Maryland Marriage Equality Bill Expected To See Quick Action In State Senate; House Support Still In Question

WASHINGTON -- Expect Maryland senators to approve marriage equality legislation in a hurry. As The Washington Post's John Wagner reported Thursday, Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert County) "wants his chamber to act quickly on a same-sex marriage bill" during the 90-day legislative session, which began this week.

Miller, however, reiterated his opposition to gay marriage during a radio interview this week, calling it "an attack on traditional families."

But the Senate president said he would not obstruct the measure and predicted it would pass.

In 2011, the bill passed the Senate on a 25-21 vote, but failed to get approval in the House when it was sent back to committee.

Will the House repeat what happened last year?

Baltimore magazine revisited the course of action that stymied the bill. In an interview with openly gay Del. Heather Mizeur (D-Montgomery County), the magazine noted how the once strong Democratic coalition that had been expected to pass the bill without too much heavy lifting, started to splinter: "Each passing Sunday, many local pastors spent entire services devoted to preaching against marriage equality and any politician willing to support it, and, each week, we'd get a couple people who lost their courage," she told the magazine.

Pressure from the religious community to reject the measure has remained, but this year, Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) has been a more active player to ensure the bill gets passed. Supporters of the bill are better organized, too.

But as the Washington Blade points out, House Speaker Michael Busch (D-Anne Arundel County) has said about 10 members of his chamber still need to be persuaded.

Also on HuffPost:

Gov. Martin O'Malley Speaks About His Support For Marriage Equality

Comments

[David Hundley]

10:47 AM on 01/15/2012

I am going to tell you what is breaking up the traditional American Family, And it doesn't have anything to do the Religion. It is these young girls that are having multiple babies, from different fathers and living on the public doles. This is whats tearing children apart. A life without the love of both parents and a life of poverty. The children can't help what the mother is doing to destroy her life, but, the children shouldn't have to suffer because of ignorance.

[lovingthismoment50]

11:21 PM on 01/13/2012

Wonderful. 2012 has had a great start for marriage equality.

Washington, New Jersey, Maryland, and Illinois are all talking about it.

Keep 'em coming! The more states that legalize marriage equality, the harder it will be for DOMA to stick around, and the more people will realize that this really is an inevitable thing. There is no stopping it.

[Terence Duke]

11:39 PM on 01/13/2012

i wish prop 8 case would be fast tracked because none of this would be necessary as that case which has already won will make it legal in all 50 states. and thanks and hats off the the brilliant prop 8 attorney Ted Olsen, A Republican that has my total respect.

[Godweiser]

02:10 PM on 01/14/2012

If it goes to referendum, this Maryland voter will make sure to vote for it. But hopefully it'll just pass. Even if something does go wrong, you're right. It's inevitable. And that probably is what sticks in the craw of most of these anti's anyway; they know that there is no lobbying firm willing to take up their side of it, because the lobbying firms all realize the futility of the cause and the bad publicity it brings them, which adversely impacts their bottom line in relationships with other businesses and in their attempts to hire top talent.

[WheelsOnFire]

10:18 PM on 01/13/2012

How sad it is that some Americans fall for the very tired and quite misleading talking point that gay marriage is "an attack on traditional families".

How could it be?

In fact, when asked about that during the Prop 8 trial -- about how gay marriage would affect hetero marriage, the anti-gay-marriage attorney looked at the judge and said, "I don't know. Your honor, my answer is I don't know."

And he was the attorney bringing a case to prohibit gay marriage!

That they must resort to such extremist language, with no backing whatsoever, is a clear indication of how weak their opposition to gay marriage is.

[EmmaDarian]

10:27 PM on 01/13/2012

Great points.

And they threw everything they had at defending Prop 8. All that money, all their resources and they made the case that marriage equality hurts no one and that it's good for the children of same-sex couples (as their expert testified).

[Terence Duke]

11:42 PM on 01/13/2012

which is why they are fighting tooth and nail to stop it from coming out. It will eventually come out, Along with the names, by court order that NOM is hiding on their "grass roots" organization. i.e. the catholic church. taxes recently revealed show 5 major donors that fund majority of their charade. and the 250,000 salaries of their evil leaders.

[WheelsOnFire]

11:19 AM on 01/16/2012

I have the list of catholic and other churches that used the money they received tax free and used to support the anti-gay Prop 8 campaign. California law requires that all who make monetary contributions to political campaigns must be made public. Thus, despite their efforts to keep their bigotry hidden, this churches have been exposed for the bigots they are. I cannot post the full list here -- it is too long -- but I have posted excerpts from time to time.

[Dana Chilton]

09:41 PM on 01/13/2012

It bodes well for a vote to happen later in the session rather than sooner. The further toward the end, the less time petitioners have to collect signatures to put the civil rights of their neighbors on the November ballot.

