From the office of Del. Glen Glass:
Update on Same Sex Marriage Legislation
After several Legislative Sessions and Hearings this past week, House Bill 438 “Civil Marriage Protection Act” passed by a vote of 71 to 67 (for the bill to pass it was necessary to have 71 votes).
If you think same-sex marriage should go to referendum, as I do, you can go to www.mdpetition.com – select ‘Contact Us’ then fill in your name, email address, type in your message and hit send.
You’ll receive periodic news and announcements from MD petitions to stay up to date on what’s happening with a petition drive. As you know, I stand for traditional marriage and my convictions will not change.
My plan is to work hard to try to send this to a referendum to be sure this vote goes to the people to decide this very important issue, not the politicians!
Thank you for your encouragement and we are grateful for all your prayers.
Delegate Glen Glass
410-841-3280
Glen.Glass@house.state.md.us
From the office of Del. Kathy Szeliga:
O’Malley’s path to the White House; The Governor is using Maryland as his platform for national office!
The Governor is pushing his same sex marriage bill he knows that by passing it here in Maryland would look great on his political resume. In fact the Washington Post stated “Perhaps no other O’Malley effort is being watched as closely nationally as same-sex marriage.” I find it extremely appalling that O’Malley is using and abusing our State to advance his own national political agenda to the detriment of our Maryland families.
For those who are ambivalent, thinking that “this won’t affect me”, the consequences of passing gay marriage will permeate many aspects of our society. The definition of marriage does not need to be redefined. I support traditional marriage, one man and one woman, and here is why:
Traditional marriage builds families – mom, dad, and children – and gives hope that the next generations will carry that family into the future.
In states where marriage has been redefined, activists have implemented a homosexual agenda in the schools to children as young as kindergarten. I am opposed to promoting gay marriage in our public schools and once it is “legal” in this state the curriculum will follow the law.
The people of Maryland don’t need the legislature to tell them what marriage is. Marriage is an institution of the people, not politicians, and the legislature should know better than to try and take the definition of marriage away from them.
This legislation has taken a front seat this session and it is the biggest family issue we are facing but I know it is not the ONLY issue. I know that the taxes and fees, which the Governor is proposing, are an assault on your way of life and I am in Annapolis fighting for you.
Thank you for your thoughts and prayers!
Delegate Kathy Szeliga
I have nicknamed all the Charmin in my house O’Malley!
I have nicknamed Steven Bee the perfect example of Harford County Republican intelligencia.
Yes, let’s not worry about giving equality to ALL the citizens of Maryland – only to those with narrow minded views. And, of course, let’s only worry about how what other people do will affect ME, ME, ME. I think you fail to understand that no one is “promoting” gay marriage like it is a product someone is selling. It should just be an option to anyone that chooses it, just like it is an option for everyone else what type of relationship they choose to be in, whether single, married or divorced.
Dangnabbit, those little buggers win again!
Hey, everyone is equal according to the Maryland Constitution and the U.S. Constitution. Why would anyone make such a headache about this issue? Granting marital priveleges to same sex couples will not hurt anyone. I am happy the drama is over and perhaps our politicians can start addressing the serious issues like comprehensive tax reform, creating jobs, reducing our reliance on fosil fuels and more. Tell the folks in Annapolis to get moving or terms limits are on the way!!!
I have followed a group in Massachusetts since 2003 when Massachusetts redefined marriage, http://www.massresistance.org . With 2 children in public school, I was concerned about the impact of redefining marriage in a state on the public schools in that state.
The full court press to promote homosexuality and transgender/gender identity themes in the Massachusetts public schools after marriage was redefined in that state was breathtaking. Some have suggested that marriage isn’t a goal for many GBLT rights activists, it is a useful tool to justify promotion in the public schools.
When I heard that in the 2006 Massachusetts state wide elections, 3 years after marriage was redefined in that state, that the pro-GBLT rights lobby spent more money on the state primary and general elections than any other single organization, including the unions, the Republican Party, the Democrat Party, what is the purpose of that money, and why does a group so weathly and powerful, equate its efforts to those of African Americans?
$700,000 of education money is spent each year in Massachusetts on a Governor’s Commission on GBLT Youth.
Could redefining marriage and the subsequent pressure to promote homosexual and transgendered themes in public schools, break the back of support for community public schools in America?
Please don’t let it happen. Our community public schools are the backbone of our democracy. They need to be relieved of the huge burden of politicized decisions that harm the education potential of many children, even in spite of the herculean efforts of many school administrators, teachers, parents, and students. Please don’t add to this burden of politicized decisions.
Please do not let our elected officials use our community public schools as their political playgrounds. Why should the political careers of a few be more important than the educational potential of hundreds of thousands of Maryland public school students?
