He goes on to say “we are going to stop gay marriage in it’s tracks.”
Maryland: No Marriage Equality this year
It looks like there won’t be marriage equality in Maryland this year.
From The Washington Post: The Maryland House of Delegates has voted to effectively kill for this year a bill that would have allowed same-sex marriage in Maryland.
The House approved on voice vote a motion to send the bill back to the Judiciary Committee, an acknowledgment by supporters that it did not have sufficient votes to pass on the floor.
The bill cleared the Senate two weeks ago on a 25-to-21 vote, and Gov. Martin O’Malley had pledged to sign it.
Advocates for the bill had hoped Maryland would join five other states and the District in allowing same-sex marriages. The bill had significant momentum coming out of the Senate but ran into resistance in the Democatic-led House from African American lawmakers from Prince George’s County, who cited religious opposition in their districts, and conservative Democrats in Southern Maryland and the Baltimore suburbs.
Reports say the vote looked to be within one or two votes shy of passing.
It’s unclear what happens now, but it seems the issue could be dead for the year.
UGH!
Possible amendment to Maryland Marriage Equality Bill
Evidence of just how close the votes look to be on the marriage equality bill in Maryland, leaders in the House of Delegates are considering a “friendly” amendment to the bill that would broaden the intended protections for churches and religious organizations.
Until now, House leaders have sought to resist amendments as that would require sending the bill back to the state Senate. With no amendments, the bill can go directly to the governor’s desk for signing.
From the Washington Post: The amendment, sought by Del. John A. Olszewski Jr., would tweak language intended to provide protections to religious organizations whose beliefs are not compatible with same-sex marriage.
As it stands, the bill says that religious organizations that oppose same-sex marriage are not required to engage in a range of activities related to “the promotion of marriage, through religious programs, counseling, educational courses, summer camps, and retreats, in violation of the entity’s religious beliefs.”
Olszewski’s amendment would cut the specific examples contained in the provision, in hopes of broadening the intended protections.
Maryland House defeats 4 anti-gay amendments to Civil Marriage Bill
From JoeMyGod: After voting down four hostile GOP amendments, the Maryland House of Delegates has just voted to advance its marriage equality bill to a third (and possibly final) reading tomorrow. Here are the failed poison pills offered by the enemies of equality:
Amendment 1: “This Act may not be construed to require an entity to provide adoption, foster care, or social services if providing the services would violate the entity’s religious beliefs.”
Amendment 2: “Providing that, in a public school that offers instruction involving materials that promote same-sex marriage, a public school teacher may not be required to teach the materials and a parent shall be given an opportunity to have the parent’s child excused from the instruction under certain circumstances.”
Amendment 3: “Change title of Act to ‘Same-Sex Marriage Act’.”
Amendment 4: “To require a public referendum on same-same marriage.”
The final vote could come as soon as Thursday.
(via email by openly gay Delegate Luke Clippinger)
Marriage equality and the hyperbole that opposes it
I am constantly amazed during the discussions and arguments against marriage equality that the “meaning” of the word “marriage” always seems to be the catalyst for continued discrimination against the LGBT community in the US. The idea that important rights and privileges that come from a civil license issued by a civil government gets pushed aside by the proponents of LGBT discrimination. That somehow the legal rights of hospital visitation, inheritance, etc, are not at the heart of what LGBT families want out of all of this.
As the debate for marriage equality begins in the Maryland House of Delegates this week, several delegates have been assailed by constituents on behalf of religious beliefs with the always constant screed of “marriage has always been between a man and a woman – the Bible says so.”
Keisha Huggins of Maryland said gay people worship at First Baptist but said her pastor, John K. Jenkins Sr., has made it clear to his congregation that same-sex marriage does not line up with Bible scripture.
“As a Christian we have love for everyone, but we’re following the word of the Lord that a man and woman should be together,” Huggins said.