[Godweiser]

10:26 PM on 01/13/2012

If it goes to ballot, this Marylander will vote in favor. I doubt I'm alone. It seems like the antis on this board are from out of state anyway. God knows which states, though I have a good idea which ones.

[Terence Duke]

11:43 PM on 01/13/2012

which is totally against the founding fathers. you know those guys these people say at tea party rallies we need to return to.

[laundrybrick]

09:18 PM on 01/13/2012

This shouldn't even be up for vote. if 2 consenting adults want to get married they should be able to go get married.

[Contact1972]

09:56 PM on 01/13/2012

Yup!

[Rooster Coburn]

10:12 PM on 01/13/2012

Why limit it to only two? Plural marriage goes back to before the Old Testament.

[Erin84]

11:09 PM on 01/13/2012

Because the 1300+ laws, guidelines, right etc associated with legal marriage are written and apply to one spouse per person. Gay marriage doesn't require changing all of that. Plural marriage does.

[Terence Duke]

12:29 AM on 01/14/2012

this is why

http://www.buzzfeed.com/donnad/how-gay-rights-is-nothing-like-legalizing-beastali

[Bob Kellerman]

07:40 PM on 01/13/2012

"Each passing Sunday, many local pastors spent entire services devoted to preaching against marriage equality and any politician willing to support it "

YEP -- WAR, DEBT, DRINKING/DRUGS, UNEMPLOYMENT, DIVORCE, PHYSICAL AND SEXUAL ABUSE, ADULTERY, TEEN PREGNANCY, WALL STREET, OVERCROWDED PRISONS, CRIPPLED AND MAIMED VETERANS, ANIMAL CRUELTY......

-------- ALL OF THOSE ARE HANDLED, NO LONGER A PROBLEM

But Tom wanting to marry the person he has loved for 20 years, tired of being the only sibling who is not in a legal marriage or Mary and Louise, college sweethearts wanting to be brides

----- IF WE GIVE IN, THE GAYS WILL RUIN ALL OUR FAMILIES

REALLY?

REALLY?

[anon004]

08:13 PM on 01/13/2012

It's unfathomable to me what gets these religious people SO upset. You don't like marriage equality? Don't marry GLBT people in your church. End of discussion.

[Terence Duke]

12:53 AM on 01/14/2012

A older psychiatrist named RD LAING talked about the mental state known as mapping:

Mapping: A person "maps" some accepted social definition of reality onto his or her experience and then acts as if that map reflects his or her experience. Or else feels terribly oppressed and unseen, if the personal experience is very different from the "mapped" pseudo-experience.

"Delusional structures involve a severe mismatch in mapping. In very disturbed people, one finds what may be regarded as delusional structures, still recognizably related to family situations. The reprojection of the 'family' is not simply a matter of projecting an 'internal' object onto an external person. It is superimposition of one set of relations onto another: the two sets may match more or less. Only if they mismatch sufficiently in the eyes of others, is the operation regarded as psychotic. That is, the operation is not regarded as psychotic per se."

[Terence Duke]

12:54 AM on 01/14/2012

part 2

Induction: Projection is done by one person as his own experience of the other. Induction is done by one person to the other's experience. One does not tell him what to be, but tells him what he is. Such attributions, in context, are many times more powerful than orders (or other forms of coercion or persuasion.)" One is told one is good, bad, evil, pretty, sexy, etc.

"When attributions have the function of instructions or injunctions, this function may be denied, giving rise to one type of mystification, akin to. . . hypnotic suggestion."

One may tell someone to feel something and not to remember he has been told. Simply tell him he feels it. Better still, tell a third party, in front of him, that he feels it."

kinda sums up most religious and tea party types who are just what they are told it is or they are without looking into the facts

[Terence Duke]

11:54 PM on 01/13/2012

Head of the IRS recently gave a speech about the topic of churches who are exempt (because a long time ago their purpose was for the public good not some of the publics bigotry) here is an excerpt of his speech:

"The Johnson amendment is found within the well-known section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. In its present form, the law states that charities, including churches, are not allowed to “participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements) any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.”

Freedom of speech and religious liberty are essential elements of our democracy. But the Supreme Court has in essence held that tax exemption is a privilege, not a right, stating, “Congress has not violated [an organization’s] First Amendment rights by declining to subsidize its First Amendment activities."

We opened reviews of 132 churches. These resulted from specific referrals and covered, obviously, only small portion of the tax-exempt community. 22 of these cases were closed without contacting the taxpayer.

Nearly three-quarters of the 82 examinations have substantiated that the charities or churches engaged in prohibited activity. Most of the prohibited activity was egregious enough to warrant the IRS proposing the revocation of the organizations’ tax-exempt status.

read entire speech here: http://www.irs.gov/irs/article/0,,id=154788,00.html

[Godweiser]

07:06 PM on 01/13/2012

I'm watching who votes how, and if they don't vote the way I like, I'll make sure to vote against them if they're my delegate or Senator.

