Former GOP Rep. Comes Out In Support Of Gay Marriage

The Baltimore Sun:

A freedom rider, a former Republican congressman and the state's chief legal officer banded together today to testify in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage in Maryland -- evidence that proponents say shows the issue is gaining momentum.

Read the whole story: The Baltimore Sun

Comments

[newshawk14]

I am impressed with the stand these three individuals have taken, I think it's only a matter of time
before the religious right is ignored, and people began to realize that they are actually endorsing
monogamous commitment.

[truthartbeauty]

It helps when it is someone in your family or someone you know real well. Lots of straight couples know gay people or gay couples and understand fairness pretty well. The trouble comes from the weakest and the stupidest, the religious fanatics who don't know what they are talking about,that stop progress on many positive things, that foment unneccessary prejudice, that cause war... to them I just say 'grow up'. how pathetic to try to deny MY rights based on YOUR morality. I have had about a butt full of most peoples morality. It is encouraging when someone shows real courage and compassion instead of their normal weakness and holier than everyone judgement.

[rikkirighteous]

Supporting gay marriage is a statement of morality. Or lack of.

[smithshaw08]

Well ya know the tide is turning when a member of the GOP supports gay marriage. I'm hopeful that marriage equality continues to make progress.

[helonias]

But when will the bible thumpers condemn adultery

Luke 16:18
Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (So Says Jesus)

Lev 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with [another] man's wife, [even he] that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

[Bitsko]

And meanwhile they are the ones who do it the most!

[rikkirighteous]

In political circles we call that Changing the Subject.

As a bible thumper I will come out against adultery, divorce, and homosexuality.

Now celebrate your victory.

[MadCroation]

There not against anything they do, just everything other people do different than they do. After all they are perfect and anything done different would have to be wrong. What a bunch of losers

[LeeCalif]

Of course, republicans are ahead of the curve over Obama on same-gender marriage.

[MathIsTruth]

Lincoln was not an abolitionist when he was first president, even though he certainly opposed slavery. But an abolitionist would never have been elected president in 1860. It was politically impossible.

Similarly, Obama does not fight for same-sex marriage even though it's pretty clear that he really does support it. But it was impossible to even be nominated for the presidency in 2008 unless you opposed it. Sad, but true.

[rikkirighteous]

Lincoln opposed gay marriage.

[Bitsko]

Boy, that is a heck of a stretch.

[cyclobenzaprine9]

This guy is very brave.

[AprilPA]

Maybe Wayne would consider changing his party affiliation from Republican. He may have to anyways if he doesn't apologize to King Rush about what he said about gay marriage.

[Topsailsman]

Here is what the Chicago Tribune wrote about Gilchrist:
Wayne T. Gilchrest is a former representative of Maryland's 1st Congressional District. A former social studies teacher and decorated platoon leader in the U.S. Marine Corps, the moderate Republican lost his nine-term congressional seat in 2008 after drawing heavy criticism for his vote in favor of a timed withdrawal in Iraq. After being defeated in his party's primary by state Sen. Andy Harris, Gilchrest supported the opposing party's candidate for his district, Democrat Frank M. Kratovil Jr., in the 2008 general Congressional election.

Republicans, the party of ethnic and ideological cleansing.

[WinterParkMom]

Gay rights should be a Federal Issue, and gay marriage should be allowed everywhere. How many gay couples vs straight are caught cheating, with prostitutes, domestic violence, etc.

No man be it politician or priest has the right to tell another man or woman who they are allowed to marry, cohabit with or adopt children with. We should view gay rights as inalienable rights.

GOPers need to realize that this country has changed from a puritan, witch hunting society to one of tolerance. Why do these guys persist in persecution when there are so many better things they can do for the people with the little power in their hands?

[wdw505]

do not confuse tolerance with acceptance­....

Tolerance does not mean acceptance. Tolerance is the act of putting up with somebody irritating or otherwise unpleasant. Acceptance is the willingness to accept somebody as a member of a group or Social circle. Just because I Tolerate you does not mean I will have you over for dinner.

So my opinion picking on something a person can not change is wrong. Gayness is indeed a decision that a person acts on or not. I don’t accept gay people in to my world. I do tolerate them but I do not have to accept them into my social groups, my house or expose my kids to them and their aberrant behaviors. Businesses that actively support gay marriages and that lifestyle I do not and will not support them with my dollars.

