Leave a Comment Sagesse
Opponents of Maryland marriage equality law launch petition drive
March 14, 2012
By Adam Bink
They need about 56,000 signatures. MDPetitions.com is the conduit for signature-gathering efforts, where they say:
Maryland voters should have a say in whether or not Same-Sex Marriage is made legal. Make your voice heard!
Which sends you to Maryland Marriage Alliance, which describes itself as:
a grassroots, non-partisan, interfaith coalition dedicated to preserving the traditional definition of marriage in Maryland law. The Maryland Marriage Alliance is supported by the Maryland Family Alliance, the Maryland Catholic Conference, and the National Organization for Marriage, and is the leading entity in Maryland focused solely on the preservation of marriage. Along with our three sponsoring organizations, we are made up of hundreds of local community leaders, pastors, family organizations, and concerned citizens who know that preserving traditional marriage helps keep Maryland strong.
The general assumption is that they will reach the number needed to qualify. We’ll see what kind of tactics they use to do it.
Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!
25 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
Ann S. | March 14, 2012 at 3:43 pm
Noooooooo, Marylanders, don't sign it!
2.
Fr. Bill | March 14, 2012 at 3:59 pm
And what, pray tell, are the contribution disclosure laws of Maryland? Never mind, NOM pays them no heed anyways and nothing seems to happen to them.
3.
Bob | March 14, 2012 at 4:36 pm
Since we're going to have another fight on our hand here we need to be the ones to frame the debate. My suggestion: Just as the Nineteenth Amendment, giving women the right to vote, did not change the meaning of voting, granting gay and lesbian couples the right to marry does not change the meaning of marriage.
4.
Mark | March 14, 2012 at 5:02 pm
And I think states should not allow these referendums on the ballots until such time as the Prop 8 case is put to rest. It may mean a delay in allowing same sex marriages to go forward in those states, but when voting on civil rights are concerned, our case will set a precedent. These rights should not be voted on.
5.
Bryce | March 14, 2012 at 5:08 pm
Way off topic, but does anyone know if the deadline for Amici in opposition to rehearing en banc has passed?
6.
Bryce | March 14, 2012 at 5:08 pm
In Perry, of course.
7.
brad | March 14, 2012 at 5:15 pm
OMG come on USA, i am from Canada and i cannot believe what the gays have to go through.
We have had ssm marriage here now for well over 5 yrs, it is now a NON issue here! sighhh
Hang in there people..equality is coming…slooowly
8.
Kathleen | March 14, 2012 at 5:33 pm
I THINK it's tomorrow, but I'm not 100% certain.
9.
Reformed | March 14, 2012 at 6:16 pm
Finally, a few fights where you can actually win rather than just working to defeat a constitutional ammendment just to maintain the status quo. The shoe is quite on the other foot, anti gay forces have to qualify for the fight, and they have to win it.
10.
Lesbians Love Boies | March 14, 2012 at 6:17 pm
Which traditional version of marriage? The one from the bible where man has many wives?
11.
Fr. Bill | March 14, 2012 at 6:45 pm
I also think a better distinction should be made between marriage as a civil contract under state law and any religious connotations. Religious criteria should not establish th rights of a couple to enter a civiil marriage any more than religious criteria should establish the criteria for ending a civil marriage.
12.
WeTheSheeple | March 15, 2012 at 7:35 am
If the signatures are challenged in court (like the surely will) and it isn't resolved until after the 2012 election, does the marriage law still take effect in Jan 2013? My understanding is if they miss the Nov 2012 election, the earliest the referendum could be voted on would be Nov 2014.
13.
Faceless Bureaucrat | March 15, 2012 at 8:17 am
I'm a straight married guy with a wife and two kids. All four of us want to campaign for same sex marriage in Maryland. My wife and I want to take our kids on the picket lines to teach them about political activism. We live in a part of Montgomery County MD where our position is the norm, and so we expect to have to travel around the state to go to rallies that will make a difference. So, in future posts, can the lead news article (so I don't have to read all the comments) provide directions where to go (I mean, a link to follow, at least) so we can join the pro-SSM forces at future events in Maryland? Thanks!
And, @LLB, Re that traditional bibilical polygamous marriage:
It has been awhile since I read the Good Book, but if I recall correctly, there are three versions of the Ten Commandments ( ! which one does the GOP want in the courthouses?), in at least one of which the coveting is proscribed as "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor his wives". In other words, in that marriage tradition, wives (plural) were property of lesser value than houses and livestock.
So let's bring back those good ol' days! (Not.)
14.
New | March 15, 2012 at 8:29 am
I just wish marriage equality rights were granted AS FAST as they are taken away.
The VERY NEXT DAY after propH8 passed, marriage licences became unavailable to lesbians and gays in CA.
And here we are, days, months, even years after the Judiciary or the Legislative ruled or legislated in our favor, and still NADA for many of us. It's depressing.
