baltimoresun.com

« Sen. Simonaire mulls run for Arundel county exec | Main | Baltimore couple to attend Obama's jobs address »

September 8, 2011

O'Malley raises money for same-sex marriage campaign

Gov. Martin O'Malley urged supporters of same-sex marriage to "call on the goodness" of their opponents as they try to gain more votes in the General Assembly and more allies throughout the state.

Speaking at an Equality Maryland fundraiser in Chevy Chase last night, the governor said that the issue should be viewed from the eyes of the children of same-sex couples. He said children across the state should grow up in households governed by the same sets of laws.

"It is through their eyes, the eyes of the children of gay and lesbian couples, that I have viewed this issue," O'Malley said. "This is all about the protection of families."

"Even people who do not yet agree with us on this issue, there is a lot of goodness in each and every individual and we need to engage in that goodness," O'Malley said. "We need to call people to that goodness."

The governor gave a far more impassioned plea for the bill during the fundraiser than he did two months ago at a Friday afternoon news conference when he announced that he would put his name on a same-sex marriage bill. This time several in the audience complimented his speech and he earned two rounds of applause when he finished.

* Photo credit: Governor's press office

The event raised at least $12,000  and drew around 300 supporters, organizers said.

So many members of the General Assembly attended that one speaker joked that the group might have enough votes in the room to pass the bill. Last year the controversial measure passed in the Senate but vote counters in the House believed they were a few votes shy and pulled it from the floor. 

Also speaking at last night's event were Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown and Attorney General Douglas Gansler -- two possible gubernatorial candidates in 2014. They both sounded optimistic that the bill would pass next session, and both looked ahead to the next hurdle: A statewide referendum on the legislation.

(Two other possible gubernatorial contenders were invited but did not come. Comptroller Peter Franchot was out of town, though his chief of staff attended. Howard County Executive Ken Ulman was not there.)

The 2012 ballot is now set to include a question on whether illegal immigrants should receive college tuition discounts that are available to legal residents. And most believe that should same-sex marriage pass in Maryland, it would be quickly petitioned to the ballot for voters to decide.

Gansler even took it a step further, predicting that if  the issue lost at the ballot box, it could re-emerge as a legal fight if a gay couple tried to challenge the current law. Same-sex marriage advocates already tried to do that, but were rebuffed by Maryland's highest court.

Brown weighed in too, saying that there will be "a coalition-driven effort targeted in every county" to convince voters to support the legislation on the ballot. "The effort in 2012 will require a lot of hard work," he said. "It will require a lot of us to redouble our efforts."

The event was held at a no-frills community center and guests enjoyed wine and cheese and looked photos from supporters' marriage ceremonies. The only extravagance was the dessert: A multi-layered white wedding cake.  

* Photo credit for cake: Annie Linskey
Posted by Annie Linskey at 8:16 AM | | Comments (48)
Categories: Same-Sex Marriage
        

Comments

Gay marriage should be passed in 2013.
With the Dream Act referendum on the ballot for 20122 pass ing gay marriage this year will bring out the naysayers in droves guaranteeing defeat for both items.
And I supoport gay marriage.

Did O'Malley make legalization of gay coupling a main topic of his costly ad campaign in '10? Did he mention it all?

As for the "children", the only(?) reason the gov makes this a cause, would he be for gay marriage if the vast majority of gay couples didn't have children? Indeed, do the majority of prospective gay legal couples have children, not counting kids they may have from hetero relationships? O'Malley as usual states illogical points, and the W Post and B Sun plus the big media owned TV stations in our area let the nonsense stand.

Frankly, I don't give a damn about gay marriage, but the hypocrisy of liberals is revolting.If they are so liberal, then why not extend benefits to families of any sexual orientation whether they are married or not. I thought liberals didnt believe in religious institutions.

NO GAY MARRIAGE in Maryland. It is a terrible sin, a terrible message to children, and O'malley should be ashamed of himself. To get votes, he's "thinking of the children." Yeah, right. If he were thinking of the children he sure isn't thinking about the fact that 1 in 5 gay men has HIV according to WebMD. Should they even BE around children?

As a gay man, i feel it's foolish to push for gay marriage this coming session. Why not wait for 2013 so to avoid the referendum? If we wait till 2013, we have time after it passes to gain support to avoid a smackdown at the ballot box. i think our ego is getting ahead of logic, wait to pass this until 2012 or your hurting the cause.

I have this question. Show me the law that forbids two consenting adults from entering into a civil union. If there is no law that forbids it, then there is no need to pass a law allowing it.

