O'Malley's Same-Sex Marriage Bill to Provide More Religious Protections
Same-sex marriage was debated in Annapolis last year, but was stalled in the House of Delegates.
By Lisa Rossi for Patch and Tom McParland for Capital News Service
Gov. Martin O’Malley introduced legislation this week that would make same-sex marriage legal in Maryland.
Same-sex marriage was debated in Annapolis last year, but it ended up stalling in the House of Delegates.
Last year's bill said ministers and churches "may not be required to solemnize any marriage in violation of the right to free exercise of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment."
The new bill, SB 241, includes broader language that, among other guarantees, ensures that each religious entity "has exclusive control over its own theological doctrine, policy teachings, and beliefs regarding who may marry within that faith."
"We expanded the language to include provisions from other states that have passed marriage equality with religious exemptions, just to take away any ambiguity about whether or not religious exemption applied in certain circumstances," said Delegate Heather Mizeur, D-Dist 20, who is openly gay. "It's just a more wordy way of providing for religious exemption."
This year, O’Malley said “momentum is growing” for same-sex marriage in Maryland, which has endorsements this month that include labor organizations AFL-CIO and SEIU 1199.
Washington, D.C., as well as six other states, have laws allowing same-sex marriage,according to the Baltimore Sun.
“Other states have found a way to do this. We can find a way to do this, too,” O’Malley said during a press conference Tuesday morning, which was posted on YouTube.
The Maryland Catholic Conference of Roman Catholics, as well as the Maryland Marriage Alliance, a group of churches and faith-based organizations, are among those that have mobilized to oppose the legislation.
The Maryland Marriage Alliance is sponsoring a rally in Annapolis at 6 p.m. Jan. 30 entitled “Rally for Marriage!” regarding the proposal. Marylanders for Marriage Equality, a group that supports same-sex marriage, is organizing phone banking sessions on the issue in the region.
"You can't protect the religious community from same-sex marriage," said Delegate Emmett Burns, Jr., D-Baltimore County, a minister and staunch opponent of the legislation.
The introduction of the Civil Marriage Protection Act marks the resurfacing of a divisive issue that polarized lawmakers and generated heated debate at the State House last year.
Bill supporters have partnered with Marylanders for Marriage Equality, a wide-reaching coalition that includes labor voices, lobbyists and a range of faith leaders.
Opponents are looking to religious groups such as Progressive Clergy and Laity in Action to pressure delegates who remain on the fence.
"We are targeting black delegates who came to our churches and said how much they loved us and then voted against us," said Burns, the organization's founder, who plans to hold rallies in Prince George's County. "They will be held accountable."
Marylanders as a whole continue to be split on their feelings on same-sex marriage.
According to a poll published in January by Gonzales Research & Marketing, based in Arnold, 49 percent surveyed support a law allowing same-sex marriage, while 47 percent oppose it.
Jessica
2:44 pm on Wednesday, January 25, 2012
I support EQUALITY!!!!
Jesse Robert Becker
3:34 pm on Wednesday, January 25, 2012
There's no need to "'protect the religious community from same-sex marriage,'" but a need to protect our government from religious intrusion.
Okay, it may not go that far, and basic religious tenants are a good, positive thing for society. But basing public policy on obscure (Mentioned three times? Come on...) religious references that have been changed and mistranslated over the centuries is ridiculous. You can not deny civil rights and benefits to citizens, when they do no harm, and the only basis for argument (seeing as there are no facts to the opponents) are your personal, opinionated objects. You do not become oppressors simply because you disagree with something as unimportant and ineffectual to a person's characters as sexual orientation on a personal level. That is the true threat to American values.
Jesse Robert Becker
3:35 pm on Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Correction: "objects" should be "objections