In her well-written article, "The Growing Divide: Real America?" in the last issue of the Roundtable, Ms. Leslie Ogden wonders if there could possibly be "two Americas." This idea, to her, seems unfortunate; according to her, the idea that our country could be divided seems dangerous and threatening to the stability of the Union. I must inform her that there are more than two Americas - there are, in fact, at least fifty. And, contrary to her belief that this is destructive to our country, it is in fact where we find our strength. America is not a monolithic state, in which we have all decided to agree on a specific set of policies to be implemented by the federal government. Our Founders wisely chose to allow the states to "go their own way," with good reason and generally successful results. Real detriment has resulted when the federal government has tried to turn the constitutionally powerful states into subjugated bodies to do its bidding.

Ms. Ogden and I generally agree on the issues, it seems. She supports same-sex marriage, as do I. Both of us find the proposition of creationism, particularly as an academic theory, to be ridiculous. And both of us seem to be influenced by the urban areas of this country. Our opinions diverge, however, on what is to be done with our countrymen who do not share our views. It appears that Ms. Ogden believes that national accession to policies should be decided by the federal government, with all states following the same policies. I, however am utterly unconcerned with what other states do, at least in a legal sense; my only concern is that my own state is allowed to carry out the policies it sees fit. I wonder if Ms. Ogden realizes that if many of the issues she discusses in her article were put up to a popular vote, our side would lose. Federalism keeps us free to do what we believe is right and rational.

Perhaps late to recognize the utility of states' rights, but certainly willing to flex its muscle in this area, Massachusetts has benefited greatly from the concessions made to it by our venerable Constitution. Even as former Governor Mitt Romney made our state the butt of his jokes leading up to his 2008 Presidential bid, Massachusetts legalized and affirmed the right to same-sex marriage. The same governor decided to take the national lead and bring near-universal health care to Massachusetts. Neither of these things was done with the permission, encouragement, or approval of the other forty-nine states. The Big Dig, a project which has undoubtedly revitalized transport and life in Boston, and the frequent expansions of public transit upon which our state embarks, are projects initiated by the Commonwealth acting alone. The federal government only doles out funding because it has a greater "power of the purse" than the state.

The true deficiency with Ms. Ogden's assumptions lies in a lack of understanding of federalism. I would ask her, "If all the states and regions of the country are meant to act the same, then why did we even bother dividing the country up into states?" It strikes me as extraordinarily patronizing to the rest of the nation to ask the states to simply come to a consensus and agree. This is subversive of the Constitution and insulting to the states. When Massachusetts was maligned by much of the rest of the country for instituting same-sex marriage in 2004, we were being told by the people and politicians of those states to act against our will and to compromise the exercise of our rights as a state. By asking us all to ignore our differences, Ms. Ogden, even with good intentions, is doing the same thing fifty times over.