@ PTA Mom – what are your thoughts on prayer in school?
Effects on the public schools in Massachusetts after marriage was redefined in 2003….
excerpt from :
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html
In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal Civil Rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judges dismissed the case.
**** The judges ruled that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children, and that schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt-out their children. ***
Just like they had to “normalize” women voting and desegregation? It is the year 2012 and children will be going to school with families with two Moms or two Dads. Please don’t turn our children into haters.
@Deeg
Please don’t teach my children homosexuality is equivalent to heterosexuality.
Daschle……..my aim would only be to teach them acceptance of those that are different from themselves.
@Deeg
The homosexual lobby wants to teach acceptance of the practice of homosexual activities in school to children.
The primary goal of the homosexual activists is to normalize gay sexual activity as equivalent to heterosexual activity.
If your are different, why do you want to be the same and be “married?”
Again…..my aim would only be to teach them acceptance of those that are different from themselves. In addition, campaigns based on a presumed “gay agenda” have been described as anti-gay propaganda by researchers and critics.
@Deeg
Of course proponents of the gay agenda would call people pointing out the gay agenda as being anti-gay.
It doesn’t matter that your “aim would only be to teach them acceptance of those that are different from themselves” the aim of the homosexual lobby is to teach homosexuality as a normal lifestyle option.
Daschle: But homosexuality is a normal lifestyle option. Why don’t you work to eliminate divorce? That is far more distructive to young children. All you are doing is trying to develop one of your tea party wedge issues so voters will not think about real isuues. BTW if “Our community public schools are the backbone of our democracy” why don’t you people support public education?
There is nothing normal about homosexuality, nor will there ever be. Normal is the “norm” and that leaves homosexuality out. I do not resent the people who practice homosexual behavior, but it will never be the norm.
Never say never…If Jesus can do it, can’t everyone?
Everyone can do it, but most do not. That’s what makes sex between persons of the same sex not the norm, nor normal.
Things change Bobbie P. I think you would see that if you would just open your eyes.
Bobbie and Daschle please read these definitions. There is a difference in meaning. I use them thusly: Norm, expected patterns of behavior and belief. Normal: of natural occurrence. A gay person is not the norm as most people are heterosexual but homosexuality is normal albeit for few people.
While inherent homosexuality is still hotly debated “…studies published during the 1990s have claimed to offer evidence in favor of a biological or genetic cause for homosexuality. Three of these in particular—a study of brain structure by Simon LeVay, a study of twins by J. Michael Bailey and Richard C. Pillard, and a study of “gene linkage” and “gene markers” by a team led by Dean H. Hamer.”
@Proud to be Liberal – All of the studies you cite for a genetic cause of homosexuality were inconclusive.
You still think evolution is inconclusive. You don’t pay attention to evidence.
It should be enough that Jesus, Our heavenly Father, was a homosexual. Didn’t we all inherit a part of him? It sounds to me like you may have gotten your fair share and are ashamed of yourself. It’s ok. Soon you’ll be able to enjoy the marriage benefits that heterosexuals do.
@Gay Jesus – Don’t get frustrated it’ll be okay. You can continue to believe homosexuality is the equivalent to heterosexuality.
Great point. I cannot believe our representatives voted against this issue. On what basis, other than pandering to their base, could they possibly justify their stand. At the bottom of all things, I will always be strongly liberal because the conservatives, Tea Partyers, and their ilk are just such mean-spirited megalomaniacs who seek bully those around them.
@Proud, I’m a progressive Democrat and homosexuality is not natural or normal. Nor do I want it taught as a normal lifestyle option for children to choose.
Daschle, you may be a Democrat but I don’t think you qualify as “Progressive”. I’m quite active in the Democratic Party and almost everyone I know would agree that a “Progressive Democrat” is someone that believes homosexuals are “normal”, and should not be treated differently from anyone else.
@Liberal in Bulle Rock – Are you saying all progressive Democrats are for the gay agenda?
All the ones I know – and that’s a lot! You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, just be honest about what you call yourself. On what do you consider yourself “progressive”?
By the way, few Democrats ever refer to the term “Gay Agenda” anymore. The “progressives” wouldn’t let them get away with that! I’m a politically active gay person and I can tell you that there is no agreed upon “agenda” other than wanting to be recognized as a human being with the same rights as everyone else. Trust me, there is a lot of diversity of opinion with the LGBT community on what that means.
I know a gay liberal progressive in Bulle Rock named Joe and I don’t associated with him for one reason he’s a jerk.
So this is like the whole “I’m not rascist because I have black friends”
People need to stop generalizing.
