Md. Same-Sex Marriage Bill Dies With No Final Vote

ANNAPOLIS, Md. (AP/WJZ) — Not this year. Maryland lawmakers were on the verge of making history, to become the sixth state in the country to allow same-sex marriages, but on Friday those efforts are all but dead.

The speaker of Maryland’s House vowed that Democrats would try again next year to pass legislation legalizing gay marriage, but the intense lobbying by faith groups against the measure in recent weeks shows that it won’t be easy, even in a state known for its liberal politics.

Political reporter Pat Warren reports on what happened in the House of Delegates Friday, and what happens next.

A loose coalition of Democratic legislators failed to cobble together enough votes to overcome opposition from Republicans and religious groups, including the Catholic Church and many black congregations, to make Maryland the sixth state to legalize gay marriage.

Lawmakers had planned to vote on the bill in the House, but it was withdrawn instead Friday and effectively killed for the year.

Opposition from some religious groups grew after the Senate narrowly passed its version of the measure Feb. 24. Then some black Democratic lawmakers withdrew their support, while freshman legislators had trouble determining what constituents wanted. House leaders didn’t rely on a traditional whipping operation to line up votes on a hot-button social issue, even after Republicans gains last year.

“The vote would have been very close, make no mistake about it,” said House Speaker Michael Busch, (D) Anne Arundel, after it was referred back to committee on a voice vote.

Busch had been meeting with his fellow delegates for days seeking votes, saying he will try again next year.

Delegate Anne Kaiser, (D) Montgomery, one of the chamber’s openly gay members, said supporters were always a few votes short of the 71 needed and that many factors blocked their way.

“I think in some cases it was the churches back home,” Kaiser said. “I really can’t explain people’s motivations. Many people who promised us their votes changed their minds.”

The bill’s withdrawal bitterly disappointed gay marriage supporters who said they had appeared close to a major victory after the Senate, considered the more conservative of Maryland’s two Democratic-controlled chambers, approved a similar proposal.

Same-sex marriage is legal in Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and the District of Columbia. Rhode Island lawmakers are debating legislation to legalize same-sex marriage. But the Maryland bill hit trouble in the House two weeks ago after a committee had to delay a series of votes on the issue and some Democrats, including in the black community, began wavering.

Even if the bill had passed, there was a chance that it could have been put to voters in a referendum. Under Maryland law, citizens who gather enough signatures can petition for their right to vote on laws passed by legislators.

The issue divided the state’s top three political leaders, all Catholic Democrats. While Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller opposed legalizing gay marriage, Busch and Gov. Martin O’Malley supported it.

“I would have hoped that we could have resolved this issue and then let the people decide,” O’Malley said.

National groups on both sides of the debate had converged on Annapolis in the past week, with the National Organization for Marriage pledging to spend $1 million to oppose the re-election of supporters of the bill. The liberal Human Rights Campaign called voters urging them to ask their lawmakers to support the bill.

Opponents of gay marriage said it was a victory for protecting marriage.

“We took a position to support the existing definition (of marriage) as being between one man and woman and that prevailed,” said House Minority Leader Anthony O’Donnell, (R) Calvert.

Catholic officials, led by The Maryland Catholic Conference, coordinated much of the opposition. After the Senate voted, leading bishops in Maryland signed a letter urging Catholics to contact their legislators and insisting the debate was “not over,” according to the Catholic News Service.

Maryland was founded by Catholics in the 17th century, and the Archdiocese of Baltimore says the Catholic population in Baltimore and its nine counties alone is nearly a half million.

Such opposition would weigh heavily on both Republicans and Democrats, said Donald F. Norris, chairman of the Department of Public Policy at University of Maryland, Baltimore County.

The Catholic Church “can get out the faithful to lobby very, very heavily,” Norris said. “So it doesn’t surprise me that in Maryland, a progressive state, that gay marriage can’t yet garner the votes needed.”

O’Malley did say he would’ve signed the bill if the General Assembly passed it.

(Copyright 2011 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

More from Pat Warren

One Comment

  1. Irene Mann says:

    As a Catholic, Gov. O’Malley should be ashamed of himself. Apparently his parents did not do a very good job in instilling Catholic beliefs.

    1. Laurie says:

      I dunno… my aunt’s within the clergy and while she would not support marriage within the Catholic Church, she does on a civil level (you know… separation of Church and State?) or in any house of worship that welcome’s it…

      Laws are to protect the minority… not to benefit the majority. A little more than 50 years ago a man and a woman… of two different races… by law… could not marry in about 15 of our states… against religious teachings.. so it was said…

      1. Marriage between one man and one woman says:

        Yeah, and fifty years from now people will be saying that it was so sad that one man or one woman could not marry more than one other person or other animal. It’s not just about religious teachings…

        Why bring up the race card? It has nothing to do with gender/sexual preference.

      2. Greg says:

        The race comment is right on the mark in my opinion. It relates to separate but equal stance. When that was going on if whites had to enter this door and black had to enter another to get to the same place it wasn’t the same. neither is giving a civil union to gays when it should be called marriage.

        Furthermore O’Malley should be applauded for being able to separate his beliefs in church from his duty as a state official. What his religion says should not and does not have any bearing on gays having the recognition of marriage like every has the right to no matter what their orientation is.

      3. NanC says:

        Abrahmic religions do not recognize gay marriage. Forcing them to is a violation of Freedom of Religion. Forcing them to confirm gay marrieage is a violation of Freedom of Association. The Bill of Rights are inalienable. All other rights are political. O’Malley engaged in politics.

        Solution civil unions or gays develope their own organized religion and refrain from co-opting existing religions to their purpose.

      4. Diane King says:

        Thank you Greg for being the voice of reason. Those are the 2 key points of this issue. 1 – equal opportunity for all, 2 – separation of church and state.

    2. jimmy says:

      Well, Irene , I am a Catholic and I support gay marriage and equality. No Idea what your church preaches, but it’s not love or equality.

      1. John says:

        Only the antichrist would suppoort the so-called gay marriage. Marriage cannot be re-defined. Only God can do that. He’s the one who set up the institution. It is a holy union between one man and one woman. It’s the only marriage blessed by God amighty. God never changes, never compromises and He’s not a respector of persons.

        Why not just call it civil union?

      2. JQP says:

        If it is in God’s hands, then you don’t need me to tell you how to behave, do you, John? Likewise, no one else in the world needs or wants your opinion, either…except for maybe your wife, if you’re lucky enough to have one. God is not a threat, my friends. God is not human or hateful, which some of you seem to think…and didn’t I see some of your names out there condemning WBC? Hypocrisy is and has always been the cornerstone of the Judeo-Christian religions.

      3. John says:

        I don’t believe in others using their power and influence, imposing their will on us. No one should anyone have that right. You can all have your own way, it’s your life. Take your wishes or grievances to the polls. Let the people decide.

        God gave us all, our own free will. When the battle is over, God shall prevail. Our choice will determine our destiny. Where will you and I be fifty to hundred years from now?

      4. Diane King says:


      5. Dan says:

        story does not answer why question. Why did this bill fail.

    3. Balt21212 says:

      Looks like the bigots won this round. Too bad.