15.
grod | March 15, 2012 at 10:05 am
Brad, civil marriage equality was achieved through the courts in 9 of the 13 jurisdictions between 2003 and 2005, and in the other jurisdictions that year when the federal government proclaimed an unformed law. Unlike Canada where the definition rested with the feds, in the USA, it rests with each state. By the time the Supreme Court became involved, it was essentially over. The critical decision happened in 2003 when the Federal government did not appeal the Ontario Appeal court’s decision. It is comparable to President Obama not to challenge in Court DOMA. Use of ballot initiatives while possible in some Canadian jurisdictions, it is unusual. Agree it is a non issue but that is also likely in Massachusetts (2004) and Connecticut (2008).
16.
StraightSupporter | March 15, 2012 at 10:36 am
I'm in NC and I know of some people who want to launch initiatives here against marriage equality. I went to church the other day, and the speaker (a Rowan County commissioner) was talking about the ACLU effort to get rid of praying before meetings in the name of Jesus. He spoke about freedom of religion and how that would take away his freedom, how ACLU is founded in communism, how separation of church and state is so state doesn't control church but church can control state (which would then try to control other churches of differing religions and thus be state controlling church anyway). Then when he started talking some about DOMA, he was essentially telling the people that more Christians need to get out and vote and vote for DOMA, vote not based on man's law but on the Bible. He spoke about getting some signatures to protect their right to pray.
It seems a bit of a double standard or even hypocritical, that they should talk freedom of their religion, but be so fine to use their religion to vote and effectively push their views and dogma via the legal system onto others with respect to DOMA (and anything else they don't agree with). What about another person's freedom of religion that maybe there is nothing wrong with marriage between two same-sexed people?
Oh, wait, that's right. Freedom of religion as long as it is what they believe. They don't really believe in freedom of religion. They want people to respect and tolerate their religion while they use their religion and the legal process to force their views and ways onto other and are not respectful or tolerant of others and their religions or lack their-of or different lifestyles.
17.
Ann S. | March 15, 2012 at 10:41 am
It's not an uncommon right-wing belief that the state leave religion alone, but that religion can affect and control the state. It's not how I learned the law, but that's what they believe.
18.
h8nsbad | March 15, 2012 at 12:02 pm
I wonder how the folks who sign this will feel knowing that if they petition to referendum their names will be publicly and permanently frozen in time on the wrong side of history for all posterity to see? Petition signers names are public record on successful petition efforts. It may be a bit hard for them to explain to the gay grandkids…
19.
Sagesse | March 15, 2012 at 4:46 pm
This article on separation of church and state is excellent.
Arizona, You Can't Change the Constitution by Not Understanding It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-herrington/…
20.
Bob | March 15, 2012 at 5:04 pm
everyone should give this a read,,,,,,,, it helps to put the church back in it's place,,,,, ie. even the amish have to accept that not everyone drives a horse drawn vehicle…
even if a law does contravene church doctrine,, it can stand if it is in the publics best interest,,, etc…
very well written indeed!!!!!!!!!!!!!
21.
grod | March 15, 2012 at 5:17 pm
Off topic: On March 9 P8TT‘s blog header was Increasing Opposition to North Carolina’s Amendment # 1 On March 14, Catholic Bishops Peter Jugis and Michael Burbidge representing the dioceses of Charlotte and Raleigh each released a video indicating support for Amendment One. They support a ban same-sex marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships. — Marriages in their dioceses covering all North Carolina represent between 2%-3% of all the weddings annually authorized in this State. One third of these marriages are interfaith marriages. When one looked at Maine, annual marriages in the diocese covering all of Maine represent between 4%-6% of all marriages in that state. One third of these marriages are also interfaith marriages. Can someone explain how the head of an organization representing between 2% and 6% of those being annually married is accorded such elevated spokesperson status. An underlying assumption is that spokespersons are talking for all they represent, when it is known that their congregants are not of a single mind. Just when is someone going to ask these spokespersons if they are aware that they are not wearing any clothes?
22.
grod | March 16, 2012 at 6:35 am
The question that I continue to ask myself is 'why do I continue to attend and financially support a church that is so fundamentally against my understanding of the teaching of the Master.' I will resist asking you the same question. My inadequate answer to myself is "It's a comfortable pew". G
23.
StraightSupporter | March 17, 2012 at 5:19 am
I go with my girlfriend. I told her about my feelings and found that even she doesn't agree with her church on this matter and many others. She is more of a live and let live person. I really think she just goes for the socializing aspect. A lot of her family go to this church.
24.
Lori Hollander | April 17, 2012 at 6:58 am
Thank you so much for being a straight ally to the LGBT community and a supporter of same sex marriage. My husband and I are marriage counselors and also straight allies and would love to connect with you. We are passionately involved in the fight for Marriage Equality in MD. You can call or email:
LHollander@RelationshipsWork.com or 410-363-2825 x2.
Warm regards,
Lori
25.
Craig | April 18, 2012 at 7:45 pm
Proposition 8 is a case in the 9th Circus Court. So no matter what they found, it would not be binding on Maryland. They have every right to exert the legal process in their state of a referendum on ANY issue, from taxes and spending, to rights and privileges.
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.