[DCdweller]

I don't think you have to worry about any gay man or woman coming anywhere near your house. We tend to find ignorant hate intolerable. Hopefully, your kids grow up and tell you how ignorant you've been over this issue and I assume others... then maybe they will force you to grow. I sure hope none of your children are gay because it really stinks to be in a household as a gay child and have ignorant hateful parents. Best of luck with everything, people that send out cosmic bad vibes like you tend to get those vibes returned to them by the universe..­..

[4akinderworld]

So, if you're in a car accident and the EMT who comes to perform life-saving CPR on you is gay, you ask for someone who is straight, since pumping on your chest and breathing into your lungs is DEFINITELY in your world.

[Topsailsman]

wdw write "Gayness is indeed a decision that a person acts on or not".

There is no proof of that. None. As our ability to understand human physiology continues to improve, my opinion is that science will prove it is biologically driven.

See, I put "my opinion". I'm fact based, that's why I'm a liberal.

[oldguru]

May you be blessed with a gay child.

[gloriousbeing]

Boy am I glad I don't know you!

[PlaceboStudman]

Unfortunately, the issue is somewhat more complicated than that. Until Congress makes a move to overturn the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, Republicans will always have that as a means to legitimize their bigoted discriminatory policies. And to overturn DOMA, those of us who support gay marriage have to do a better job of debunking the religious-­fanatical-­right myth that Jesus Christ said anything against homosexuality, let alone gay marriage.

The issue remains in the hands of Radical Conservative Evangelicals (and no not all Evangelicals are radical conservatives) who insist on using the oxymoronic propoganda of Leviticus in The Old Testament, aka The Torah. Of course the irony of that is that The Torah/Old Testament is actually Jewish Law, which is the exact thing that Jesus Christ rallied against to allow his followers to become Christians and not Jews. So, if these people wish to continue using Leviticus to denounce homosexuality, fine, but call it what it is, Judaism, not Christianity

When we get past that roadblock, more people will see the light and support the true words of Jesus Christ, who would have supported gay marriage if he and his followers had the advantages of medicine and technology that we have today that has shown that homosexuality is not a choice, but is a psycho-phy­siological condition of the spirit

[wdw505]

well good thing i'm not religious

[cyclobenzaprine9]

Wonderful post! Thank you!

[SteveDenver]

So far nobody has mentioned GOD and THE CHILDREN.

Personally, if I were to pass judgment on marriage at all, gender would not be a consideration.
I would begin with a background check: criminal, genetic, employment, finances. Then a temperament test. Next would be a communication, comprehension and verbal expression examination.

I continually hear about the "sanctity of marriage." If this term was taken seriously and Biblically, only angels could marry. Maybe that's what we really need: instead of defending marriage against homosexuals, marriage should be protected from hypocrisy. If that was the case, only angels could marry.

[Joan Jacobs]

Since the article says that the Republicans want to know what MD voters think: As a married (almost 40 years now) heterosexual voter from MD, I think it starts with what you believe the purpose of marriage is. If you believe that marriage is for procreation and advancement of the species then, obviously, same-sex marriage is wrong. But, if you believe, as I do, that marriage is a commitment made between two people who want to share their lives - with all the good and bad that comes with that - then a marriage between people of the same gender is no different from a heterosexual marriage, and if provides the rights that heterosexual couples enjoy legally. I'd say - go ahead and pass the measure. Not only does the government need to stay out of our bedrooms, so do the voters.

[SteveDenver]

Thank you very much, Joan.

[wdw505]

no one is monitoring your bedroom...­.....civil unions are fine......­.marriage no

[DCdweller]

And you get to decide this why? I think stupid people should be shipped out of the country but that doesn't mean it should actually happen.

[AZ AF VET]

are you sure or is that an opinion?

[oldguru]

Well then, we had better begin changing all of the laws that define the rights of "marriage" to read "civil union" . The word "marriage" has legal implications. If you redefine that, then the discrimination is moot. There are plenty of churches who are perfectly fine with performing a ,marriage ceremony for any two people who want to make a religious lifetime commitment. Anyone who wants to practice bigotry can just stay in the churches that condone that.