      1. Laurie says:

        Yes… sadly. So we get to be second class citizens again.. for awhile.

        Oh… and to whomever up above here… I asn’t bringing up a um “race card”? I’m a mixture of many heritages (and doesn’t like the word “race”… so hateful).

        It is a historical fact, period. It is a part of our makeup as Americans that we allowed this to happen but also a part of our makeup that we corrected the issue. There’s no such thing as “race”, only people.

        I was simply stating a his

      2. pride proud says:

        we can along way to give up now

      3. Balt 101 says:

        Why are people calling people bigots because this didn’t go to a vote. Most legislation never goes to vote and even fewer pass on to become laws. You would be pretty naive to think the first time a bill is ever introduced it would become a law, expecially something as controversial as this.

    4. Megan says:

      The USA is not founded on your Cathlic belief system. What the bible, Quran, or any other religious books or beliefs say has ( or is supposed to have ) absolutely NO say in our government and it’s people. Not everyone is catholic, we are all from different belief systems and it is rude and extemely ignorant to think that your belief system is the only one that matters.

    5. jbr says:

      You think straight people know what marriage means? Try looking at the daily headlines of heteros cheating and making a mockery of marriage. You have no right to pick and choose.

    6. m. gordo says:

      Dear Irene,
      Gov. O’Malley’s religion or his personal religious beliefs are irrelevant in this matter.
      No doubt you have heard of a basic tenet of America…the “separation of church and state”.
      The issue of same sex marriage should not be decided based on anyone’s religious beliefs. If same a sex marriage law were to pass (thus guaranteeing rights that all citizens are entitled to) and you as a Catholic or a Buddhist or whatever think same sex marriage is not for you, that is your choice.
      But government should be in the business of abrogating the rights of others who believe otherwise.

    7. Ronald G Miner Jr says:

      Owe Malley is no more a Catholic that any other Democrat. You cannot be pro abortion and be a Christian of any denomination…period…Sin by proxy is still a sin in the eyes of God. Anyone who votes for and supports politician is as guilty of sin as the politician themselves.

  2. Liam says:

    Yea he should go out and molest some children instead. That’s a good Catholic moral.

    1. Ken says:

      You are an ass.

      1. Patrick says:

        well said Ken

      2. hvillage says:

        …and you have a foul mouth. It drives me nuts to have to explain to my kids why self-righteous people use fatuous, disrespectful language to get what is supposed to be a message of morality and virtuousness.

      3. hvillage says:

        that s meant for Ken, above

    2. Ken says:

      @ hvillage…you are an ass too…

      1. Diane King says:

        huh? why would someone’s kids be reading these posts????

      2. hvillage says:

        Ken, thank you for clarifying your position. Diane, honey, it was really more metaphoric and based on a comment someone made above about having to explain the actions of others to their children. I figured anyone with half a brain would have caught the irony. Clearly I was mistaken, but you keep on trying, there, sister.

      3. Diane King says:

        hvillage – your condescending tone makes you look like a hateful unhappy person

      4. Diane King says:

        and I’m not your honey or your sister! Thank goodness.

  3. Herman Glimsher says:




    1. jimmy says:

      Is your keyboard broken or is it just you being a clown leaving your CAPS on every time you leave a comment.

      And if it would of made it to the ballot box, Herman, it would of passed in support of gay marriage and equality.

      1. Ronald G Miner Jr says:

        Wrong but thanks for playing. I have no stand on gay marriage, but your ignorance is showing. well over 60% of poll data confirms that Marylander do not support gay marriage. Many of those polled are Democrats. I bet you are one of those who believe that a majority of Americans support Obamacare and socialism too…

        Wishful thinking…

    2. Megan says:

      They are voting the way the majority want them to vote! Just because you and the narrow minded people you talk to all agree does not mean you are in the majority.

    3. balt 101 says:

      Regardless about how you feel about O’Malley he had nothing to do with this vote. He is not a legislator, he is a Governor, which is part of the the Executive branch which doesn’t make law. Try to at least have a legitimate point.

  4. Mike says:

    For all the people that say gay marriage is wrong because the bible says marriage is between one man and one woman (which it actually doesn’t) and then makes the argument that if we accept gay marraige we have to accept polygamy (looking at you Marriage Between One Man and One Woman), I have a question. How do you reconcile those two arguments? Polygamy was sanctioned repeatedly in the bible and it was common for the main people in the bilbe to have numerous wives. How can you say you oppose gay marriage because of your biblical beliefs and then turn around and not support polygamy…or, for that matter, slavery, subservience of women, there’s a whole bunch of things acceptable in the bible that are currently taboo. Could it be that you pick and choose your “beliefs” from the bible to suit your own prejudices?

    1. Aria says:

      This! It’s hypocrisy.

    2. Jason says:

      As an aside, the mention of polygamists IN the bible is not the same as being sanctioned or condoned BY the bible. The bible contains accounts of things that may (or may not depending on your beliefs) have happened during the time at which those particular books are written. Not to get into whether the bible is completely or partly true, I just wanted to point out that a mention of polygamy is not the same as approving of its practice.

      1. Aria says:

        In the bible, god allowed many wives. That’s condoning polygamy.

      2. Jason says:

        I disagree…respectfully of course. God allowed a lot of things in the bible, that doesn’t mean He approved or condoned it. God “allowed” Adam and Eve to eat of the forbidden tree, even though He told them not to. He allowed them to do it, and when they did, He punished them by kicking them out of Eden. I think there is a big difference between allowing something to take place and telling someone that it’s okay to do.

    3. Japheth says:

      Mike, I totally agree with you… I am a conservative, a deeply religious man with roots in the Reformed faith of Christianity.. The bible allows numerous wives… People just do not want to accept it. It is against same-sex marriage and I am glad it died in the house but I want the hypocrisy to end.. Plural Marriage should not be denied. Yeshua (Jesus) was not talking about Plural Marriage in Matthew 5 and 19, the context was divorce.. For all those who will say that the bible does not condone polygamy just records it then clearly they have not read their bibles close enough.. Yehovah (God) through the prophet Nathan declared unto David: “And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.” (2 Samuel 12:8). If God did not condone it then God would NOT have given David his wives nor said if it was to little I would have provided MORE.. God cannot sin, God cannot allow sin or condone, So the fact that God gave David his wives proves Primia Facie evidence that polygamy is not sin and cannot be denied to any man. It is even regulated in God’s holy law, “If a man take another wife … he can not diminish the first wife’s clothing, food, or bed rights” The case is simple and clear God not only allows it but even provided numerous wives to men. To call polygamy sin would be to say that God sinned and that is a violation of of the Third Commandment.

      1. Jason says:

        If God does not allow sin, then why does sin exist? Again, I make no claims towards whether same-sex marriage is sin or not, just trying to show the flaw in your logic. God could abolish sin easily, but He wants people to make the choice.