No to gay marriage in Maryland.

didactic1,

Although I'm not certain I altogether followed much of your posting, I do want to point out one important fact. Civil marriage is not a "religious institution." Just like property taxes, dog licensing, and (yes) divorce, it is a civil function and is of no legitimate interest to the Church. We who are working for marriage equality have no wish or power to affect the practices of any church. No church would be required to "bless" or acknowledge any marriage (although many stand ready to welcome same-sex couples into Holy Matrimony).

The extent to which the Church has involved itself in this issue bespeaks either ignorance or malevolence. Which is it?

As far as I'm concerned ...who cares...really. the only way this impacts me is that if married some people will have less impact on welfare and now my taxes go up because they are on welfare instead of their partner paying for it. If people have gone through any wealth they go on medicaid (is that a NY term?) so if they are married same sex to someone and that person now has to cover the health care...great..I"m not paying for it. marry any sex you want..i don't sleep with you therefore I don't care. If my child was a same sex personality i'd not care either...it doesn't impact me nor my beliefs, because what you do doesn't impact me at all ..unless i'm paying for it. HELLO.... and I,personally just don't care if I don't have to pay for it.

Ladyjas,

Sorry you feel that way. Good thing you won't be forced to have one.

GaryO,

Your comment is offensive in the extreme. It defies response.

posstum,

Current Maryland State Law defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. No provision is provided for "civil union." Such a provision, if it existed, would probably attempt to emulate the benefits and responsibilities that are entailed in marriage. True marriage equality would eliminate any such "attempt" and would simply grant those benefits and responsibilities to any couple who agreed to the stipulated terms.

I am really scared of you people who talk about gay marriage or homosexuality, and say things like, "It is a terrible sin, a terrible message to children." Seriously, what decade are you living in? And on what planet? Every cedible medical/psychological organization in the civilized world has published findings that there is nothing wrong with being gay. It is just as normal and natural as heterosexuality. Period. People who can ignore scientifically proven facts because they insist on maintaining their bigotry are truly sad, scary people.

Why not just wait for Perry vs. Schwarzenegger to win it nation wide in less than 3 years?

@ didactic1 - what does getting a legal marriage license from the court house have to do with religious institutions? Are you saying heterosexual couples shouldn't be allowed to marry if they are Athiest?

didactic1 - keep your ideas of "sin" out of politics - we have separation of church and state - do you have a single logic based argument to make? If not, pack it up and keep it to yourself. Say whatever you want in your family, your church, your friends. In politics, religion is checked at the door.

ab - it's called the Defense of Marriage Act - go read it.

Without legalizing marriage between more than 2 people, there will still be discrimination regardless of the idiotic denials by the homopromo lobby to the contrary.

If the REAL LIFE teabaggers want to marry, and deny 3 or 4 people the same rights, then the real life teabaggers are doing the EXACT SAME

Your governor is a man who, when he recites the Pledge of Allegiance " takes seriously the words, "with Liberty and Justice for ALL" !!!

I find this amazing, my water, sewer and trash collection fees have almost tripled since O'Malley and company took office. I work harder and take home less yet they still spend money like it grows on trees. Cut off the money supply and let them feel the same pain and we will get better leadership.

People don't have problems with other life styles, can O'Mally raise some money for Men who marry Women? Instead of taxing us to death?

@Anonymous - I think you posted your comment about "spending" to the wrong article. And your previous post is almost as dumb. Better get some laws passed against Mormons - oops, forgot, since they are a religious group, they are exempt from persecution. My bad.

BankStreet Your comment is offensive in the extreme. It defies response.

"there is nothing wrong with being gay. It is just as normal and natural as heterosexuality."

Not in any world but yours.

It is NOT "normal" at all. Regardless of what you believe, a Creator or a theory of evolution, neither would EVER allow a species that can not replicate itself.
That would be a failure of either theory.

Homosexuality is nothing more or less than a genetic disorder not unlike sickle cell anemia or Cystic Fibrosis.

No one can prove it is anything other than that.

Most homosexuals say they are born that way, well they are right. They were born with a genetic disorder or defect that at some point in their development, a gene went awry. A switch malfunctioned.

Prove that theory wrong!

Anonymous (one of several brave souls),

I'm not sure how your water/sewer/trash rates are affected by Governor O'Malley directly. Nor how they are germane to this discussion.

I found GaryO's posting offensive because it dismissed the concerns of hundreds of families in Maryland who will be strengthened by marriage equality and because it treated fellow human beings as pariahs. It was contemptible. Care to tell me why my posting was offensive, or were you just being "witty"?