I have an acquaintenance that is a very, very conservative Republican. Low and behold, she now has a gay grandson. What a conundrum – accept him or reject him? We can’t “choose” what our children will become. They are born what they are….regardless. No one is promoting homosexuality like a product to be hawked, and you certainly can’t “catch” homosexuality, but I wouldn’t want my child, or anyone elses, to feel ashamed for what they are, and I want all of them to have the same rights as everyone else.
@Deeg
There is no proof that homosexuality is genetic. And a child or an adult can be drawn into a homosexual lifestyle.
There is no proof the Jesus was a heterosexual, yet you believe it anyway. I have it on good authority that he loved the ding dong…lots.
There is no proof that God exists, yet you believe it anyway.
Don’t start suggesting that a lack of evidence is the reason for denying homosexuals the right to equal marriage rights. And children are drawn everyday into the fairy-tale belief that there is a man in the sky watching over us and protecting us. At least homosexuality is real.
Stop believing in fairy tales, let everyone enjoy equal benefits and start living in the twenty-first century.
@Jesus was gay – Not a religious argument for me. When the homosexual lobby can show geneticists have proven that humans who are homosexual are born that way let me know.
Where is the proof that humans are born heterosexual? Where is the “straight” gene?
If you had any clue about genetics you would realize that if heterosexuality is genetic, than variation in those genese and the proteins or hormones they produce could lead to variation in sexuality. There is no either/or in biology. There is a continuum of just about any trait. Your assumption of heterosexuality being universal stems from you religious worldview or ignorance of biology.
@Jesus was gay – There is no proof of a heterosexual gene, however nature proves that biologically heterosexuality is requisite for the race to succeed whereas there is no biological need for homosexuality for the human race to continue.
You obviously are ignorant of biology. Is there a need for diabetes? Is there a need for muscular dystrophy? Is there a need for blue and green eyes? There are almost an infinite number of traits that humans have that are not necessary for human reproduction, yet they exist as variations of traits that are. Homosexuality is a variation along the sexual continuum, an obvious result of the alterations in the complex physiology that has evolved in animals.
Regardless of whether homosexuality is genetic or not, why should that prevent homosexuals from being able to enjoy the marriage benefits of heterosexuals?
@Gay Jesus – A primary goal of the homosexual lobby is to normalize homosexuality and include its teaching in the educational system.
So what’s your point? I’m assuming that the world will end when that happens. People don’t want evolution taught in public schools either. But it is taught because it is real, just like homosexuality. If your son or daughter “becomes” a homosexual because they went to public school, you should be happy about it. They will be more like Jesus than ever!
@Gay Jesus – Darwin’s theory of Evolution is by definition a theory and is taught as a theory.
Homosexuality is an activity that people choose to engage in. Do you choose to have homosexual sex?
I always ask myself, “What would Jesus do?”. If homosexuality is good enough for him, it’s good enough for everybody.
You obviously don’t know what a scientific theory is and how evolution explains modern biology. You probably think that there is some alternative legitimate scientific explanation for life’s history and diversity.
Daschle: You stated, “Darwin’s theory of Evolution is by definition a theory and is taught as a theory.” Well so is gravity. Would you care to jump off a bridge to test that theory?
Daschle: See Dean Hamer. He published a study that claimed not only to have finally proved that male homosexuality was at least partially genetic but also to have pinpointed the stretch of chromosome where one of the genes involved resided. Hamer and his colleagues conducted extensive interviews with 76 pairs of gay brothers and their family members and found that homosexuality seemed to be inherited through the maternal line. This led him to compare the X chromosomes—which can be inherited only from the mother—in those same brothers. There he discovered a shared genetic marker, a patch of DNA called Xq28. The above is a quote.
You may believe anything you want, but please be tolerant of others.
@Gay Jesus – You make a great deal of assumptions in your quest to unnerve and insult your adversaries.
Understand your opinion that homosexuality is not a choice is just an opinion with no scientific basis. And you do want to teach children that homosexuality is an equivalent natural alternative to heterosexuality.
Please tell me what assumptions I make that are insulting. And there is a large body of evidence showing physiological differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals, including homosexuality’s evolutionary origins and continuance in populations. Those differences are variable from person to person, but that is to be expected among complex animals. Teaching children about homosexuality is not going to make them become homosexuals. It sounds like you are not so sure about your own sexuality.
@Gay Jesus – Keep on trying.
Do you find it hard to hide the fact that you are gay?
@Gay Jesus – Come on you can step it up a bit can’t you?
Too often, speculation, emotions, and politics play a major role in the assessment of homosexualty. There are many of us that believe it is genetic, and there are many studies that lean toward that assumption, so I guess we will agree to disagree.