      2. Japheth says:

        Jason, I did not mean that god does not allow sin, of course He does allow it to fulfill His divine plans.. I was trying to say that God does not allow his elect ones or even unbelievers to sin without a just recompense. Yes, God could abolish sin easily, but he does not do it because He wants people to make a choice, He allows it to to fulfill his good pleasure and He molds good or evil actions to fullfilll His purpose, (Romans 9:22-23). But God cannot sin… If God was to sin then He could not be God.. The moral law is the sum of His attributes and if He sinned then He would cease to be God. So the fact that God gave numerous wives to David and told him that if it had not been enough He would have given him even more wives show that polygamy is not sinful no matter what man tries to say. God can not do what goes contrary to His will/law. God can only do His holy will, Westminster Children’s Catechism Q/A 16.

      3. Japheth says:

        Jason, I also meant that God cannot allow sin… And what I meant by this was that God can not make good/right what is sinful nor can be take a sinful thing and make it good/right.. So I meant that God can not declare something that is considered sinful and evil and say it is right and vice versa. Yes God can declare positive commands right or wrong such as rituals but to declare something right that is against His moral law which is rooted in His divine attributes would be to violate Himself. That means God can not declare something temporarily good what is against His holy will. That does not mean that God allows sin to happen it just means that God can not make a declaration or do something that would violate Himself.

      4. Jason says:

        I understand your point based on your explanation, but my interpretation is different, which doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m right either. In that passage (2 Samuel 12:8), it says that God delivered “thy master’s wives into thy bosom”, which to me says they weren’t David’s new wives, just his “property” per se. So to me, that means that God is saying if the things i gave you weren’t enough, I would have given you more things. It makes no reference (in that verse) as to what David did with this new “property”. In the very next verse it says that David committed evil in God’s sight by killing a man AND taking his wife to be his (David’s) own. That, to me, says that not only was killing the man evil, but taking on another wife of one’s own was also evil. Perhaps I’m getting lost in the semantics, but I don’t see how the verse you quoted says it’s okay to have more than one wife of one’s own. And again, I’m not saying that polygamy is or isn’t a sin, I just don’t see that verse as supporting your argument. If God gives a man an abundance of wealth, but the man uses it to sin, that doesn’t mean that what God did was a sin. But that’s just my opinion based on my own interpretation.

      5. Japheth says:

        Jason, the context of 2 Samuel 12 is that David stole another man’s wife which is adultery.. David already had numerous wives and God told David that He himself gave David those wives and delivered Saul’s wives to David after the death of Saul. But David wanted something he could not have, another man’s wife. So God said through Nathan, I gave you all such and such, and all your master’s wives and had it not been enough I would have given you even more of the same. Whether or not that these wives were given in Betrothal as Free Women or whether they were Concubines which are Slave-Wives makes little difference. Scripture recognizes both as complete marriages except one as less rights then the others. So the context of 2 Sam. 12 is that God gave David all these things and wives and David took what he could not have and God said Why? had it not been enough of what I gave you I would have given you more which includes more wives. I already showed previously that in God’s Torah (Law) He already includes regulations to Plural Marriage, “If a man takes another wife” etc, etc.. There are many more regulation laws that God gave in the scriptures which implicitly permits Polygamy. I am not alone in my interpretation of 2 Sam. 12 or any of these other text. Protestant Reformers said the same thing such as Martin Luther of the Lutherans, Martin Bucer of the Reformed, John Milton of the Puritan-Reformed, The Wesley’s of the Methodist. Early church fathers such as Augustine and Jerome. Martin Luther even performed a Plural Marriage ceremony for the Arch-Duke of Hess. So what I am saying is not quite unorthodox.

      6. Jason says:

        Hmmm. I see your point. Thanks for the insight.

      7. Jason says:

        Okay…I couldn’t stop beating this dead horse. If the verse in 2 Samuel permits or condones polygamy, wouldn’t it contradict w/ 1 Cor 7:2 which says more explicitly that a husband should have one wife and a wife one husband?

      8. Japheth says:

        Jason, Sorry it took a few days.. Not only do we not get on the computer on the Sabbath but we also travel far for church. So are you referring to 1 Corinthians 7:2 or are you talking about Titus 1:5 and 1 Timothy 3:2? 1 Corinthians 7:2 does not use or say one wife or one husband.. The wording of 1 Corinthians 7:2 says “Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.” This is what I hate about the English language since it is so inadequate.. If you look up the words own and own from 1 Corinthians 7:2 you will find that they are not the same word. The first word “own” is heautou and the second word “own” is idios. Strong’s numbers is 1438 for heautou and 2398 for idios. The Greek word idios means joint ownership or co-owner while heautou means sole ownership. Therefore, the clear implication of 1 Corinthians 7: 2, from the meanings of the words heautou and idios, as determined from their usage in various scriptures, is that while a wife is not allowed to be owned by more than one husband, a husband, on the other hand, is not prohibited from being owned by more than one wife. If a husband is so owned by more than one wife, then the ownership of those wives of him would be shared, common or joint. Additionally the word wife does not represent one or we would have other problems in scripture such as in Exodus 20 in the 10 Commandments where it says that We are not allowed to covet our neighbors house, wife, ox, donkey, etc. Does our neighbor only have one ox, or one donkey, etc etc.. Now if you are talking about Titus and 1 Timothy passages where it says in English “One Wife” for Bishops and Deacons. I would say that is a very very bad translation. The Greek wording is “Mia gynē” which should be properly translated as “First Wife”. Mia is the Greek word for sequential numeral one “First” then Second, Third, etc.. In other words a Bishops or Deacon can not be divorced from his first wife or any other sequential wife. Which to was a old testament requirement among priest that they can not be divorced nor marry a divorced women. I draw your attention to other uses of “Mia” in the New Testament. Acts 20:7 reads “Mia Ton Sabbaton” which is translated as “First of Sabbaths” which means First Sabbath after Passover. KJV mistranslates it as “First of the week” but that would have to be “Mia Hemera Tou Evdomada”. “Mia Ton Sabbaton” refers to the counting of Sabbaths between Passover and Pentecost that was required in Torah (See Lev. 23:10-16). Anyway, If Paul wanted to say that Bishops and Deacons were restricted to One (Singular) Wife then he would have used the Greek word “Heis” which means Singular One. A true godly man is not to deal treacherously with the “wife of his youth”, his first wife, the wife-number-one! The “judgment of the Yehovah” in Exodus 21:10 established that very clearly. Therefore, indeed, an elder, a bishop, a deacon would and should certainly be required to live up to that “judgment of the Yehovah” in Exodus 21:10. Indeed, because they must be holy, they must certainly be still so loving, so blessing, and so edifying their first wife, the “wife of thy youth”, the wife with whom they first learned how to be such a true godly lord! Additionally a Minister of God must have his house in order which would include not being divorced which is the meaning of Titus and 1 Timothy phrase “First Wife”.

      9. Jason says:

        I wonder why they wouldn’t make such a distinction (between various definitions of ‘own’) clear during the translation to English.

