Archaic Laws 1: Where Don't Meets Duh

[Ian David]

Thursday, January 25, 2007


Some outdated Massachusetts laws are amusing, some quaint, and some both spiteful and harmful. In the latter category, we think particularly of marriage laws:

* Residual statutes that the state Senate did not or would not align with the Goodridge decision. That has left us with the vicious anti-marriage-equality petitions and the current amendment.
* The twin 1913 race-based laws dusted off by then Gov. Willard Mitt Romney with the help of then AG Tom Reilly. these keep out-of-state homosexual couples from marrying here and spreading our loving poison of same-sex marriage like lavender Johnny Appleseeds.


The trivial and significant versions are on display again. Last year, it was Senator Cynthia S. Creem with her bill 938, an omnibus to sweep these legislative dust kitties from under the furniture of government. This time around, Rep. Byron Rushing has filed a bill with even more arcane and risible examples of legislators gone wild. (His bill doesn't seem to be on the state site yet.)

Creem's bill ended up languishing in limbo after being referred to the Judiciary Committee. We suspect that Rushing has the profile and personality to move his version to the floor. Because it will apparently include the 1913 disgraces, it may be controversial even in this century.

Rushing seems too savvy to touch the same-sex marriage clarifications while the anti-marriage-equality amendment is in the works, but he picked up a lot of Creem's work and added to it.

Let us pause first to reflect what great fun this must be. Among the beadle work and slogging that legislation so often involves, what a joy to sit at a conference table giggling about finds in our laws.

More:
http://massmarrier.blogspot.com/2007/01/archaic-laws-1-where-dont-meets-duh.html