[PlaceboStudman]

Unfortunately, Rabid Right Wing Evangelical Christians have abducted marriage to be the only legitimate reason for procreation, hence the Family Values Coalition. But, historically, marriage has been a legal contract that has had more to do with property rights than emotion or spirituality. Hence the antiquted concept of the Dowry and arranged marriage that is still practiced in some countries

[Topsailsman]

What is so interesting is that everyone has a different idea of what "marriage" is. .

Why can't we just get government out of "marriage"? Just go all civil unions for the state and let people do whatever they want for their "marriage". People can put whatever romantic or religious baggage they want to put on their own, just don't drag the state into it. Mormons "marry" for all eternity. Catholics refuse to recognize "marriages" from other denominations. You can get "married" by an Elvis impersonator while in a nudist colony. Sanctify however you like, choose whose "marriage" is real or not, just leave the state out of it.

There will never be agreement on what constitutes "marriage". So get it out of legal code and replace it with civil union, simply an agreement to abide by an established legal proceeding in event of deciding you don't want to be in the contract any more.

[wdw505]

however i will not pay for health care coverage on a gay marriage..­.......i don't feel the need to pay for that lifestyle in anyway....­..

[AZ AF VET]

Joan
As a heterosexual male that has been married for forty years I couldn't agree more with you. People who have such a aversion to Gay marriage can't get past the mechanics of the sexual act. Marriage is a whole lot more than sex.

[carolinecantoo]

That's not what my husband says.

[BartLA]

And now the GOP is all over Steele for coming out pro-choice for women. They want him to quit because of his view. This is what's wrong with the majority of the Republican party. They're stuck on abortion and gay rights. I applaud those Republicans who can call themselves Republicans but choose differently on these issues.

[wdw505]

i am a republican and would be pro-choice if the parental interference and 3rd trimester abortions were taken off the table.....­.

[amistad]

Who cares what you think.

[gloriousbeing]

Are you a woman? Do you have a uterus? If not, how would you feel if the government wanted to control what you could and could not do with your own body?

[oldguru]

Ya know, the whole thing about third trimester abortions is a red herring made up by the nutters to make people think that it is done every day, and is done on the choice of the woman. That is another lie. The ONLY reason that third trimester abortions are done is if the life of the mother is at risk, or if the fetus is dead or is not viable. That happens. there are fetuses that never develop enough brain to sustain life, and will die within hours or minutes of birth. Fetuses die in utero for various reasons. To make this illegal is stupid and callous. No one can or will be aborted of a third trimester fetus that is healthy and viable.

[PlaceboStudman]

Evangelical Christian Republicans have been obsessed with The Bible and their modern day interpretation and abduction of millenia old doctrine of The Bible, which is what leads them to have such strong opinions (however wrong) about abortion and homosexuality, and yet have no real logical answers for the other aspects of government function such as the economy or war

[taste-the-rainbow]

Hes very brave to go against the majorty of his party's stance on gay marriage. Next time say it when you have some actual power and not when you are an "Former" congressman.

[wdw505]

wow, English as a second language must be difficult for you

[amistad]

Says the ignorant poster...

[Topsailsman]

Please point out the grammatical errors, I found it better than many and not worthy of a snarky comment.

[SkippyTrippyHippie]

Oh, please. You have no right to mock rainbow's posts when most of your own barely make any sense.

[gloriousbeing]

Well, now, really, are you going to come down on the guy because he is a "former" congressman? At least he had the balls to come out in public and say that he IS a member of the Republican't party and he IS in favor of gay marriage. Don't make it a "damned if he does and damned if he doesn't argument". You sound incredibly Republican't when you do that.

[I once had a Crysknife]

First of all it's a states rights issue and there is nothing conservative about constitutional amendments banning anything about private matters.

[frantaylor]

Since when can any US government entity deny someone he right to enter a contract based on their sex? Doesn't the Constitution say exactly the opposite?

[Maygressive]

Careful Republicans, if more of you start thinking for yourself, your party might not be totally irrelavant by 2010....

[osusana]

DING DING DING!!!!!!!! We have a winner! I believe you have put your finger squarely on the issue. The Republicans are the party of the DittoHeads­...they don't know what they think until Rush tells them.