      10. Japheth says:

        Jason, They do that with all sorts of passages and words… There are 4 completely different words and meanings for Love in the Greek New Testament but all are translated with Love without differentiation. Same goes for words like God, they used a generic word “god” instead of the proper “Elohim” which is a Plural-Godhead (Trinitarian). They use such names as “Jesus” which is not even connected to the Hebrew or Greek name of the Messiah.. Je-Sus is derived from “Ge-Zeus” which was a pagan temple name for Zeus. The Hebrew name of the Messiah is Yeshua which is transliterated into Greek as Iesous, Iesous is translated into English as Iesu and transliterated as Yesu.. Jesus is not even close. I can think of dozens of more words where the Greek differentiates but not in the English translation. 1 Corinthians 11 comes to mind about headcoverings.. Paul uses the Greek word katakalupto for an outward additional material covering and uses the Greek word peribolaion for the natural hair covering that God gave and Paul is using as example on why women should also be covered with the material covering.. But both words though are translated as covering which makes the whole chapter confusing and contradictory. Just a few examples..

      11. Jason says:

        What I’ve learned from all this is that it’s important to pray and trust that God will provide you with the proper interpretation of scripture, regardless of the words on the paper. Even knowing what was intended by the text doesn’t ensure that the message will be received correctly.

    4. Megan says:

      The bible also says it is ok to stone your child to death if they disobey you. I hope some of you don’t have children!

      1. Ken says:

        If they are gay they will not have children without social or scientific intervention.

      2. NanC says:

        Jesus said “Let those without sin cast the first stone.” He came to fulfill the law of God.

      3. Japheth says:

        Megan, The context is not little children but adult children… These children were gluttons and drunkards and they rebel against all authority including the church and state. They must also be found guilty in a state judgment court. Perfect scriptural example would be Eli’s adult children.. God rebuked Eli for not rebuking his sons or taking them to the court of elders. People try all the time to use the “stone children” law to try to disprove biblical law and use it as an emotional tool.. That is wrong…

      4. Japheth says:

        NanC, The first part of your sentence “Let those without sin cast the first stone” is not the words of Yeshua (Jesus).. If you look at all the manuscripts from A.D. 78 to A.D. 420 John 8:1-11 are absent and was forged and inserted around the 400s. Even the early church fathers in the 400s said that text was forged. Second part of your sentence that Yeshua came to fulfill the law of God… Fulfill does not mean destroy or abrogate.. Look at Matthew chapter 5, Yeshua said twice He did not come to destroy the law and that not one jot or tittle would pass from the law until heaven and earth pass away and the man who teaches other man the leasts of these commandments will be considered least in the kingdom of God. Additionally the word fulfill in Greek or Aramaic means to confirm and not what we think it means “to draw to an end”. Also the word destroy in Aramaic is actually “loosen” which destroy would mean something similar.. So Yeshua said He did not come to loosen Torah or the Prophets but to confirm them.

    5. Ronald G Miner Jr says:

      It doesn’t? REALLY? I see no reference to Adam and Steve or Eve and Ann..What I do see is this….Straight from the Torah

      Leviticus 20:13

      And if a man has sex relations with a man, the two of them have done a disgusting thing: let them be put to death; their blood will be on them.

  5. David says:

    Thank God! I fasted today for Lent and emailed my delegates and feel that God intervened.

    1. TRS says:

      I hear ya!!!!🙂

    2. Aria says:

      You prayed for people to be denied rights? You’re evil.

      1. David says:

        No the good people of Maryland are God-fearing and don’t want so-called sodom marriages. This contradicts the natural law of humanity.

      2. Megan says:

        Um no you are wrong. I am a very good person and I am not a part of YOUR religeon. Don’t speak for me. You have no idea what most of the good people or for that matter even most of the god fearing people in Maryland want. If you think you do you may want to talk to someone because you may have NPD. (narsassistic personality disorder).

      3. Diane King says:

        David – I live in Maryland too and you certainly don’t speak for me or my circle of friends. Your narrow-minded hateful beliefs are just that – yours. Not everybody’s!

      4. Japheth says:

        Aria, there is no such thing as “human” rights, only Divine Right of God. It is not human rights but Divine law which is the foundation of liberty and the safeguard against tyranny. It is not something proceeding from man (rights), but something proceeding from God (revealed law) which is to order all society. The notion that men have inherent rights is simply a way of affirming original sin. The notion of human rights underlies all pagan revolutionism. Also, it is not evil for Christians to pray for the downfall of the ungodly. In fact it is commanded and exampled for us through scriptures (see imprecations). To call something evil which is good is treason against God. Hear the words of God through the Prophet Isaiah, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

      5. JQP says:

        I thought the ability to reason was supposed to indicate that we are more intelligent than creatures without that ability. This religion of yours did an exceptional job of negating that theory.

  6. JC Wagen says:

    All legal unins shgould be made civil unions as the states require a licence for the union to be legal. Then if you want to be confirm the union in a church or religon of choice then you may do so.

    All settled

    1. annonuser says:

      Wow, great idea. Even seems to separate church and state. Novell.

      1. Oswald says:

        A good idea, but hardly” novel” — read the editor’s column in the Dundalk Eagle from three weeks ago.

    2. Kristina says:

      JC…I couldn’t agree more and I believe there is biblical backing to just this idea. Mark 12:17 says “Then Jesus said to them, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.” And they were amazed at him.” A civil union with legal rights is fitting in Ceasar’s world…just don’t force the churches to participate…that’s where it become’s God’s world. I think Maryland’s proposed bill did just that.

    3. m. gordo says:

      I think that’s the way it works now. For people who are not believers in any faith or who choose to marry only according to civil law, they can do so. It is called a marriage and not a civil union though.
      However Maryland does not, today, allow two men or two women to to be married in a civil ceremony. That’s what a same sex marriage law would allow, thus restoring civil rights to those people who today are being deprived of them.

  7. demo65 says:

    THANK YOU!!!!! Now all of yall and you know who you are. Go home. It is over. Call it what you want but don’t call it a marriage. NOT GONNA HAPPEN!!!!!

  8. Herman Glimsher says:



    1. Aria says:

      Blacks wouldn’t have equal legal right right now if it was left up to a vote.

  9. Jennifer Graul Bushneck says:

    Why would you intentionally block and push back into the dark ages the ability to be in a committed relationship? As far as society goes it is always in the community’s best interest to have stability in any form. I am disgusted with the people I voted for and put into place for the State Congress.

  10. As a “gay” man I am glad the bill did not pass (gasp) look, marriage by definition ( a socially constructed word via religion) clearly indicates that (again) it is between a man and a woman.
    The fight should have nothing to do with Race and or sexism. The only issue that I had with marriage had to do with the fact that inter racial marriages were illegal.
    Nevertheless, does one really need a “word” to celebrate their love and trust?
    When one sets their wedding up as being the happiest day in life they are setting themselves up for massive failure!

    1. jimmy says:

      That’s all fine and dandy, Derrickwoolfson, however until Civil unions give you all the rights and titles that marriage gives you, then we need marriage.

      1. space oddity says:

        See Derrick, Jimmy proves my point, gay marriage is all about the entitlements, not relationships.

    2. Aria says:

      Marriage predates Christianity. Ignorant people think marriage is a Christian idea. It’s not.

      The “word” is needed so that you have the legal right to be there if your partner is ever dying in the hospital.

      1. jimmy says:

        Thank you Aria, it appears space oddity still has no idea that the word marriage gives you by law, that’s why it’s an equality issue not a religious one.