So, you would deny civil marriage to people who have sickle cell anemia or cystic fibrosis? My homosexuality is not a disease or disorder. It is, contrary to your assessment, entirely "normal." Neither typical nor predominant ... but well within the spectrum of "normal." And I don't think the human race is put in danger of dying out by my presence. Some human traits, such as irrational fear or hatred of fellow creatures who might be different, though, are -- I hope -- on the wane.

"And your previous post is almost as dumb. Better get some laws passed against Mormons" Posted by: duh

So you are willing to discriminate against 3 loving adults in a long term relationship only because they are not homosexuals?

You then are guilty of the same thing you accuse those who oppose homosexual marriage of being guilty of. BIGOTRY and HATE and denying someone the same rights you are demanding.

I find it odd that homosexuals cannot see that they are no different in their discriminatory and bigoted beliefs.

Sticky wicket, this one is.

@posstum:

Section 2-201 of the Family Law Article reads: "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in this State."

There is no such thing as "civil union" in Maryland; calilng a relationship a "civil union" has no legal standing whatsoever and does not entitle the self-declared participants (no matter what their gender) to any rightsor recognition. Moreover, of course, same-sex couples have a legitimate complaint about being pushed to the back of the bus. A "civil union" is not a marriage.

@anonymous:

"Prove that theory wrong!"

Why should the burden be on homosexuals to disprove your theories? Why shouldn't you have to prove it right before denying them equal rights?

And even if, arguendo, that theory is right, why is it the basis for the denial of equal rights? Do we deny people with "sickle cell anemia or Cystic Fibrosis" the right to marry?

I am a person of faith. My partner and I were married, by a rabbi, in a mainstream Temple, before God and our families.

It was wonderful. It gave social and religious standing to what was already, for many years, the most important aspect of our shared lives.

People are free not to believe in God the way we do, of course. That's about faith, though, and I think we have to respectfully acknowledge that we may never agree, nor do we have to.

Now we are looking to protect our most important relationship legally, civilly, so that we are not legal strangers to one another.

We share a house, a car, a mortgage, bills, decisions about what to have for dinner and decisions about life and death.

We've already made multiple trips to a very expensive lawyer to try to protect that relationship, but even our lawyer acknowledges the difficulty of doing so without a marriage certificate.

The lawyer has had to think ahead to all manner of possible situations just to try to make sure they are covered--they would have been automatically by a single marriage certificate.

Heterosexual couples get to protect their most important relationship with a single marriage contract.

We want to protect ours as well. That seems like a reasonable thing to do in the case of heterosexual couples.

I don't understand why it suddenly becomes unreasonable when gay couples seek to do the same.

Peace.

Re: "...Homosexuality is nothing more or less than a genetic disorder not unlike sickle cell anemia or Cystic Fibrosis..."

Perhaps. And yet we don't find ideologues or politicians trying to prevent those with sickle cell anemia or Cystic Fibrosis from marrying or otherwise living their lives with all the civil rights and responsibilities that those without "genetic defects" have.

I suspect something other than viewing gay people as "defective" is to blame for why society puts up roadblocks in front of them in ways that it tries to REMOVE in the case of those with other kinds of "defects."

I am a person of faith. My partner and I were married, by a rabbi, in a mainstream Temple, before God and our families.

It was wonderful. It gave social and religious standing to what was already, for many years, the most important aspect of our shared lives.

People are free not to believe in God the way we do, of course. That's about faith, though, and I think we have to respectfully acknowledge that we may never agree, nor do we have to.

Now we are looking to protect our most important relationship legally, civilly, so that we are not legal strangers to one another.

We share a house, a car, a mortgage, bills, decisions about what to have for dinner and decisions about life and death.

We've already made multiple trips to a very expensive lawyer to try to protect that relationship, but even our lawyer acknowledges the difficulty of doing so without a marriage certificate.

The lawyer has had to think ahead to all manner of possible situations just to try to make sure they are covered--they would have been automatically by a single marriage certificate.

Heterosexual couples get to protect their most important relationship with a single marriage contract.

We want to protect ours as well. That seems like a reasonable thing to do in the case of heterosexual couples.

I don't understand why it suddenly becomes unreasonable when gay couples seek to do the same.

Peace.

"...I find it odd that homosexuals cannot see that they are no different in their discriminatory and bigoted beliefs."

With respect, I'll let those polygamists argue for what they believe.

I don't think it's up to gay couples arguing for the same right to marry as heterosexual couples to make the separate case for multiple same or opposite partners.

