church, between a man and a woman, and I think there’s a separate meaning to it.”

Steve Elmendorf, Kerry’s deputy campaign manager, who is gay, confirmed on Wednesday that Kerry was referring specifically to an amendment to the Massachusetts state Constitution, and not proposed amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which he opposes.

Elmendorf, who was until recently the staff chief to former presidential hopeful Rep. Dick Gephardt, said Kerry isn’t prepared to take a firm position on the Massachusetts amendment because a number of different versions are currently under consideration in a state constitutional convention now underway.

“He hasn’t seen what the amendment is,” Elmendorf said. “The [state] senate has different versions. The state could end up with a horrible amendment, a good amendment or anywhere in between.”

But when efforts were undertaken to amend the Massachusetts Constitution two years ago to ban gay marriage, Kerry joined with all 12 members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation in a letter opposing the proposed ban, which was virtually identical to the one currently under debate.

“We believe it would be a grave error for Massachusetts to enshrine in our Constitution a provision, which would have such a negative effect on so many of our fellow residents,” said the joint congressional letter, dated July 15, 2002.

“The proposal to add to that document — essentially a charter of liberty and democracy — a provision as harsh both in its intent and its effect on our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered constituents is in conflict with the generous spirit that motivated its adoption, and that should continue to govern us today. … We are therefore united in urging you to reject this Constitutional amendment and avoid stigmatizing so many of our fellow citizens who do not deserve to be treated in such a manner.”

In the letter, the congressional delegation also warned that such an amendment might “prevent not only the state government, but also the cities, towns and counties from acting as they might wish to provide some form of recognition for same-sex relationships.” Kerry’s interview on NPR indicated that an amendment preserving civil unions and other forms of legal recognition for gay couples might be enough to win over his support.

Dominick Ianno, executive director of the Massachusetts Republican Party, said this week that the senator’s “waffling” was “typical Kerry behavior,” and the chair of that group, Darrell Crate, said that the question of whether or not the senator supports an amendment “is a simple yes or no question.”

“This is not a question of language, it is a question of principle, and the senator owes the people of Massachusetts a straight answer on this issue,” Crate said.

The issue of marriage for same-sex couples reached a political turning point last week in Massachusetts, when the state’s highest court issued an advisory opinion at the request of the state Senate rejecting civil unions as a constitutional alternative to marriage for gay couples.

The Kerry campaign released a statement after that court decision in which the Democratic frontrunner took issue with the ruling, while reiterating his opposition to gay marriage and his ...