  11. Angel says:


  12. yuck says:

    im not a big church goer i actually have not been sincae a child im just glad a bunch of gays wont be getting married it is DISGUSTING!!! YAY i pray it wont get passed next year woo hoo>>>>Thats what ya get for being gay you wanna get married be straight!

    1. The honest 1 says:

      Thank god Generation Y has the foresight to see past this silly nonsense and clarity to understand the difference between church and state. So glad my generation will finish off the rest of you close minded, hate filled bigots. I guess when I see the number of heterosexual marriages increase compared to divorce rates, I’ll be more inclined to believe that religion has anything to do with the sanctity or longevity of marriage.

    2. Diane King says:

      um, yeah, that was enlightening yuck. Your name says it all.

  13. JC WAGEN says:

    All legal unions should be made civil unions as the states require a license for the union to be legal. You have apply to the civil court to get that license now.
    Then if you want to be confirm the union in a church or religion of choice then you may do so.

    All settled!

    Sorry about the typo’s in the first post I was in a hurry and did not pay attention.

    1. NanC says:

      Good solution. However organized religions should not be forced to confirm a union they do not recognize. None of the Abrahamic religions recognize gay marrieage. Gay civil rights should not be allowed to trump the Freedom of Religion clause in the Bill of Rights. Civil unions separate Church from State.

  14. Jojo says:

    I hate it when some people compare race to sexual orientation. You are either born White or Black. You personal had no say in the process. You don’t have a say in your sexual orientation. You made a choice. So please STOP comparing these 2 completely different issues

    1. annonuer says:

      And can you cite the scientific research supporting this bold statement?

    2. Kristina says:

      JoJo, I’m curious…why do you think people would choose to be persecuted, shunned by strangers, family, and friends, beaten, threatened with death, etc.? By your name I can’t tell for sure if you are a man or a woman, but try just once truly picturing yourself with someone of the same sex…can you even remotely? Do you choose someone from the opposite sex or are you drawn by some inexplicable force to the opposite sex?

    3. Diane King says:

      Jojo you’re not very well read are you? Welcome to 2011. Your statements are absolutely false. It is not a “choice” to be gay.

      1. JQP says:

        Though I stand on your side of the fence on this argument, Diane, you have done nothing here but blast other people for their opinions (even hvillage’s above, who agrees with you), when are you going to say something worth while?

      2. Diane King says:

        Well JQP, I checked out your comments here to see what exactly it is that you feel is “worthwhile”. I don’t see much difference. Just the typical back and forth of differing viewpoints. Why are you singling me out?

  15. prince says:

    Hurrahs and coudo’s…It’s about time you used some brains to not let this kind of
    thing …most of the people in this world have some ability, enough to not let this
    farce happen…

  16. yuck says:

    Being a gay guy is one thing(still disgusting) but i swear the girls around my age only do it for the attention and probably are disgusted by a naked girl it just makes me sick. And its a shame i have to explain to my daught er why a guy and guy are holding hands or girl and girl it should not be that way

    1. dj says:

      I agree with you 100%. I dont care about the marriage part. I just feel sorry for the kids. To hear two guys who both have daughters at a young age explain to them why they are sleeping together is totally mind blowing. The kids will grow up thinking its ok for them to kiss or have a relationship with the same sex. Just nasty to me.

    2. Megan says:

      You are both ridiculous. I hope everyday that people like you have children that grow up to be gay or at least open minded.

    3. NanC says:

      Personally having been raised in the Midwest I find all public displays of affection offensive. What you do in the privacy of your home is your business. What you do in public should be guaged to minimize offense to others. Its callled good manners. Anyone fondling each other in public is a disrespectful oaf.

  17. Joyce says:

    God is good!!!!!!

  18. Herman Glimsher says:



    1. Megan says:

      You are so wrong. It is NOT a choice.

      1. Ken says:

        Everything in this life is a choice. If it is not then it is defective DNA or a chemical imbalance in the brain.

    2. Diane King says:

      Oh please Herman. Many gay men try to conform to what society expects of them and then as they get older they become more confident in who they really are and only then are willing to “come out”. Just because they managed to put on a good front and produce children doesn’t prove anything.

    3. hvillage says:

      Ken, if it is a choice, then you are saying you made a conscious choice to be straight? In fact, that you COULD be gay if you so choose?

      Better to look at it, should you be of a strong Judeo-Christian faith, from the perspective of choosing spirituality over physicality. In which case, therein lies the only choice.

      So, my question to you is, is your faith the only thing that keeps you from committing “sin”?

  19. Czar says:

    Anyone who dares misrepresent the bible about the sanctity of marriage as an institution that the creator set up (Uhmmm… Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve), had better go back and, if you can read, then read Romans chapter 1 and 2 and Deuteronomy.

    Or, go back and read (if you morons can read) Genesis and the lesson of raining fire on Sodom.

    Note to communists – you choose to be an idiot.

    1. John says:

      Here, here! It’s quite clearly explained in Ronans 1. The reprobate-minded becoming lovers of themselves, engaging in their own lusts and doing that which is unbecoming. Please read if you are a true believer.

      I love all people but do not agree with all their ways or lifestyles if it’s contrary to my faith. i would protect and defend and help gay people if they arein need or in danger. I would not impose my will or my faith on others but would tell them God’s truth to the best of my ability, as it is stated in God’s word.

      1. Joan says:

        John, so true.

      2. JQP says:

        go further back and read older texts… you’re so off base.

      3. Megan says:

        That god you speak of has nothing to do with it. What that book says doesnt either. Not every US citizen believes in your god. Even alot that do disagree with you. Your religeous views are irrelevant in politics. Sorry!… And grow up!

  20. annonuser says:

    The legislature. No Balls. Ironic.

  21. ratm33 says:

    Get over it, it is done. This is just their nice way of saying no way. THis is just gross, how can someone be aroused by the same sex, that is not the way nature intended it. If you say that being gay is a natural thing, then i say so is high blood pressure but we take meds to cure it. Maybe one day they will find a medication for these people.

    1. Megan says:

      Animals in nature are gay too. It IS natural. You should educate yourself.

      1. Ken says:

        You have got to be kidding. If either your mother or father were gay…you would not be here. Gay is contrary to the laws od nature. Face facts….

      2. Megan says:

        I know lots of gays with children they gave birth to. You just ignorant to the ways of the world. Ur still living in the past. Catch up!

  22. Aria says:

    ““Those of you who will equate same-sex marriage with the civil rights movement show me your hands, let me see the scars my race has known,” Del. Emmett Burns, (D)-Baltimore County.”

    I want Burns to show me the scars on his hands. I want Burns to show me how he’s been scarred. His rights are assured. He hasn’t been personally injured and faces no legally allowable discrimination. Gays do.

    Yes, blacks were mistreated through slavery and the original civil rights movement. They were mistreated for something they had no control over. During the civil rights movement, it was “separate but equal”, but was deemed wrong.

    Well, gay people have always been mistreated, and to this day, can get someone killed. In most states, gays don’t even have the “separate but equal” that blacks had during the civil rights days. Gays don’t choose to be gay any more than blacks choose to be black.