@Deeg – No we haven’t agreed to disagree. There is no proof that homosexuality is determined by one’s genetic make-up.
Humans are animals. Granted, animals that are aware they are animals and aware that they will die. As a human, I am aware that lots of animals seem to get off on just about anything in order to satisfy themselves sexually. It’s natural for an animal to want pleasure and to seek it any way it can. I would argue that while there probably is no homosexual gene, there is a latency in all of us (animals) to behave hedonistic. It’s normal. It’s natural. And you can’t fight nature. Argue all you want that homosexuality is a choice. Exclusive heterosexuality is a choice. Monogamy is a choice. Polygamy is a choice. Dice up your approach to this topic any way you want and it’s still the individual’s choice. And all they want you to do is to tolerate them and stop discriminating against them. That’s what this is all about.
Well said. Genetic or not…taught in schools or not…so what? Let homosexuals enjoy the same benefits as heterosexuals.
So you believe that you could have been “drawn” into a homosexual lifestyle?
Well, if that isn’t agreeing to disagree I don’t know what is! You believe one thing and I believe another. That’s a disagreement and we agree it is a disagreement. SMH
@Deeg – No agreement in disagreement, since I do not tolerate your position as it has no factual basis.
Religious types strongly defend their belief that it is learned. I don’t believe that. But I do believe that Christianity is an accepting religion and that God loves ALL of His creatures. I believe we should accept people for the good in them and not by some subjective criteria based on what church they belong to. I believe we should work to eliminate divorce as that IS widespread (over 50%) and DOES cause irreparable harm to children. ( BTW fundamentalist Christians have the highest divorce rates. )
Proud To Be Liberal
If you are correct, the Gays would be better off not getting married. You can’t have divorce without first having marriage. Why do you believe are they so intent on messing up their lives, not to mention the lives of any children they may adopt?
Everyone has a right to be miserable… also intolerant and ignorant.
Yes. Yes they do. It seems you know a lot about that Mr. Porter.
BOBBIE: As if your posts aren’t a sample of intolerance and ignorance.
Well, I tolerate your position, but it has no factual basis either. I just believe we should be tolerant and respectful of others and their thinking, even if it isn’t compatible with mine. Therefore, it is legitimate that I agree to disagree with your position.
“Religious” people should be working to help these children. The New York Times has a piece today that shows “It used to be called illegitimacy. Now it is the new normal. After steadily rising for five decades, the share of children born to unmarried women has crossed a threshold: more than half of births to American women under 30 occur outside marriage. Once largely limited to poor women and minorities, motherhood without marriage has settled deeply into middle America. The fastest growth in the last two decades has occurred among white women in their 20s who have some college education but no four-year degree….”
This, and widespread divorce, are topics that are a real detriment to children, much more than your red herring of gay marriage.
We can now focus on positive gay studies education curriculum in schools.
Additionally we should also offer sexual experimentation opportunities for youths who are 16-18 to explore safe same sex activities. Ideally we’d match youths with older more experienced partners so they can effectively be guided in the exploration process. It is imperative that experimenting teenagers have non-judgmental tutors who will explain gay learning and sex acts.
Finally we must decriminalize bestiality.
We don’t need to do that in public schools…the Catholic Church already does that…after all, it’s what homosexual Jesus wanted.
Do not confuse this ass with me!!
PTLB,
What’s the difference between the two of you?
We are two different people with different views. I thought that would be self evident to anyone.
If you thought it was self evident, why did you post “Do not confuse this ass with me”?
MIKE: Because of people who can’t tell the fictitious from the real. BTW, Do you think Stephen Colbert is a conservative?
Oh please, 10 countries and several states have legalized same-sex marriages and the world hasn’t come to an end. Your piety, delegates, is impressive but stop trying to force your religious views on everyone else. If I’m going to hell it’s my business and not yours. Today’s conservative religious thought is rooted in patriarchal tribal customs that no longer have meaning in a 21st century world. Don’t tell me the Bible says this or that – it’s full of contradictions and nothing more than a compilation of stories that were chosen by men, mostly for political reasons to gain control over “heretics” and empires.
Traditional marriage? By whose definition of “traditional”. That lame argument was used to prevent legalization of interracial marriage back in the last century. Marriage is not procreation, it is an institution of government created to recognize property – originally meant to assure ownership of a women to her husband. Even now, a marriage license assigns rights and privileges related to property and custody. Humans have always procreated but not always as “married” couples. Yes, procreation requires male and female participation but that it is a feature of evolution, not something ordained by some divine power imagined by our “ignorant” ancestors who had not yet discovered the scientific method.
YES!!!
The “religious” people should concentrate on eliminating divorce among the “religious” people before they worry about marriage equality.