I have nothing against the Bible. There are some great ideas are in there. But tradition is never a solid justification for discrimination. And in this country, we have freedom of religion. You do not have to be christian, muslim or jewish if you don’t want to be. You can be an atheist or agnostic and still be a law abiding American. Marriage – technically speaking – is a civil contract based on a civil license from the government. Not a church. Churches do not issue marriage licenses. Nor do they create or enforce tax benefits or hospital visitation rights.
There is a curious ongoing idea that, somehow, same-sex marriage rights are NOT a civil rights issue. This particular argument often comes from the African-American community, as if the phrase “civil rights” can only be used in terms of the fight for equality in their community. But “civil rights” applies to any group who is looking to have the same rights as everyone – whether that group is made up of women, latinos, blacks, or the LGBT community. Civil rights are about equality for all. Not just one community. It’s not as though gays & lesbians are co-opting something and thereby demeaning it’s language in reference to anyone else.
Juan McCoy, who lives with his partner, Chris Williams, and their five children in Maryland, said it is frustrating to listen to politicians whose rights are not being affected like his are. His senator, C. Anthony Muse, voted against the bill in the state senate. “It’s a throwback, and that’s what’s disappointing to me about many of the delegates in the House that continue to accept this type of discrimination. To put obstacles in the way of other groups to me is just baffling.”
Maryland House Majority leader Kumar Barve said “It’s going to be close but I think that a majority of the House feels that this is a civil rights issue and it’s a matter of giving the same rights and privileges and responsibility to loving, same sex couples that married people like me have,” Barve said.
Yet, there are some, even within Barve’s party, who disagree.
“I will argue for the position that civil rights were not the same, our civil rights, the movement was not the same,” Democratic delegate Emmett Burns, Jr., who is African-American, told Reuters. “Those who juxtapose the two are gravely mistaken.”
Opposition from the far right likes to say that same-sex marriage is a cause of the disintegration of heterosexual marriage – as if the opportunity for two men to get married would somehow lure straight men from their heterosexual marriages. I’ve personally never met a truly straight man who decided “hey, I can get gay-married now. Screw this straight stuff – let’s go Bob!” It’s just not happening.
Colbert King, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for the Washington Post wrote last week: “It’s still beyond me how gay marriage affects the already married or heterosexuals who want to get married.”
“I understand even less, if that’s possible, the concentration of conservative black pastors on gay marriage when the real and present danger is the decline of marriage among African Americans — an ominous trend that has nothing to do with the desire of two people of the same sex to marry. Gay, lesbian and transgender people and their desire to get married have nothing to do with the decline of marriage and family in the African American community.”
“What ails us comes from within and from societal conditions unrelated to same-sex marriage. If anyone should know that, it’s the black preacher.”
I continue to hope that in Maryland, and eventually across the nation, people will focus on the civil rights – yes, civil rights – component of this debate and not the finger-pointing, religious bias that keeps the discussion from the important issue at hand. And that’s equality for all.
Maryland: Marriage Equality passes Committee vote
From Metro Weekly: Maryland’s House Judiciary Committee voted today 12-10 in favor of the passage of Senate Bill 116.
The bill now moves on to the House of Delegates for a floor vote. That vote is expected in the coming week. SB-116 passed through the Senate on Feb. 24, with a 25-21 vote.
The vote came after several amendments were discussed on March 4, including one by Del. Neil Parrott (R-Washington County) to allow grandmothers to marry their grandsons. That amendment was withdrawn.
If signed into law, the legislation would grant same-sex couples in the state legal marriage recognition, while also protecting the rights of religious institutions to handle issues of marriage however they see fit.
Opponents have threatened to take the issue to take the marriage legislation to the ballot box. According to Maryland’s State Board of Elections, opponents of the marriage bill can start collecting signatures for a statewide referendum immediately after the passage of the bill in the House of Delegates, before Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) signs the bill.
A total of 55,736 signatures are required on the petition and must be submitted to Secretary of State John P. McDonough (D) by June 30. One third of those signatures are due on May 31.
Maryland: House Delegate Sam Arora flip-flopping back and forth on Civil Marriage bill
Freshman Maryland Delegate Sam Arora campaigned on a platform of marriage equality in Maryland. He specifically went after and got the support of Progressive Maryland and of Equality Maryland. He raised lots of money based on his specifically stated support of marriage equality for the LGBT community.
