BOSTON (AP) – The November elections in Massachusetts were supposed to be Phase Two in the state’s epic gay-rights battle, a time for political retribution and citizen retaliation for votes cast during this year’s debate on a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

But the divisive issue, which dominated Statehouse discourse after the state’s high court legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts a year ago, is not playing a highly visible role in the legislative elections that could determine its fate.

At stake is whether the Legislature will reaffirm its support for a constitutional amendment, given preliminary approval earlier this year, that would ban same-sex marriages while legalizing civil unions. Gay rights advocates need to gain at least five more supporters in the Legislature to prevent the measure from going to voters in November 2006.

While same-sex marriage advocates and foes are investing money and volunteers in candidates who support their viewpoint, the action is mainly behind the scenes – in stark contrast to the Vermont elections that followed after that state legalized civil unions in 2000.

In Massachusetts, despite repeated threats of payback at the ballot box, neither side is placing gay rights in the spotlight.

“I’ve been knocking on thousands of doors and I’m not asked about this issue very frequently,” said Democrat Angus McQuilken, a gay-rights supporter engaged in a rematch with Republican Sen. Scott Brown, a same-sex marriage opponent. Their first contest – a March special election – was seen as a litmus test on same-sex marriage.

Republican Gov. Mitt Romney, an ardent and outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage during this year’s debate, has not raised gay rights as part of his well-financed effort to install more GOP lawmakers in the heavily Democratic Legislature.

Most voters also don’t appear to be placing it high on their priority list, according to candidates on both sides.

“We don’t hear a whole lot of people talking about gay marriage one way or another,” said Tim O’Brien, executive director of the state Republican Party. “Reform, tax increases – that’s what people are really caring about.”

The state’s highest court ruled last November that same-sex couples had a right under the state’s constitution to marry. The ruling took effect in mid-May with considerable fanfare as same-sex couples around the state flocked to city halls to apply for marriage licenses.

In between, the Legislature held a protracted debate over the constitution and emerged with the narrowly approved amendment. The identical measure must be adopted again in the upcoming two-year session before going on the ballot in 2006.

But the fervor generated by that battle, which saw citizens clashing in the hallways of the Statehouse, has died down.

The initial results, as reflected in the September primaries, show gay rights supporters able to fend off opponents despite predictions of political fallout for their votes. Not one lost a primary battle.

Same-sex marriage opponents, who supported the constitutional ban, fared less well, although the issue appeared to be a significant factor in only one of three primary defeats. Even then, it served more as an inspiration for the openly gay candidate to get into the race than a hotly debated issue during his successful campaign against a 16-year House veteran.

In 2000, 17 Vermont lawmakers who supported civil union rights for same-sex couples were ousted during the fall elections.

Many of the most competitive races in Massachusetts’ upcoming general election involve incumbent senators who opposed the constitutional amendment. But their Republican opponents, most of whom oppose same-sex marriage, are not focusing on it.

Gay-rights advocates say Massachusetts voters have simply come to realize that granting marriage rights to same-sex couples has had no impact on their lives.

“The weddings have gone on and there hasn’t been a major catastrophe. The sky hasn’t fallen,” said Tom Gerace, co-founder of SupportEquality.org, a website that funnels contributions to the pro-gay candidates involved in the toughest races.

Kris Mineau, head of the anti-same-sex marriage Massachusetts Family Institute, says the issue isn’t dead.

“Everybody’s trying to be politically correct on both sides, because it’s a third rail and they’d rather not touch it,” she said. “But the voters are concerned about it. It’s not going away.”

Political analysts argue that same-sex marriage has slipped from the spotlight because most candidates – regardless of their views – realize it’s simply not a winning issue in a deeply divided state.

“I think that it’s a two-edged sword and candidates can’t touch it without getting sliced by one side of the blade,” said Jeffrey Berry, a political science professor at Tufts University. “Whatever side they’re on, there are voters who are passionately opposed to that view.”

This close split was seen during the legislative debate this year, when the amendment won its first round of approval 105-92 (with three lawmakers absent). This means that gay advocates would have to switch at least five votes in the Legislature to keep the margin below the 101-vote mark necessary for passage.

Same-sex marriage advocates believe they will have won if they are able to show that a vote against the amendment did not lead to widespread retaliation at the polls.