IMO, the word "marriage" is the sticking point for alot of people, me included. However, if legislation was passed legallizing civil unions between gay & lesbian couples, providing them with the same protections afforded married couples, I would have no objection. Isn't that the real object here? The use of the word marriage, which many connect with their religious faith, is the sticking point.

Seems like O'Malley has ignored the letter Archbishop O'Brien wrote him.

Its a done deal. Gay marriage will be legal in MD. Gays are in position across this country to make it happen. Watch out for who you vote into office next time MD!!!!

I love unabashed hypocritical bigots - and apparently, judging by the comments here, they are alive and well in Maryland! Whatever excuse you use - it is still pure unabashed bigoted hatred! - may god strike you down for your hatred!

Maybe OMalley lives in the closet?

Memew55 - I think God would strike homosexuals down before His beloved. He's done it before - Sodom and Gomorrah.
Perhaps the aids and HIV epidemic among homosexuals comparable to it.

Bigdoggoose,

I don't think Governor O'Malley is closeted. However, many homophobes are. Sometimes, the only way they can protect their fragile constructions is to hurl innuendo at others.

WOW! To all you people who cannot read what is written but have a sick desire to insert your own bigotry and biases into what someone else typed, let me clear it up for you.

The genetic defect I wrote about is just that, noting more nothing less. If any of you bigoted people can point out where I typed any position on whether you should be allowed to marry or not, please post it.

It is far easier to bring your own bigotry and bias to the surface than to actually read what was typed.

In all the discussion about gay marriage, those wanting the law changed keeping talking about love and protecting the "children". Yet they aren't shy about also wanting to protect their assets & gaining benefits limited to married couples. Demanding protected rights for what they do in their bedroom. If they think that O'Malley really cares about doing what's fair, they are, at best naive. He is positioning himself for higher office & will expect the gay community to endorse him for his efforts, without question. Those politicians standing behind O'Malley's push should remember that not every MD voter agrees with their views.

There is really one main reason for the Governor to drop his push for gay "marriage:" the voters don't want it.

In every state where the voters have been asked to vote on this issue, they have said NO to gay "marriage."! What part of NO does the Governor NOT understand? In New Hampshire, they elected a veto-proof majority in their state legislature and they are working on repealing their gay "marriage" law. The same thing is happening in Iowa. And, there is also a repeal effort, though lengthy, in New York.

This is something the voters simply do not want. Most people actually do believe that real mothers and fathers are important in a child's life, and that mothers and fathers are not interchangeable. That is, they don't believe any two people will do to raise a happy, successful child. They also see gay "marriage" being used as the excuse for removing laws against multiple marriage and child marriage, and most voters don't want that.

The majority of voters get it that the public purpose of marriage is to connect parent to their chidlren and to each other. Even the supporters of gay "marriage" have to leave children out of the argument because their arguments are solely about the "civil rights" of adults and not what's best for children or the future of our society.

"I don't think Governor O'Malley is closeted. However, many homophobes are."Posted by: BankStreet


Too funny! A person using a homophobic slur in an attempt to insult someone who is not gay! How disgusting and HOMOPHOBIC and bigoted is that?

Legalizing same sex marriage is propagating the dangerous practices of homosexual and bisexual sex spreading to Heterosexuals. Since 1983 the Center for Disease Control (CDC) has stated that homosexuals or Men having Sex with Men (MSM) and now Women having Sex with women (WSM) with anal and oral intercourse, and using various sex toys, is the #1 cause for the spread of HIV, AIDS, HPV, and many other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) . (See below references). I and many others are amazed that individuals in power choose Political Correctness over not only the physical welfare of the Gay Community, but fail to recognize the exorbitant medical and economic cost to care for an HIV/AIDS infected individuals let alone the emotional and mental anguish knowing that their life will be cut short. There are many Homosexuals who have rejected and left the Homosexual life style; however I have a former acquaintance who, I just recently confirmed is a practicing homosexual who has had multiple partners. When he gets HIV and eventually AIDS, which he may already have, I will suggest that he find a good lawyer to sue the State of Maryland, and I think Reckless Endangerment is a good "Cause of Action". Because of the present overwhelming statistics, starting with the CDC and other medical research, that Gay sex practices which transmit HIV, AIDS, HPV, and other STD's are condoned by the State of MD , it would be a good reason to sue. True friends do not let friends drive drunk and neither does a true friend promote an unnatural sexual life style that will eventually make them get sick and die. In passing the Same Sex Marriage bill, the majority of Maryland senators and the governor do not care about Homosexuals, Lesbians or Bisexuals, or even Heterosexuals, but there are many unheard 'peons' that do, including myself. So, if you say you care about homosexuals, Bisexuals, and Lesbians then do not pass or sign this law, for the welfare of all our citizens in the State of Maryland.

