From the New Harford Democratic Club:
Maryland’s new Civil Marriage Equality Act would protect all children no matter who their parents are and would not negate religious prohibitions on same sex marriage, according to representatives of the coalition supporting the law, who spoke to the New Harford Democratic Club.
Manley Calhoun, representing Marylanders for Marriage Equality, and Lisa Ward, minister of the Harford County Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, were invited to the club’s April meeting to discuss the coalition’s efforts to turn back efforts by those opposed to the law. The state legislature recently approved the bill to allow civil marriages in Maryland but opponents are expected to collect enough signatures to put the law to referendum in November.
Calhoun said the law would protect families, including children and spouses, who under current law are denied certain legal rights, such as health insurance coverage and survivors benefits.
“This is not a religious argument, but a legal one,” said Ward. “Churches and other religious organizations, would still have the right to choose not to perform wedding ceremonies for same sex couples.” Calhoun said that opponents of the marriage equality act are making the claim that it interferes with religious freedom in order to drive a wedge between traditional supporters of the Democratic party.
Calhoun asked for support from club members in their efforts to turn back the anti-marriage equality efforts. He said anti groups will make a major effort to defeat the law, which is expected to be on the ballot in November. Although the law was approved in the 2012 legislative session, it was not set to go into effect until January 2013 in anticipation of a referendum.
Following the presentation, the club voted to support the coalition with a monetary contribution.
Gay marriage does not.need to be legal to protect families.
Laws could be passed that protects a family unit without marriage.
For those who believe that marriage is a God-given sacrament, anything other than man/woman marriage is a sin. Civil or otherwise.
This is a heated topic. Noone wants.children to suffer. The parents choice to have children in these relationships means that we need laws to protect the children, not promote marriage.
Anyone who believes that marriage is a God given Sacrament also does not believe the state has any authority to decide what is and is not a marriage. They simply pay a tax inorder to get married!
O’Malley is a self indulgent, arrogant man who denies his own faith. He talks of freedom of conscience and equates it to freedome of religion. American Catholics have some who follow their faith and the scriptures. O’Malley is not one of them. He is first and foremost a promoter of himself. He is Catholic in name only. His real god is power and self.
Do you go to Crab feasts and eat?
Snappy come back I have to say. Actually he nailed it on the head. O’Malley is all about himself – period. He is a first-rate, fourth-rate governor because he can’t balance a bugdet without raiding money set aside or taxing his citizens at every turn. That’s not leadership… that’s cowardice. He governs from the extreme left because half his base in this state feeds from the public trough and the other half is just as whacked as he is.
A little off subject are you?
Not at all if you pay attention.
BEL AIR FED, This article was NOT about O’Malley, but you DID correctly indicate that he supports civil marriage. He also supports a womans right to choose AND safe legal birth control (all THREE things go against The Vatican’s positons). But just like the majority of practicing Catholics, Governor O’Malley doesn’t agree with every position the Vatican “preaches”. Also, even if he DOES agree with The Vatican on any of these “hot button” issues, he has enough sense and fortitude to seperate his PERSONAL beliefs from his responsibility as Governor of Maryland and (rightly so) legislate on behalf of ALL Marylanders regarding Church and State issues! Hell, if a HOMOSEXUAL was elected Governor, that doesn’t mean that they’d try to outlaw marriage between a man and a woman! And how about old Willard (Mitt)Romney? He’s a practicing Morman, (a cult religion as described by many Christians), and just a couple of generations ago his Morman religion officially supported polygamy to the extent that his grandfather moved his entire family (including all of his WIVES) to Mexico to excape the “Draconian” law outlawing polygamy in these here United States!
P.S. Changing the topic slightly….funny to hear that idiot homophobe Rush spewing venom at President Obama for finally coming out of the closet yesterday regarding his support for civil marriage. Rush is the BEACON and EXPERT on traditional marriage….he’s been married how many times……? I believe the answer is 4 (or maybe even 5)! SHUT UP!
Do you dig on the swine? Should we set women aside for 7 days every month?
I love crabs. Have my crab table ready to go this year, looking forward to lower prices. If you think it crabby to criticize St Martin now just wait until he tries to be JFK re-incarnate in four years. If I live I’ll have my pinchers all oiled up and ready to go.
Not crabby to criticize St. Martin but it is clearly in the bible that you should not eat crabs, dig on the swine and women on their period should stay away from other people! That is what I find interesting about the “God’s Law” arguement. They cherry pick which Laws are important!
You can not cherry pick from the bible. It says do not eat crestaceans.
And I for one do not intend to ever eat “crestaceans” because of the statement in the Bible.
So you do not eat shell fish, or pork? You keep Kosher?
Furthermore should we now legislate that everyone must eat the same diet?