He co-sponsored the marriage equality bill now working it’s way through the Maryland state legislature.
But a few days ago, he let some constituents know he planned to vote “no” on the bill once it reached the House floor. Immediately people in Maryland started scratching their heads -“How do you campaign on a specific issue, co-sponsor the bill then CHANGE YOUR MIND???”
In reports circulating the news, Arora has said in past days point blank that he would be voting against marriage equality because he is “born again” and doesn’t want to “redefine marriage.” He has even gone so far as to remove a Twitter post from January 25th declaring his co-sponsorship and support for marriage equality.
Needless to say this has caused a huge backlash against Arora. Scores of campaign donors are asking for their money back saying he lied during the campaign.
Today, Arora posted a statement saying:
“I will vote to send the bill to the floor because it deserves an up-or-down vote. On the floor, I will vote to send the bill to the governor so that Marylanders can ultimately decide this issue at the polls. I think that is appropriate.”
In other words, he’ll vote for it so it can be repealed by referendum.
Apparently, according to Todd E. Eberly, a political science professor at St. Mary’s College of Maryland, “some delegates signed onto the legislation because they thought it would not clear the Senate. When Senate passage became a possibility, they got scared. If you’re a proponent of the bill, you certainly don’t feel as confident as you did a week ago.”
So this elected official specifically campaigned to vote one way – cashing lots of checks along the way from supporters – thinking he wouldn’t have to ever make that fateful vote. And now, he’s been caught having to do just that.
While I don’t agree with anti-LGBT politicians, at least they are honest when they campaign. But to go out and actively seek votes and campaign dollars LYING to the people who are writing the checks to you – that is honestly the lowest you can go in politics. People should know who and what you honestly stand for in a campaign. Take a stance and be man enough to stand up for it. But don’t lie to folks just to get their dollars.
I hope Delegate Sam Arora does indeed follow through on his campaign promises. It will be very interesting to see how he fares in the next election cycle. My personal opinion is there is no place in public office for someone THIS lacking in integrity.
Maryland: Marriage Equality vote in House today
The Maryland House Judiciary looks set to vote on the Civil Marriage Protection bill today. Sponsors of the bill hold 12 of the committee’s 22 seats, making passage likely, but approval by the full House is still uncertain.
While Democrats hold a 98-43 majority in the House, it remains unclear if they have enough votes for passage. Supporters said Friday there were about 68 House delegates ready to vote in favor of the measure — a few shy of the 71 votes needed.
Governor Martin O’Malley has said he plans to sign the bill into law if it reaches his desk.
Maryland: Marriage Equality Passes in Senate 25-21!
The Maryland State Senate just passed Marriage Equality on a vote of 25-21.
From here the Civil Marriage Protection Act goes to the more Democratic leaning House of Delegates. Governor Martin O’Malley has indicated he has every intention of signing this bill into law.
Maryland would become the sixth state along with the District of Columbia to have marriage equality.
Go Maryland!
Maryland Marriage Equality Bill hits the state Senate
The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, SB 116, which passed out of committee on a vote of 7-4 was introduced to the full state Senate this morning. This bill would legalize marriage equality in the state of Maryland.
State Senator Robert Garagiola introduced the measure and in doing so emphasized that religious institutions would not be required to recognize these relationships:
“Under the terms of the Act, an official of a religious institution or body who is authorized to solemnize marriages, may not be required to solemnize any marriage in violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution, or Article 36 of our Constitution. As amended, the bill also provides that a religious organization, association or society, or any nonprofit operated by one, may not be required to provide services accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges to an individual if the request is related to the solemnization of a marriage or celebration of marriage that is in violation of the entity’s religious beliefs.”
Debate is scheduled to occur Wednesday. Reports are that there are 24 votes, the necessary number, to pass the bill. From there the bill heads to the house of delegates where it’s expected to pass.
Governor Martin O’Malley has indicated he will sign the bill if it reaches his desk.