BOSTON - Same-sex marriage advocates have a new fight after what was seen to be a crushing defeat in the November 2 election: convincing people that nothing actually went wrong.

In fact, Massachusetts same-sex marriage advocates are touting this election as a success, according to Marty Rouse, the director of MassEquality - a group whose mission is full and equal marriage for gay and lesbian couples in Massachusetts.

All 50 members of the Massachusetts legislature who voted against a proposed amendment banning gay marriage were reelected and 2 pro-amendment incumbents were defeated, giving same-sex marriage advocates a net gain of 2 votes, according to Rouse.

The outcome of this elections has "resounded strongly in the halls of the legislature" he said.

All of this was brought to the forefront of the political debate by the Goodrich v. Department of Public Health decision which legalized same-sex marriage in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. Gay rights groups celebrated the first anniversary of the decision this past November 18.

Public perception is what Sue Hyde of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force sees as the biggest problem of this election.
It is not the strategy of the NGLTF or most other pro-gay marriage organizations to put referendums on ballots. Ballot referendums are the work of groups who want to keep the institution between one man and one woman.

Their strategy is to install lawmakers who favor same-sex marriage is state legislatures. One they say is making significant progress each election.

"To put up a fundamentally human right on the ballot to be voted on is simply wrong," said Matt Foreman, NGLTF Executive Director, in a press release on the group’s website.

Hyde points out that Mississippi does not have sexual orientation anti-discrimination laws, so it is no surprise to her that a state amendment banning same-sex marriage passed there. She does admit that Oregon was a disappointment to her and other advocates like her, but claims that even there the chances of winning were slim.

A 180-day campaign is "simply not enough time to overcome the lack of exposure," said Hyde.

Both MassEquality and the NGLTF see time as the main factor in the struggle for same-sex marriage. Hyde and Rouse both had statistics and anecdotal evidence to suggest that the more people are exposed to gay couples, the more likely they are to vote in favor of same-sex marriage.

Backlash, a concern of many same-sex marriage proponents, simply has not materialized here in Massachusetts, argues Rouse. He points to Election Day wins as proof.

"This is where there should be backlash. The referendums are smoke screens" said Rouse "Where this is real: we won."

However, full-time gay marriage advocates like Rouse are not yet out of jobs. Nationwide there are now 17 states whose voters have passed referendums banning same sex marriage, making the overall struggle for full and equal marriage for same-sex couples more difficult.

Despite overall legislative gains in this past election, public perception is very important to the continued progress of the same-sex marriage movement. And when 11 out of 11 proposed defense of marriage amendments pass, all in landslides, that comes as a sharp blow to public perception and therefore the momentum of the movement.

There are also concerns here in Massachusetts where full and equal marriage is a reality. A voter referendum goes up for a second vote in the legislature this year, and by Rouse’s count his movement is still 16 to 18 votes behind where they need to be.

MassEquality is optimistic about the chances of the vote coming out in their favor, but cautiously so. "Until they vote, we don’t actually know."

Area gay rights groups are also fighting for the repeal of the 1913 law that bans all marriages of out of state residents whose marriages would not be legal in their home states.

The overall strategy for both the NGLTF and MassEquality now is to get gay people to tell their stories to their straight family, friends, neighbors and coworkers. This is because of the data Rouse and Hyde have showing that voters are far more likely to vote for a pro-gay candidate or pro-gay on a referendum if they actually know lesbians and gay men.

"Across this country there is a rich vein of fairness, and it is that vein of fairness into which we need to tap" said Mary Bonauto, the lawyer who argued the Goodrich case for the GLAD (Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders) at a celebration of the first anniversary of the decision. "We must try to reach the moveable middle."

The argument for same-sex marriage was the same from GLAD as it was from MassEquality or NGLTF. "We need to be free to make choices to take care of our families in the best way possible" said Hyde.

Michael Rund