    Burns is an idiot who should be ashamed of himself for daring to say that gays shouldn’t have equal rights and then to compare them to blacks. Based on his comparison of racial rights and gay rights, he should support gay rights. Instead he wants rights for “[his] people”, but doesn’t think gays should have rights. That’s twisted to the point of evil.

    1. joan says:

      You are really lost in your understanding of civil rights by Burns. I was apart of it, in marches, putting my life on the line to get laws passed for persons of a different color when this was our right (regardless of law) as a human being. The marriage law is no comparison. It is a law of “common sense”. The difinition of “marriage” is between one man and one women. Female/Male? Even animals know this! I guess this earth will never be populated! Even if you adopte a chilld, it still requires opposite sex. Don’t try making up rules, It will never work! What is evil is trying to change what is created naturally.

      1. Megan says:

        Um no it is not. The bible says that is what marriage is but that book has no place in our government… And you should educate yourself since apparently no one else has… There ARE gay animals in nature!

  23. John says:

    Instead of imposing our will on the people, perhaps they should put it up for a vote by all Marylanders. Take it to the polls. I’m disgusted by all lobbyists. No special treatment for anyone. The word “rights” is being used excessively to make any movement sounds powerful. “Animal rights”, civil rights etc. What about God’s rights? God’s rights should come first because He is the only all powerful.

    1. hvillage says:

      That all depends…. is your god the same as everyone else’s? Because if not, then we first need to agree on a god. Christians can’t even agree amongst themselves which way is the right way to worship, and Judeo-Christians as a whole can’t even agree on God’s name… When we can agree on the creator, we can agree on EVERYTHING ELSE… until then we are all just people reading books and picking what we think sounds right to us. And I can sit here and judge you all day for each and every sin you have ever committed in your life by my standards… but I can not condemn you. Most religions seem to agree on that one very specific point… that is God’s job.

      1. John says:

        There is only what God. People worship Him differently. That’s okay. What’s not okay is when others try to make God a liar or try to change His rules. God’s covenant goes both ways. If we keep our promise to Him, He will in turn keep His. He is not a respector of persons.

        There’s no confusion about who the Creator is. No one ever say “O my Darwin”. Let’s live our lives as if the next moment we were going to stand before our creator, almighty God. It doesn’t matter whether anyone accepts or believes it, but there is only one God. Having “faith” in God, trusting and obeying Him is the only way to please Him.

        We can all agree that we are all sinners. We should love one another and support one another in a godly way.
        True believers should never condone any behavior that is not supported by God’s Holy Word.

      2. hvillage says:

        Leave it to a self-righteous Judeo-Christian to assume that anyone who isn’t must be an atheist or evolutionists… I subscribe to a different faith entirely. Wake up to the rest of the world, John.

  24. Liz B says:

    Not a suprise–MD again wussies out of taking a stand. C”mon people–my kids are becoming more and more disappointed by the day! None of us are free until all of us are free

  25. joan says:

    I have a problem with the delegate who is concerned that his daughter is not getting the rights in her state because she is in a relationship with another female. This bill should not be based on his personal family issues. Because he has accepted his daughter’s relationship does not mean everyone else has to. It is wrong. Don’t try subjecting their lifestyle on others to please her.

    1. Greg says:

      Don’t worry no where in this bill did it state you must marry someone of the same sex, it simply allows those who want to the ability.

  26. MommaK says:

    Please keep your religion seperate from my politics!!! I am so tired of listening to all of the hate spewed by the “religious” people it makes me sick. If it’s up to your God to judge then back up, sit down, and shut it! You are NOT a god yourself so why judge what you cannot understand.
    My son understands what most don’t love doesn’t have a limit. I am as deserving, and as important as any heterosexual mother. I work, I raise my child, and do not teach him to HATE. My son knows love everywhere in his life he is good, he is bad, and not judgemental. If someone is different he is smart enough to question the difference but doesn’t leap to attack The rule in our home…we DO NOT HATE. Hate is distructive, harmfull and eventually evil. Can we not offer love to people we don’t understand? Nope, judge them, punish people for being who GOD made them to be. GOD doesn’t make mistakes it’s amazing that so many think he did.
    As for the religious who just have to judge us….let’s go with the bible here.

    Matthew 6: 2 “For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”

    No one knows the mind of God, it’s amazing to me how small people make divinity. Everyone has the right to be happy, everyone should have the rights and be protected by law.

    1. NanC says:

      Please keep your politics separate from their Religion. If its not listed in the Bill of Rights its not an inalienable right and therefore is political in nature. Inalieanable rights should always trump new politically motivated civil rights.

      Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Association is protected in the Bill of Rights even if gays find this offensive. Forcing Abrahamic religions to recognize gay marriage is a violation of the inalienable rights of their congregations.

      Civil unions which separate church from state are the answer.

  27. Ronald Lee Norman says:

    So let me get this stright. Adam and Eve. To populate the earth with offspring. They started and now incest was involved. Explain this one the all mighty one.

  28. Geri says:

    Where is Judith who has made it her life’s work to speak so disparagingly of others whose view differ from her own on this topic? The Christian community will continue to stay prayerful.

    1. hvillage says:

      Geri, apart from inviting confrontation, your statement is the most compassionate one I have heard from your side of the table.

  29. T says:

    Taking religion, church and state out of the equation for a second. I have never seen two male dogs or two female cats attempting to have intercourse or even having an intimate attraction to one another or any other animal engaging in same sex practices. That let’s us know that same sex relationships is not natural! If its not recognized in the animal kingdom it shouldn’t be recognized in humanity. I am sure science can appreciate that fact!

    Now bringing religion back, many people just think the Bible is a fairytale but its not. JESUS IS LORD and his Word will not change for no one!

    1. JQP says:

      perhaps you were not aware that cats and dogs do not represent the animal kingdom as a whole…if you wanted to make a more meaningful and crushing statement you could have said something like, “so you’re saying that gay people are no better than animals humping randomly in the wild?”. I don’t personally feel that way. I am tired of people who are scared hiding behind their religion and threatening people with their God… OH wait, is that God? Allah? Yaweh? Jesus? can you at least agree on a name??? There are countless religious texts from countless different religions. You can’t even agree on which of your own texts is right… We’re supposed to trust you?

  30. Bill T says:

    Emmit Burns is closeted and he needs to come. Although I would not want to claim him. Same Sex marriage is NOT about religion. No one has asked any church to santify it. Those of you who call yourself christian make me sick. Take a look at your own reprsentatives of marriage. I would like to see divorce outlawed so you really had to stay the rest of your life with the person you married like you swore to before your God. With your 60% divorce rate, you have trashed the very idea of marriage. You don’t deserve the right to take ownership of marriage. And YES I do equate our rights to civil rights. As a gay man, I marched for your rights. There was a time when blacks could not marry. Was it really that long ago? WE SHALL OVERCOME.

  31. Scott's County says:

    State sanctioned sodomy lost tonight! Fantastic! Civilization is preserved in Maryland. Men can still be men. Real men. Tomorrow morning, I’m going to make love to my wife (a Woman, I might add), have her fix me some breakfast and wash and iron my clothes. Then, I’m going to drive my big gas guzzling truck over to the gun range and shoot off a few rounds from my AR15 into 100 yard targets, then grab a beer and a burger, and then go see a macho guys’ movie. Maybe, I’ll go see “Battlefield: Los Angeles.” Ahh, yes. The life of a real man. A traditional male chauvenistic anti-gay pig. Life is good. No gay marriage in my state. I’ll sleep well tonight. Hopefully, you gays will try to get some rest too. Your battle was long and hard, but you lost. Ha! Ha!

