Senate Passes Same-Sex Marriage Bill
Law goes to governor for signature and a likely referendum challenge.
Sen. Richard Madaleno, a Montgomery County Democrat who is openly gay, hugs fellow Montgomery County Democratic Sen. Jennie Forehand after the Maryland Senate passed same-sex marriage legislation by a vote of 25-22. The bill now goes to Gov. Martin O'Malley for his signature.
Photos (1)
Photos
The Maryland State Senate passed same-sex marriage by a 25-22 vote Thursday night.
The passage of the bill comes less than a week after the House of Delegates passed the identical bill.
The bill now goes to Gov. Martin O'Malley for his signature.
The law, which goes into effect Jan. 1, is expected to face a referendum challenge and could end up on the November ballot along with the bill that grants in-state tuition rates to some children of illegal immigrants.
All of Montgomery County's eight senators voted yes on the bill.
Jeff Hawkins
7:53 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
As with ALL hot-button issues, this should go to referendum. It's really the best way....
Corbin Dallas Multipass
8:48 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
It will go to referendum, but it's not the best way. This is a civil rights bill.
Cory Booker, Mayor of Newark, explained this really well a few weeks ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y4Z7tl7Vy8U
Michael
9:06 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
Right, because throughout history when a minority group wants the same rights as the majority, the best way is to let the majority vote. That's worked pretty well to avoid opression and genocide all over the world. I cannot think of a single example in history when a majority EVER united en masse against minorities. (Where is my sarcasm button...)
Linda Amendt
10:55 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
Well, it is no ones business who marries whom, unless they are part of the couple. Hetero marriage never went to referendum; and so far, I've checked..none of the other 7 states (and the Distriict of Columbia) that have legalized same-sex marriage, have had their civilizations in ruin, and their hetero marriages threatened. In fact, I can't see that anyone should care except the couple getting married.
Jeff Hawkins
9:03 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
@Corbin
Sorry.....we will have to disagree. Let each concerned/involved citizen of the state have their say. Either way the vote falls, so be it, but at least the folks have spoken.
Jeff Hawkins
9:28 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
@Michael
"the best way is to let the majority vote"
How do we know who the majority is until the votes are cast? I do agree with the core meaning of that sentence though............indeed....let the majority of the tax paying citizens of the state vote just as the majority of the ruling party did in Annapolis.
Suzanne Krall
9:44 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
Jeff,
The majority did vote. That is how the legislative process works. We elect the representatives, they vote on the laws. The vote should be finished.
Brigitta Mullican
9:48 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
Boo!
Jeff Hawkins
9:55 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
@Suzanne
Again, I believe with hot-button issues like these that they should go to referendum. As for our elected officials, they should handle the tax money, build the roads, help the schools etc.
We will have to disagree.....
jag
10:47 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
Right...because 250 years of precedent and the very definition of our constitutional republic should be amended to fit your personal views of the role of government. There's nothing to disagree on - this particular issue, I'm sure, will go to a referendum. In general, of course our elected officials have a constitutional and ethical responsibility to address "hot-button issues."
Jeff Hawkins
11:23 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
@Jag
The founding father's at times advocated legislative referendums, Thomas Jefferson being one of them. Referendums were greatly supported by the Progressives of the early 20th century for a variey of reasons.
The Federal Government has already weighed in on this issue or at least until the Supreme Court makes a decision. Ammendments have indeed been made over time to our Republic.........and that's a good thing.
As for personal views.........we have all have them and as I said we are "allowed" to disagree with each others accordingly. I have no problem with our elected leaders addressing "hot-button issues", although I believe it's NOT their main reason for being there, but referendums are needed "in my opinion" to keep the checks and balances in good order.
We agree, this issue will go to referendum and then and only then can a truly tested outcome be accomplished...........whichever way the vote goes.
Corbin Dallas Multipass
2:15 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
Jeff, I'm curious what counts as "hot button issues" since that is your criteria for what should be up for referendum. Could you expand on that?
Jeff Hawkins
11:34 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
@Linda Amendt
"Well, it is no ones business who marries whom, unless they are part of the couple"
Tell that to the Federal Government and Obama
"Hetero marriage never went to referendum"
Start the petition!
"I've checked..none of the other 7 states (and the Distriict of Columbia) that have legalized same-sex marriage, have had their civilizations in ruin, and their hetero marriages threatened"
I believe the end of civilization was not in question :)
"In fact, I can't see that anyone should care except the couple getting married."
Evidently Linda.............alot of people "care"
Jeff Hawkins
2:43 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
@Corbin
"Jeff, I'm curious what counts as "hot button issues" since that is your criteria for what should be up for referendum. Could you expand on that?"
Ummm Corbin? How about the subject of this thread?
