By Pat Warren

BALTIMORE (WJZ) — Gay rights advocates launch their 2012 campaign to legalize same-sex marriage in Maryland.  Tuesday, Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake joined the coalition of supporters.

Political reporter Pat Warren has more on what Marylanders can expect to hear and see.

Supporters plan to follow the example set in New York and sway public and political opinion in their direction.

Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake put the power of the mayor’s office behind legalizing same-sex marriage in Maryland.

“Your fight is our fight and together I know we will win,” she said.

Other faces behind the cause come forward in the launch of Marylanders For Marriage Equality, fashioned after the successful campaign led by New York’s governor that legalized same-sex marriage in New York last month.

“We’ll do whatever it takes,” said Chris Megargee, Equality Maryland.

A move to legalize marriage between same-sex couples was blocked in the House of Delegates this year. The bill got as far as the floor of the House of Delegates but went back to committee without a vote.

Advocates are now looking for support in the religious community.

“With people going door-to-door, people at the community associations, in their churches, in their synagogues and their mosques talking about the fact that marriage equality is the right thing to do in Maryland,” said Delegate Maggie McIntosh.

Defenders of marriage as one man, one woman are expecting it.

“We are in their sights.  We are targeted.  We are in the bullseye,” said Emmett Burns.

Ironically, both sides use the importance of family in defense of their positions.  But will it work in Maryland?

“We don’t want that and it’s not going to happen,” Burns said.

Advocates want Maryland to become the seventh state to legalize same-sex marriage.

Comments (239)
  1. fogey0 says:

    Rawlings- Blake should be spending her full time trying to turn around the murderous rat hole of a city she has helped create rather than pandering to wacko fringe groups for votes.

  2. PAUL E. MICELLI says:

    Remember who introduced and VOTES for this bill when ELECTION day rolls around, very interesting.

  3. Leave the gays alone says:

    We need to stop worring so much about gay marriage and gay rights. Let them have it. What we need to think about is Baltimore City and all the killings that go on each and every day. That is a greater sin, how come all you Christians arent getting together to fight crime. Weak and I am sure God is not happy with you.

    1. Gays need to leave it alone says:

      the gays need to stop pushing their agenda. I’m all for equal rights within limits. You’re right, there are more important issues to be dealt with, such as public safety. They should be happy that they have a choice and deal with it as is.

      1. Janice says:

        LOL “equal rights within limits”.

        Talk about an oxymoron….

      2. Gays need to leave it alone says:

        Yes, equal rights within limits.
        Equal-as great as, same value as
        Rights-something that is due to anyone by just claim, legal guarantees, moral principles, etc.
        Limit-boudary or bound

        This is not an oxymoron. There are rules and laws, etc. that are established within every society. They are put in place to protect civilization.

      3. Janice says:

        Perhaps we should put limits on your marriage rights, sir. Sound good? Now who is to decide these “limits” and based on what moral code?

      4. Ed says:

        It boggles my mind when conservatives are against government regulation of big business, but when it comes to relationships, regulation by law is REQUIRED! Talk about big government!

      5. To Janice says:

        There are limits placed on my marriage. And I abide by them. It is for my good as well as the good of others. There are marriage laws for good reason!

      6. Janice says:

        And, why, good sir, should the limits imposed on my “gay” marriage be any different or more restrictive than yours?

      7. To Janice says:

        The limits should be different because it is a different type of marriage!!!!!

      8. Janice says:

        LOL different type of marriage? Sorry, we are fighting for THE SAME. Remember equal but NOT separate under the eyes of the law? Your marriage, just because it is between yourself and a woman (who I feel sorry for), should have no legal differences or superiority than my own “gay” one. I believe you are missing the point.

      9. Gays need to leave it alone says:


        A hetereosexual marriage is between individuals of differing genders. Gay marriage is between two individuals of the same gender. Notice the difference in the genders?

        I do not feel sorry for my wife. Heck, I don’t even have a wife. Too bad that you are making assumptions and feel sorry for someone that doesn’t exist.

  4. Baltimore Sucks says:

    Baltimore is no New York City. Baltimore is weak and will never live up to the standard of New York City. Baltimore lives in the past and because of that fact it will never be a Charm City. It will always be a city that you go to if you want to realize how great New York City is.

    1. whatnow says:

      Go Home Yankee.

      1. ha ha says:

        I’m sorry, but are you an accurate representation of most “Christians”? I can’t remember Christ using sarcasm and name calling in the bible in order to attract followers. Just a question.

    2. kathy says:

      If you dont like baltimore get out and go live with the gays in new york see if we care.