    1. JQP says:

      I love it when rednecks and stupid people in general fly their flags. It’s like they’re giving you a little heads up (pardon the pun) that they aren’t all that bright and not to bother engaging in a verbal conflict. What’s that old saying? You can’t argue with ignorance. God bless you Scott, and good luck, son.

  32. tina hamrick says:

    Marriage is not about religion, if it is then why do state and federal governments give benfits to spouses. You get taxes breaks, death benfits, health. So see it’s not about religion. Someone said don’t make it about race. but today in the house a black del said we didn’t suffer enoungh yet to get rights. The haven’t turn the fire hoses on us yet that were strong enough to strip the bark off trees. Really we haven’t paid. We haven’t been murder, we have been beaten, we haven’t been arrested. We have been treated like nothing…what do you think your doing now. We haven’t lost are jobs of because who we are, we haven’t been turned down for a place to live because who we are. Well that house del I say stonewall my friend. Mathew Shepard and so many others. And I also say to you it was okay to murder us to without the law caring. 14th amed…the person born in to that state should be afford the same rights as all other…!

  33. WhySoSerious says:

    Can someone tell me just when the heII did Gays become so powerful?? In my opinion, the church is full of men who aren’t sure of their sexuality.. That is why I don’t let my son go to church..

    1. hvillge says:

      LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. you are awesome

  34. Sia Ngegba- Jalloh says:

    God has proven himself in Maryland, thank you Lord for answered prayers .Marriage is a union between a man and a wife and not people of the same sex. Genesis1:27 so God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;male and female created he them.
    If it was right then God will just have created Adam and without an Eve beside him. God never lies his word is ture and his promises are yeah and amen, we are still praying that distruction will not take place in this nation as it happened in Sodom andGomorrah.

    1. JQP says:

      what about Lilith? she was a woman, too… the first-first woman… why do Christians always leave her out?

  35. Pat Bee says:

    Jim Crow laws are still on the books then. Laws that restrict who marries whom are simply cruel and evil. My husband and I have been happily married for 25 years. Why wouldn’t I wish that same joy for others?

    “Kelsey Grammer can end a 15 year marriage over the phone, Larry King can be on divorce #9, Britney Spears had a 55 hour marriage, Jesse James and Tiger Woods, while married, were having sex with EVERYONE. Yet, the idea of same-sex marriage is going to destroy the institution of marriage? Really?”

    1. WhySoSerious says:

      And not one of them was GAY!!!!! What’s ya point??

  36. Lucifer says:

    I Love it.!!!!!!!!!!!!

  37. Vince says:

    I think it is a shame that they did not even vote on it. Cowards, all of them!

  38. Charlie says:

    The right decision is….. “One Man and One Woman”

  39. Phyllis Connelly says:

    take the gay marriage vote to the pollls, i believe that’s very fair, then you will see what people want

    1. JQP says:

      can we vote on your moral standing while we’re at it? because if it’s up to me, you had better not be sinning at all or i will quick as spit yank your rights as a human being.

  40. Chuck Mosser says:

    Glad to learn the bill was defeated and O’Malley is a BOZO~!

  41. peter o'neil says:

    God had nothing to do with this bill passing or not passing he will deal with the injustices on judgement day. Religious zealots are worse than the criminal element itself. The worse crimes in history against humanity have come from the churches.

  42. clwilson says:

    The ignorance/arrogance of you all who oppose equality due to some story book written over two thousand years ago is astounding.

  43. Meg says:

    is confused and frustrated with the religious extremists who are up in arms about the equal marriage issue. How does allowing others to get married effect their lives?  It does not “encourage” people to be gay, or negate straight marriages. Bible quote this, bible quote that. I respect your right to have an opinion about all issues, and understand that many folks believe that being gay is “wrong,” but our country was founded on a separation of church and state. The biblical reasoning has no place here.  Point to social or economic reasons for being against this bill and you’ll be heard. Otherwise, go live where the church dictates the choices of the government. 

    1. Scott says:

      I agree. Our government should not be allowing or disallowing ANY marriages. Marriage has always been a religious union between a man and a woman. I am tired of my government spending time and resources legislating, endorsing or condemning things it has no right to. When we have a law that allows a special right to any minority group it most certainly endorses and validates it’s content.

      1. Bill T says:

        Meg, well said. Scott, marriage is nota religious union. It is a contract / license to partnership between two consenting adults. The Church seems to think it belongs to them simply because they made a religious ceremony around it.

      2. Scott says:

        Actually the licence / contract has been added by our wonderful, overly intrusive government. The institution has, and should always be, just what it was intended to be, a religious union. The problem is that everyone thinks they can just adjust this world to fit their personal wishes.

      3. Scott says:

        I am not a religious person but have a great respect for those that are. Their institution should not be made a joke of by those who chose to lead a deviant lifestyle.

  44. forgotthepoint says:

    All of you who claim to believe in God remember, “God is Love”, it is not our job to sit in judgment of any one but rather if you believe it’s a sin what they are doing, I do not, love the sinner hate the sin so you should stop making hateful comments. How christian can you really be?

  45. Jim says:

    God Bless Maryland!

  46. RAY says:


    1. Diane King says:

      Morals? I’ve had many gay friends over the years and I find that overall they are the most giving and generous people, always looking to do good works for others who may be disadvantaged or in need of help. I’ve also known many extremely rigid christians who spew hate and try exclude and persecute those that have different religious beliefs or who don’t conform to what they think is the one and only right way to live.

  47. Scot says:

    When will we ever decide to not allow our elected officials to try to rush bills through. It seems they only try to do this with high profile issues that obviously would never be passed if time was taken to allow for public and majority direction. Government has become way to involved in things it was never intended.

  48. NanC says:

    All the belief systems in Abrahamic organized religions are Man’s choice when they exceed the Ten Commandments and the express teachings of Jesus and Mohammed. God gave us free will. We can choose to sin or not. Sin has its own wages.

    That said we have religious freedom in this country. Christians, Jews and Muslim religions do not recognize gay marriage. Organized religion is free to develop its own belief system even if gays find this offensive. Forcing gay marriage within these religions is a violation of other peoples civil rights. Those who participate in organized religion have freedom of association even if gays find this offensive. The civil rights of Abrahamic religious believer are expressly protected in the Bill of Rights. Not so the rights of gays to marry within these religions.

    Suggestion. Gays should accept civil unions. Civil unions are not an attack on other peoples civil rights.

    The argument that only a married gay partner can visit his/her companion in the hospital is specious at best. A little foreplanning and making each other Medical Power of Attorney would solve all visitation/decision making confusion. Making each other Legal Power of Attorney would solve the rest. Taking the time and trouble to execute a will that specifies how you want your estate divided would wrap up any loose ends. In other words take charge of the situation and act responsibly toward your partner. Stop blaming problems caused by inaction on society.

