Compromising positions

National | GAY MARRIAGE: The battle of Boston ended with no clear winner. But there was a clear loser: the traditional view of marriage | John Dawson

After three tumultuous sessions spread over six weeks, the Massachusetts legislature on March 29 finally passed a long-anticipated ban on gay marriage ... sort of.

By a vote of 105-92, Bay State lawmakers approved a constitutional amendment that would outlaw marriages between same-sex couples while simultaneously guaranteeing those couples the financial benefits of marriage through state-sanctioned civil unions.

It was a compromise that left both pro-family activists and gay-rights lobbyists feeling, well, compromised. If Ron Crews, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, could take any solace from the legislature's convoluted solution, it was that the other side couldn't claim victory outright.

"My thought was, if this thing goes down -- even as bad as it is -- the Gay and Lesbian Task Force can say, 'We defeated the Catholic Church, the Coalition for Marriage, the Republican Party, the governor, and the [Senate] leadership.' Quite frankly, I didn't want them to be able to say that."