Thesaurus:
"Noun 1. hot-button issue - an issue that elicits strong emotional reactions."
Wikipedia:
"A politicized issue or hot-button issue is a social, economic, theological, spiritual, scientific or legal issue which has become a political issue, as a result of deliberate action or otherwise, whereby people become politically active over that issue."
Carroll County Times:
A hot issue for lawmakers By Barry Rascovar Inside Maryland Politics Carroll County Times | 0 comments
"Same-sex marriage is a hot-button issue. It is highly personal and emotional."
Hey Corbin........if you can't figure out what qualifies, then give me a list and I'll get back to ya!
Corbin Dallas Multipass
2:54 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
I submit the list of all possible issues.
Since Barry Rascovar defines it as highly personal and emotional I don't know if I'm comfortable saying what is highly personal and emotional for you.
Jeff Hawkins
3:06 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
@Corbin
"I don't know if I'm comfortable saying what is highly personal and emotional for you."
That's your call...............perhaps another "hot-button issue"?
Not sure of the meaning of your first sentence?
Corbin Dallas Multipass
3:12 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
"Hey Corbin........if you can't figure out what qualifies, then give me a list and I'll get back to ya!"
"I submit the list of all possible issues."
I don't think the meaning could be clearer. Out of all the issues that exist (or ever could exist) what do you count as a hot button issue?
i.e. if someone didn't care much about autism because they're not personally affected by it, then maybe it isn't a hot button issue to them.
"That's your call...............perhaps another "hot-button issue"?"
Wait, are you redundantly defining what you consider to be a hot-button issue as another hot-button issue? It's personal, you said so in your definition, so what do you consider a hot-button issue. If it's my call, do I get to say what is another hot button issue for you? So confused, because that would make it not very personal.
Jeff Hawkins
3:41 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
@Corbin
"I don't think the meaning could be clearer. Out of all the issues that exist (or ever could exist) what do you count as a hot button issue?"
That's your opinion....I was looking for the submitted list! If you are looking for a term paper on the subject then sadly you are going to be disappointed.
"Wait, are you redundantly defining what you consider to be a hot-button issue as another hot-button issue? It's personal, you said so in your definition, so what do you consider a hot-button issue. If it's my call, do I get to say what is another hot button issue for you? So confused, because that would make it not very personal."
I didn't define anything, I was suggesting YOU had a "hot-button issue". If you noticed, those definitions were not mine. You didn't understand what the term meant, I supplied the definition or example, i.e. Mr. Rascover.
It's your call to supply a list of issues, don't know if they are "hot-button" until I see them. I love this.....it's kinda like a cat playing with a dying mouse :)
Corbin Dallas Multipass
4:01 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
"That's your opinion....I was looking for the submitted list! If you are looking for a term paper on the subject then sadly you are going to be disappointed."
I'm not looking for a term paper, just a list. You can't provide a list?
"I didn't define anything"
"I supplied the definition or example, i.e. Mr. Rascover."
Huh?
So you supplied Mr. Rascovar's definition as what you meant by Hot Button issue, right? Or is that not what you meant?
jnrentz1
11:37 am on Saturday, February 25, 2012
Mr. Hawkins,
I support petition to referendum.
hmj
4:13 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
So we should adopt a new definition of marriage to meet your needs? You are very willing change the limits on marriage to meet your needs, but want to keep other limits in place ( age, two people , not related, etc). We are a civilized society and that means some limits on behavior. Stop the nonsense and evolve ---- enough of the primitive behavior.
jag
5:15 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
You're correct. Government can and should have a vested interested in placing restrictions on who can get married and to whom, e.g. people who are closely related (birth defects), children (lack of brain development), etc. People who are fanatically against gay marriage have to rely on nonsensical arguments about biblical passages because they know there's no substantive reason why our government should restrict homosexual relationships.
Sean Carr
5:21 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
It has always been legal for homosexuals to marry ... as long as they marry someone of the opposite sex. Somehow, that makes sense to some people.
The Big Egg
11:06 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
It makes no sense to me to suggest that a gay man marry a straight woman. That seems to be a cruel thing to do to her. Same for a lesbian woman marrying a straight guy.
The Big Egg
11:12 pm on Friday, February 24, 2012
Here are some existing limits on marriage:
minimum age: still in place
consanguinity: still in place
monogamy: still in place
same-sex: evolving limits
miscegenation: revoked
So, what is and is not a marriage can be subject to evolving social norms. Interracial marriage is now allowed. Same-sex marriages are gaining acceptance. Some day, maybe we'll be allowed more than one spouse, though I can't imagine why someone would want twice the trouble.
Rob Saah Technology Enterprise's
10:08 pm on Tuesday, February 28, 2012
I think its great, it should be legalized.I dont see what the problem is.