    1. Bill T says:

      Really NanC, again yoiu are yet another religious zealot who believes that only those who are faith based should have any protected rights in the universe. EVERYONE deserves the same rights you take for granted. We could say the same thing to you. Why should government protect your rights? Why don’y you take care of your personal business so society doesn’t have to pay to clean up your mess? I suppose blacks should have been been happy with a having a second class citizenship. Your religious views have no place in my government. No Gay is asking any church to sanctify our relationships. You can have your cold bigoted walls of wisdom. They have served you well. Just look at your divorce rate. What a pretty picture you heterosexuals paint. When the wages of sin are tallied, there will be many more of you then thare are of us.

  49. keith says:

    Am so glad to hear that this bill DID NOT pass. Keeps hope alive that Maryland can remain a state based on FAMILY VALUES and the word of God.

    to the poster who said laws are meant to protect the minority…WRONG!!!

    this is a democacy we live in…MAJORITY RULES!!!

    1. NanC says:

      We are a Republic. Our founders did not want mob rule so they rejected Democracy as our form of governing. To protect the minority they also added the Bill of Rights. Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Association also protects the majority in this case.

  50. keith says:

    God Bless Maryland.

    I for one, am tired of being FORCE FED the gay agenda. It has creeped into every facet of our society.

    Wise Up America. God has a way of dealing with the gay community. Its all laid out in Genesis.

  51. Jimmy says:

    These are some stupid comments people are posting here. The fact is gay people need the same protection under marriage that everyone has. I don’t think that was to much to ask for.

    They amended this bill so much you would of thought gay people where the worst human beings in the world. It was just sad. You have no decency at all.

    When your old and on your death bed you will look back at the mistake you made.

    You will have shame when that gay doctor, gay nurse, gay priest, gay mortician are the last people that care for you, during your last days on this world.

    And when you reach heaven, that’s if you get there, you will see that gays will be there as well, because we are all gods children.

  52. In-process Paul says:

    What is love and how do I receive and give it? Is it not selflessness after first yielding to a higher Love? What is truth? Do I determine it from my own experience or is there a higher Truth to Whom I must yield in my difficult life journey? Can we not practice love and truth simultaneously?

  53. robert says:

    i’m a 64 year old heterosexual and i think people(adults) should be allowed to marry whomever they please.why does everyone want to get in every one elses business.too much time on their hands.

  54. Chase says:

    I know many Gay Men who are Married….To Women. They are both living a LIE.!! They are both Victims The poor women have no idea that their husbands are Gay. Let Gays marry each other and this problem will go away.

  55. Jennifer says:

    Some of you who supported same-sex marriage–although you tried to cloak it in a deceitful way by misnaming it, need to understand that everything you want is not good for you or the state. I have my religious convictions. Unlike Henry VIII I don’t want to change something that is inherently unhealthy for our state, into something to be celebrated. Sodomy is as wrong as two left shoes. This will be a perrennial battle–bring it.

  56. Joyce Robey says:

    If it is not an issue, why is it such an issue?

  57. Jennifer says:

    We need to be educated on our basic American rights—there is NOTHING in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution that says “there will be a separation of church and state.” Do some homework before you shoot off your comment.

  58. THE TRUTH says:


  59. heyboy1 says:

    The blacks are ruining this country…

  60. nicole todd says:

    so we need to re-define and except this evil, just so you can have all your “rights”?

  61. Doug says:

    The whole idea,
    kinda went flaccid ,did it.

  62. Robert Long says:

    Why are my comments not showing up? what the mess?

  63. vie says:

    me myself i’m so sick of hearing people say about what the bible says and what god supose to say in the bible) was anyone there when he wrote the bible and how do you no he really did? and yes i have read the bible! but i’m not sure he did i think someone did write the bible so how can anyone say it was him was you there? people write books and movies all the time.

  64. Hrh SisterFace says:


  65. Michelle says:

    I’m amazed how many religous fanatics are out there. I’m evil and perverted and will burn. Such loving Christian comments. As far as evil Ive done more positive for my community then a majority of the finger pointing, judgemental holy then thous on this board. I assisted in searching through the rubble after 911, I’ve held the hand of a teenager who asked me why her step father killed her mother. I’ve helped through donation and time to assist those who couldn’t help themselves. I was made in God’s image and I accept that. I don’t know why he chose me to be gay but I am. I’m smiling because I know on judgement day I was exactly how he made me and I try to live a life of giving to others to thank Him for my gifts. Lastly, as far as voting on anything, if the African community would have waited for a vote they would still be coming over on ships in chains with whip marks because lets face it, people love to wield power over others. We don’t feel better about ourselves unless we’re shoving someone elses face in the dirt. I think that sums up this world. Sad Sad Sad. I love my partner of 11 years, my family who loves unconditionally and I will show this baby I’m carrying how to be a compassionate human being. The rest of the hateful will be judged and I am also smiling about that. Peace to all of us.

  66. Jessi says:

    Shame on anyone opposed to this bill. It is not about you; it is about TWO PEOPLE who want to celebrate and enjoy their love. And for all of you so called “religious” people, you are the first to tell people how wrong they are in God’s eyes. How would you know? As far as I can tell, so are you, for being so judgemental, and being bigots and teaching intolerance instead of acceptance and love. Whether or not it’s your belief or not, it isn’t about YOU. It’s about Equality for All and if you can’t see God through that, then you don’t see Him at all.

  67. Sea Dog3 says:

    See, the problem with Democrats and Republicans nowadays, is that they are scared to speak the truth.. Instead of telling Gays that there is no way in heII that this is even going to be an issue that deserves to waste the tax payers money, they would rather prolong it and make Gays think that they care.. (BEING GAY IS NOT RIGHT)

  68. Kasey says:

    Don’t you just hate “Christians”. I am so sick of people how are so hateful and mean. I have stop hanging around with so many people that I knew as friends once. I had a group of friends that would get together for dinner here and there. Mostly it was my friend and then we invited others so most of the people weren’t really my friends.
    Now I don’t go out with them anymore because of two people in the group. It was supposed to be a fun social get together. These two who claimed to be Christian spent every occasions just going on and on about anyone who was different from them in anyway. They were the most hateful people I have ever met. I would get so tired of them justifying their opinions because they were Christians.

    I went to 12 yrs of Catholic School and was never taught to hate anyone who was not like me. God isn’t hateful, he loves all of us sinners.

    1. Darnell says:

      First of all the bill is over. So why are people still commenting on this. Let it go.

  69. RG says:

    I find it interesting how so many people think that there is a constitutional provision/ amendment that established a seperation of church and state. Read the 1st Amendment and examine what it really says. There’s a huge difference between the government establishing a state religion and the so-called seperation of church and state.

  70. adraine says:

    bein gay, ewwwww yukkk. it was never si in the beginning so let it go.MARRIAGE is between a man and a woman.

  71. brides says:

    I just like the valuable info you supply in your articles. I’ll bookmark your weblog and take a look at again right here frequently. I am fairly certain I will be told a lot of new stuff proper right here! Good luck for the following!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From CBS Baltimore

Track Weather On The Go With Our App!
Your Podcast Network

Listen Live