[Terence Duke]

11:59 PM on 01/13/2012

what does that mean.? if they don't strip constitutional rights away from your neighbors and fellow citizens that cause no harm to you other than gosh darn it i just don't like it you will vote against them? something that won't matter anyway with the prop 8 case already won, working its way up to SCOTUS. A case brought by the brilliant REPUBLICAN attorney Ted Olsen who has brought such a rock solid case that even Thomas and Scalia will have hard time dissenting from. i have read it. every word. Id build a house on it it is so solid.

[Godweiser]

12:03 AM on 01/14/2012

I think you misread. I intend to vote against any delegate or senator in my district that stands against equal rights.

[Terence Duke]

12:01 AM on 01/14/2012

i just read one of your other comments and realize you are on the pro marriage for all side. so apologies if my other comment comes off as attacking you. It had sounded like something that NOM would say no offense :)

[Steve Brewer II]

06:56 PM on 01/13/2012

I seriously hope that the Gay Marriage bill passes in Maryland. I hope we will be able to win equality in more states.

As for those who do not like Gay Marriage don't marry someone with the same gender as you then. Unless you have gotten into an awkward situation where someone of the same sex as you proposed and you didn't say no and led them on so now they think you are going to marry them if has nothing to do with you.

I am sorry if it upsets you because your religious views oppose it, but too bad. We live in a country where Church and State were separated. If you do not want gays and lesbians to marry that is fine, then no one should be able to marry. That will make things equal which is what this country was built on, equality.

[Godweiser]

07:13 PM on 01/13/2012

I do not recall there being a 'bible test' that a law has to pass, either in the United States Constitution or here in Maryland. And this is going to pass in the next ten to fifteen years no matter how much stalling happens now; as it stands, the anti's can't even get themselves a lobbyist in Annapolis -- no one wants to touch this issue -- and I think that speaks volumes for how likely passage is in Maryland.

[WheelsOnFire]

10:20 PM on 01/13/2012

Brilliantly said.

Fanned & Faved.

[okrawimfry]

05:01 PM on 01/13/2012

People can do whatever they like, since it typically doesn't affect me......but this is just as the bible said it would be. And those of you who will hate on this comment....just remember, you are not accountable to me, I would still treat any person with the same human dignity. I don't care if you marry your dog, but I do believe in the bible, and I do believe what it says is / will come to pass.

[Steve Brewer II]

06:45 PM on 01/13/2012

The Bible also says shellfish is an abomination, you can stone your wife and sell your daughter into slavery, here let me let this video explain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_hyT7_Bx9o

[okrawimfry]

07:03 PM on 01/13/2012

You distort what you don't understand. It is easy to use scriptures like a buffet to select whatever you want to promote your cause. Scriptures must be taken as a whole and kept in theme with all books of the Bible. Understanding of older cultures and practices must also be considered.

[ballancedintellectual]

10:58 PM on 01/13/2012

All laws that no longer apply. Check out the New Covenant

[Raniee]

07:04 PM on 01/13/2012

Ok, but I hope you understand the fact that marriage equality will be the law of the land in the USA in 10-15 years.

[okrawimfry]

07:14 PM on 01/13/2012

Yes, I fully expect that. Like I mentioned in my original post, these things are all foretold so it's no surprise.

[lovingthismoment50]

11:24 PM on 01/13/2012

That's probably the very latest.

[BraveNewWorld1989]

04:17 PM on 01/13/2012

I am doubtful that it will pass and I am a bit confused as to why the Democrats are pushing it so hard this year. First, it won't pass not because of the "rednecks" that an earlier poster referred to in the more rural parts of the state, but instead because of the influential voice of the African-American communities in the cities. If you look at what happened last year, everyone was sure it was going to pass until the African-American churches were mobilized. I know that isn't popular to say, which is why it isn't mentioned in this article, but it was a huge part of NOM and other organizations' strategy. (Similar to Pro 8 actually, although that is also not PC to talk about.)

Second, it looks like the Dream Act will be on the November ballot. While gay marriage is generally supported in the state, the Dream Act looks like it will not pass by a comfortable margin. Granted, things could change, but also like Prop 8 if the MD Legislature passes then and their opponents are successful in putting it on the ballot, we could see a higher number of those opposed to the Dream Act come out to vote and they also appear to oppose gay marriage as well. The drive for signatures to put the Dream Act on the ballot last year was extremely efficient and effective, so I have no doubt that the same mechanisms will be in place again.

[Rooster Coburn]

04:57 PM on 01/13/2012

Ladies, you know that your marriage may be in for a rocky ride when your new hubby of all of 10 seconds turns and kisses the officiating minister, priest, rabbi or mullah instead of you. Just sayin'.

