Battle over gay marriage heats up in Massachusetts

BOSTON, Nov 10 (Reuters) Massachusetts' lawmakers took a giant step toward killing a proposal to ban gay marriage in the only US state where it is legal.

With protesters on both sides of the debate rallying outside the gold-domed statehouse, lawmakers voted 109 to 87 to delay a decision on whether to back a constitutional amendment that would have given voters a chance to ban gay marriage.

Gay rights advocates cheered the move, seen as a crushing blow to opponents of gay marriage who had gathered 170,000 signatures in a petition that asked lawmakers to put the culturally divisive issue before voters in 2008.

By adjourning until January 2, the last official day of the legislative session, the Democratic-controlled legislature virtually guarantees the proposed amendment will not be taken up and therefore be killed.

''It's a travesty, it's wrong,'' said Kristian Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, a conservative Christian organisation which led the petition drive. ''We call on the governor to step in.'' Republican Gov Mitt Romney, a vocal opponent of gay marriage, said ''the rule of law and the sovereignty of the people have been trampled'' but there was little he could do to force the state's lawmakers to vote on the amendment.

''My options are limited but we will explore any alternatives that may exist to protect the constitutional rights of the people,'' said Romney, a Mormon millionaire who has staked out conservative positions on a number of sensitive social issues ahead of a likely 2008 presidential bid.

Hundreds of protesters carrying placards, chanting slogans and singing rallied outside the statehouse, some waving signs reading ''Let The People Vote''.

Many gay marriage supporters wore stickers saying ''Preserve Equality'' and held hand-made signs. One read ''Focus on your own damn family'' in protest of the Christian conservative group ''Focus on the family,'' which has campaigned nationwide against same-sex marriage.

''Make no mistake about it, this amendment is about the past. It is about fear and intolerance,'' state Sen. Edward Augustus told the chamber. ''It is about permanently ensuring that some of those among us will never be entitled to the full rights and privileges of citizenship in our community.'' The debate came two days after seven states voted to limit marriage to a man and a woman in ballot initiatives, effectively banning gay marriage.

It follows a month after the New Jersey Supreme Court guaranteed gay couples the same rights as married heterosexuals but left it to lawmakers to decide what to call the unions.

''I'm here because I'm against discrimination,'' said Nicole Roche, 20, a gay rights supporter.

But Joanne Abel, standing in a smaller group protesting gay marriage, said same-sex unions were immoral. ''I'm concerned for our democracy and I'm concerned for children who are being brainwashed by this,'' said Abel, 50.

In 2003, the state Supreme Judicial Court ruled that a ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional, paving the way for America's first same-sex marriages the following year. More than 8,000 gay and lesbian couples have since married.

If 25 percent of Massachusetts' 200-member Legislature had approved the measure, it would have gone to a second legislative vote in 2007. If it cleared that hurdle, it would have been added to a 2008 ballot for a popular vote.

REUTERS DH BST0748