Karen - I'm gay, and think that children should be raised with their 2 loving biological parents. Which is all fine and dandy in utopica.

In the real work. Half of the people that have kids don't care about them. Why do you think there are so many kids in Baltimore that are flunking out of school and not going to college. Their parents don't care about them or their success.

Also, straight couples have kids that they don't want. How many kids are there up for adoption. In the US alone, just 118,000. Those parents that you claim should raise them, they don't want their kid.... WOW.

At least when a gay couple adopts (which is what I want to do when it comes to that time in my life), you KNOW that they want that kid. It's not "accident".

Queers are on the move.
Anyone ever consider the anatomical and sanitary consequences of a queer union?
Richard

Richard,

Every day. Every live-long queer day. MMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

@Karen Grube, just because 'the people voted' doesn't make them right and it doesn't mean they should be allowed to vote on the PRIVATE lives of fellow citizens.

And it's important to remember; the last time such a ban passed it was by a VERY SLIM margin. And that was just a couple years ago. More and more people are willing to legalize same-sex marriage, if polls are correct. Main reason those measures passed is largely because of widespread disinformation.

Studies have shown, repeatedly, that children raised in homes headed by gay couples do JUST AS WELL as children raised in homes head by strait couples. Prove me wrong.

Just because gay couples 'don't fit' into your narrow view of what makes a family doesn't make it any less of one.

And really... if you were in a relationship but were denied the legal right to marry because your and your partner 'didn't fit' into what was perceived as a 'normal couple', despite being law-abiding citizens, you would be demanding those civil rights, too. Two consenting adults have the RIGHT to marry if they so choose. When you and your partner aren't recognized as legally married,. that can create a whole, huge mess for you later on should something happen to one of you.

The are already many thousands of gay couples raising children and quite successfully. How is it in the best interest of those children to deny their parents the right to marry?

Why should there not be gay marriage im a lesbian female who would love to marry my partner and know that my children will be safe when they go to school and not be harrassed because of me ... its a crying shame how so called christians are dogging the L.G.B.T COMMUNITY OUT . i do know this the very hell some are digging for the L.G.B.T COMMUNITY ISTHE HELL YOU WILL ROTT IN .. I HOPE THAT THAT O MALLY WILL BE ABLE TO LEGALIZE IT

Post a comment

All comments must be approved by the blog author. Please do not resubmit comments if they do not immediately appear. You are not required to use your full name when posting, but you should use a real e-mail address. Comments may be republished in print, but we will not publish your e-mail address. Our full Terms of Service are available here.

Verification (needed to reduce spam):

-- ADVERTISEMENT --

Headlines from The Baltimore Sun
About the bloggers
Annie Linskey covers state politics and government for The Baltimore Sun. Previously, as a City Hall reporter, she wrote about the corruption trial of Mayor Sheila Dixon and kept a close eye on city spending. Originally from Connecticut, Annie has also lived in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, where she reported on war crimes tribunals and landmines. She lives in Canton.

John Fritze has covered politics and government at the local, state and federal levels for more than a decade and is now The Baltimore Sun’s Washington correspondent. He previously wrote about Congress for USA TODAY, where he led coverage of the health care overhaul debate and the 2010 election. A native of Albany, N.Y., he currently lives in Montgomery County.

Julie Scharper covers City Hall and Baltimore politics. A native of Baltimore County, she graduated from The Johns Hopkins University in 2001 and spent two years teaching in Honduras before joining The Baltimore Sun. She has followed the Amish community of Nickel Mines, Pa., in the year after a schoolhouse massacre, reported on courts and crime in Anne Arundel County, and chronicled the unique personalities and places of Baltimore City and its surrounding counties.
Most Recent Comments
Sign up for FREE local news alerts
Get free Sun alerts sent to your mobile phone.*
Get free Baltimore Sun mobile alerts
Sign up for local news text alerts

Returning user? Update preferences.
Sign up for more Sun text alerts
*Standard message and data rates apply. Click here for Frequently Asked Questions.
  • Breaking News newsletter
When a big news event breaks, we'll e-mail you the basics with links to up-to-date details.
Sign up

Blog updates
Recent updates to baltimoresun.com news blogs
 Subscribe to this feed
Charm City Current
Stay connected