[Godweiser]

07:15 PM on 01/13/2012

The black community is having its doubts right now; people like Julian Bond have written in favor of it and have made the case strongly. At the very least, there's a dialogue going on, so I wouldn't try to predict which way the black community is going to vote until the votes are counted.

[Bob Kellerman]

07:56 PM on 01/13/2012

Someone needs to suggest to the Black ministers that it is a sin to look down on others, and is never justified by one's having been looked down on himself

[detroitblkmale30]

10:04 PM on 01/13/2012

Well Julian Bond is on the left politically. The AA churches in MD, most of them lean right socially which is why they were able to mobilize against it last time and pressure the bill's demise.

[GlennInVenice]

03:35 PM on 01/13/2012

Equal rights threaten traditional bigotry.

[LadyTeeb]

02:35 PM on 01/13/2012

I live in Maryland, and I hope and pray that gay marriage will be legal in this state. It's absolutely true that churches preach on the measure the day before the vote. At my former church, the church lawyer literally held a Saturday conference about how same-sex marriage would affect the local church. I have sat in Bible studies (after DC marriage law was passed) in a room full of women who acted as though a close relative had died. While there, I really listened to their arguments. They were afraid of losing tax-exempt status if they refuse to perform gay weddings (which, as we all know, is well within their rights to do so, even for straight couples). The remaining arguments were all made up in their heads and blatantly homophobic and illogical ("we are being persecuted;" "this is a sign of the end-times," etc.)

What I don't think a lot of people realize is that Maryland is a very religious state--especially in Prince George's County. It's not as crazy as the Bible belt, but it's still extremely religious. The main difference (and the reason why it's so heavily democratic) is because of the large black population. So, since it's such a religious state, I can see how various House representatives falter when it comes to this decision. When your religious leader tells you that voting for gay marriage is sinful and that God will punish you, then you will falter--if you listen.

[Rooster Coburn]

03:03 PM on 01/13/2012

Will "Marriage Equality" be followed by "Marriage Plurality" and then by "Zooapherous Marriage" do you suppose?

[Jason N]

03:10 PM on 01/13/2012

Stop with the slippery slope, you've been told numerous times on this thread why plural marriage and bestiality are RATIONALLY not allowed by the govt.

[chesscub]

03:17 PM on 01/13/2012

Are you a rooster or a parrot? You seem to be repeating the same things over and over and over.

[GypsyRobin]

03:20 PM on 01/13/2012

No one's "religious leader" accompanys them into the Voting Booth.

They can dictate all they want to their sheeples but none of those religious leaders know who votes for whom.

[Zippy1169]

04:51 PM on 01/13/2012

Unfortunately, pastors, preachers, ministers, and priests have more influence than you think. Remember that many religions build them selves on easing the pain of their flock. It is very easy to create unease, uncertainty and fear within a congregation. This will not work on all but it will work on many. It's a simple sad truth.

Please note I did not say all churches do this but many do.

[floresfamily9]

02:30 PM on 01/13/2012

Marriage has evolved. It was about bringing security to families, i.e. land and/or money. Maybe even protection. It was not about love then. That changed in our culture at least. But now I think divorce is more a threat then gay marriage. "For better or worse" now means until you get on my nerves. I really don't see how gays being married would do more harm to the institution of marriage than heterosexuals have already.

[bluntobject]

02:22 PM on 01/13/2012

A troublesome Blue Dog, or reasonable example for all legislators on how to "not obstruct" a legislative agenda? Obstructing the people's work is not OK simply because you and a minority of like minded individuals in the same position don't like an issue personally. Everyone serving in Congress serves the American people, and that means all of us, not just the religious bigots. The Senate and Congressional Republicans should take lessons from this man.

[cbsguards]

02:10 PM on 01/13/2012

The Rep leadership continues to say they want lesser Goverment and then fight for Goverment to control social issues when are the Rep citizens going to get it they only care about one thing Power. The country has so many real isues is same sex marriage and abortion realy how we should spend our Goverment resources decisions that should be made in our kitchens not the Congress

[morosemoose]

02:35 PM on 01/13/2012

It is much less risky then trying to create jobs, redo the tax code, make logical spending cuts, or deal with disintigrating infrastructure. those issues require thought, work, and might irritate someone in your base or, god forbid, a donor. Anti-gay and anti-abortion involve no risk or thought and pacifies the voter base and donors, which is all that matters to ay politician.

[kathy smelser]

02:47 PM on 01/13/2012

they may want a smaller Goverment but they also want more rules to control the what we eat /breath / sleep / go to school/ have kids / walk and talk / drive / what music to listen to what tv to watch / books to read / sweater vest to wear / and which god to pray to on what days ,.......if i missed anything please feel free to add to the list