E-Mail This Article to a Friend GAY MARRIAGE It ain’t over yet BY DEIRDRE FULTON

Conservative religious organizations and Catholic bishops this week sanctioned the collection of signatures at worship services — signatures needed to push an anti-gay-marriage amendment through to the state legislature in 2006, and potentially on to voters in 2008.

In response, pro-gay-marriage Roman Catholic lay clergy affiliated with the Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry released a statement late this week announcing their opposition to the so-called "Protection of Marriage Sunday," a one-day attack on same-sex marriage that is scheduled to take place at churches and parishes across Massachusetts on October 2.

"While we respect the authority and integrity of the Church in matters of faith," read the statement, "our prayers and reflection have brought us to a new openness on this issue."

So marks the official continuation of the gay-marriage fight, just more than a week after equal-marriage supporters won a historic victory on September 14, when state legislators voted down a proposed constitutional amendment (the Travaglini-Lees amendment) that would have banned gay marriage while establishing civil unions.

Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders are pursuing a legal strategy, challenging Attorney General Thomas Reilly’s controversial certification of the Protection of Marriage Amendment proposed ballot question. Meanwhile, activists will carry on with door-to-door canvassing in districts where state senators or representatives may be persuaded to switch their votes. And MassEquality will continue coordinating visits between same-sex married couples (of which there are now more than 6500 in the state) and their legislators.

"The major part of the strategy stays the same," says representative Byron Rushing, second assistant majority leader. "People continue getting married in their districts, and people need to be willing to have personal conversations with their state representatives."

First, however, pro-gay-marriage forces must determine what side those representatives are on. Although 157 legislators voted against the Travaglini-Lees proposal, only 115 have been solidly identified as equal-marriage supporters who will definitely vote against any attempts to ban gay marriage in the future. Some, such as senators Jack Hart and Brian Lees, or representatives Brad Hill and Patricia Walrath, changed their votes due to a change of heart. On the flip side are about 30 legislators who voted against the amendment only because they’re waiting to vote for the Protection of Marriage Amendment. In the middle are mystery "No" votes — about a dozen legislators whose motivations remain unclear. It appears they’ll remain so, at least for the time being; attempts by the Phoenix to reach many of those legislators last week were unsuccessful.

In addition, there are legislators whose "Yes" vote on Wednesday was the last one they’ll cast against total equal-marriage rights. Representative Eugene O’Flaherty explained via e-mail last week that he truly supported civil unions as defined in the Travaglini-Lees amendment. But from now on, it’s likely that his votes will be with gay-marriage supporters. "I will not vote for the upcoming [Protection of Marriage] Amendment as written because I believe it’s too restrictive," he wrote.

"We really feel that the momentum is with us," says Marc Solomon, political director of MassEquality, the gay-rights coalition that coordinated 18 months of grassroots activism between the two Con Cons that helped sway votes against the compromise Travaglini-Lees amendment.

One of those votes was that of Thomas Kennedy, a representative from Brockton who voted for the Travaglini-Lees amendment in 2004. Kennedy is in the hospital, and wasn’t able to be at the Con Con, but representative Kathleen Teahan read a statement for him.

"Having keenly observed these events over the past year and a half," Kennedy wrote, "having seen the joy on the faces of those who have married their long-time partners; having heard the stories of families made whole; and having witnessed the power of our nation’s oldest constitution in action, I cannot again vote to support this measure."

Click here to read legislators’ speeches from the Con Con.