Common Cents you just proved the point; Martin O’Malley is not a Catholic!
This article is everything about O’Malley. If it wasn’t for his signature on the dotted line this article wouldn’t be here. Also he was the one who brought the relgion thing into it citing orginal founders of maryland coming her for religious liberty and equating it to freedom of conscience. So don’t give me this crap about keeping his personal separate from his public – he was scolding church following Catholics or giving them a lesson about how relgious freedom and freedom of concious are the same. Nice try.
BEL AIR FED, As usual, your words don’t make sense, and you call mine “crap”, therefore I’ll call you a “f–king idiot”, AND because I don’t give a s–t about you or your opinion, I’ll not respond to your next idiotic rabid right wing response. “F” off! (oh, and have a nice day!)
It is ironic that when asked, what people respect most about the Church is its constancy over the last 2000 years. It is also what those same people want to change.
The Chirch cannot be ruled by peoples’ actions. No new scripture has been sent that I have seen.
The Church teaches the same truth as.always.
There are Catholics and practicing Catholics. In my view O’Malley is a Catholic, along with being a Jackass.
In no way does the same sex marriage bill rule a church or infringe upon a churches religious beliefs!
Thank you, God Cdev. You have all of the answers again.
The spirit of this law is to strike at the very heart of the definition of marriage, therefore, the courts would be compelled to reason that the government – not a faith – define marriage. If this is the endgame, which it seems to be; yes, this measure steps all over religious freedom.
For the purposes of paying a tax, filing taxes and the things covered by a civil marriage, The government does control marriage. As far as a religious construct government has no say. For example the church has no say about your tax return filing status and the government has no interest in if your carnal relations with a women are adultery.
I think the state should get out of sanctioning marriages all together and we remove the married filing status!
Intersting thoughts about the state and marriage. Not sure yet how I feel about that. You’re right about a church having no say over the tax forms, but the government does have interest in carnal relations. Adultery is still grounds for divorce – a legal proceeding in the courts.
Anyway, this issue sure is doing its good work taking our eyes and attention off the failing policies of this president regarding the economy; and the completely atrocius job O’Malley has done as governor. When I read the reports posted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics the picture is grim. So, I guess the news outlets will beat this topic to death – they are already – until the economic news looks brighter.
Agree with you localguy. However, I have not taken my eye away from the real issues facing us this election. Kudos to President Obama for his support of our Military and Veterans along with nailing Bin Laden, however he has so many other failed policies that he will not get my vote for another four years.
As usual left wing show their true colors with thier cursing and rants – the superior intelligencia who are better than us all and know more than anyone, right. Local guy nailed it – all this social issue stuff is nothing but smoke screen to divert the real issues – an economy that’s tanking, shrinking pay checks, rising taxes.
if the gay crowd is so concerned about having the same “benefits” that marriage affords a natural couple, why not push to change just that? add a “domestic partner” label to tax forms and insurance enrollments. i’d be o.k. with that. but don’t change marriage.
I have 8 full pages of petition signatures and 2 more to finish up. the people of maryland will have the final say.
come november 7, there will be no dream act and no gay marriage in this state.
They tried that in Deleware and somehow that was a danger to married people!
Separate but equal ring any bells, Jeff?
I have more than a few concerns with people claiming religion as the sole reason to prevent gay marriage.
Reason # 1–Marriage pre-dates Christianity. It was not an invention of the Catholics or any other faith.
Reason # 2–Why is it that when a Muslim politician wins an election, the conservatives froth at the mouth and demand that he sign a paper that he will not allow Sharia Law to influence his positions, but when a Christian politician is in office, he’s somehow a horrible human being if his policy decisions aren’t COMPLETELY dictated by his faith? Seriously, I would love for one of you to answer this.
Reason # 3–As has been pointed out already in this thread, people fighting against gay marriage due to religious reasons are hypocrites. I actually respect Rick Santorum a heck of a lot more than most conservatives. He may have come off as a bit loony for wanting to ban porn, limit divorces etc etc–but he was consistent. Those things were against his faith, and he was guided by his faith. People who are against gay marriage based on faith but would NEVER hear a word about making divorce, pornography, and so on (all the mixed fabric, shellfish stuff, etc) are the ones who aren’t REAL Christians. When you only want to legislate against the sins that you don’t happen to commit, that makes you a hypocrite.
The solution to all of this is very simple. Make ALL governmental marriages “civil unions” and let the churches decide whether or not they want to slap the word “Marriage” on it. From a constitutional standpoint, everybody is getting the exact same deal from the secular federal government. From a religious standpoint, people up in arms over this can save some face. At the end of the day, it’s just a word, and making this much of a fuss over a stupid case of semiotic outrage is just silly.
Irrespective of religion, marriage as an institution is a woman and a man.
in some places yes….some no