  5. Go Maryland says:

    I have changed my mind. I will vote “yes” for gay marriage in Maryland this time around. It’s the right thing to do.

    1. LaVerne Cash says:

      WHy is it the right thing to do? Explain your reasons.

      1. Janice says:

        Why is it the wrong thing to do? Explain yours.

    2. kathy says:

      Go ahead your an idiot

      1. Janice says:

        “Your an idiot”

        I’m sorry, honey, did you mean “YOU’RE”?

        I’m the idiot? Keep speaking- the more all of you speak the better WE look.

  6. Wondering says:

    Once again I ask, why can we not call this a same-sex civil union? I think this would provide equality–real and perceived marriage benefits that traditional marriage provides.

    However, not all things can be truly equal. For example, two persons of the same gender cannot naturally procreate.

    1. The New Gay says:

      Thats true we can’t procreate but we can adopt all the unwanted children you straight people those out like garbage and sure as hell give them a better life.

      1. Wondering says:

        I cannot speak for others, but my children are wanted and loved. I do not think gay parents would/could give them a better life.

        Would you care to address why a same-sex civil union is not satisfactory?

      2. The New Gay says:

        Tell you what, go read the DOMA and I would love to have this conversation. Once you read it, them go apply it to every goverment benifit and tax break. Then you will understand what the hell we are fighting for

      3. Tyler Buck says:

        The argument that gays cannot procreate is the dumbest of the stupid reasons people have for not allowing gay marraige. Using that logic shouldn’t we ban marriage between senior citizens since they cannot have children. Also, barren women should not be alllowed to marry since they cannot produce offspring. If procreation is your argument, I propose that traditional marriage can only be allowed when the couple has proven an intent and ability to have children…otherwise, what’s the point of getting married.

      4. To Tyler Buck says:

        Tyler, so what do you think of bigamy/polygamy? Should they be legal as well?

        You are entitled to your opinions just as everyone is entitiled to theirs.

        No one stated that the only reason for traditional marriage is procreation. However, it is one reason people get married. Without procreation, our society would diminish.

      5. Janice says:

        Honey, gays getting married would not hinder straight people from continuing to procreate. It changes nothing. It’s not as if because gay marriage is illegal now, that gays enter into straight relationships and procreate. The gays who would get married are the ones who are going to be in gay relationships anyway- the only difference is the title of that relationship!

      6. God is on our side says:

        GOD said it is a sin to be a “gay”
        I don’t want them around my children with their sick and perverted minds.
        GOD doesn’t want the gays to marry.
        The gays only want to marry to try and be like normal people.
        GOD didn’t write the bible for nothing, he wrote it so the gays won’t try to get married.

      7. kathy says:

        well go to new york with the other gays and live there we dont want you here

      8. Janice says:

        “God is on our side” please post some more! I couldn’t make the defenses you come up with if I tried! You think your religion will hold up to the court of law? It’s only a matter of time. And, no, kathy, people like you will be driven out of the state of Maryland before people like myself move to New York. The drum of change will keep on beating in the right direction. You are the past.

    2. JQP says:

      @Wondering, you raise a good point, though maybe not the one you intended. See, procreation and marriage are not synonyms. In fact, if your implication is that people should only get married if they intend to procreate, then by your logic, we should also make it illegal to get “married” if you do not intend to have children or can not have children of your own.

      If your only argument with this is that you want the word “marry” to pertain only to you and people like you, then perhaps you should obtain a copyright on the word “marry”. I only make the statement because you keep asking why gay people do not prefer “same-sex civil union”. Also, wouldn’t you find it intrusive if I asked you why you don’t call your union a “diametrical-sex union”? I mean, really, It’s not as though they should have to make a law….it should just be something that people who love each other can do. Or are you opposed to people loving each other and making a legal commitment?

      If you don’t, as a religion, recognize the marriage, then don’t. But your religion does not and should not dictate morality for all people….just the people within your faith.

      1. JQP says:

        …and under the definition of morality, I am not including the things that infringe on the health and well-being of other people. I am referring to the “sins” implied by religious texts. Again, what may be fine in your faith, may be reprehensible in mine…we do not all share the exact same values.

      2. Wondering says:

        I did not state my religious background and beliefs, therefore, how can you make assumptions and pass judgement on me? I never stated that my religion should dictate morality for all people. I also never stated that people should only marry if they intend to procreate.

        If you believe that there should be no need to make a law in order for individuals to commit to another, why are you pushing for gay marriage?

        BTW, I know that marriage and procreation are not synonyms. I know that each can be independent of the other.

        If you want to call marriage a “diametrical-sex union”, that is your perogative. Although most people wouldn’t think of males and females as being in direct opposition with one another. In fact, most people think that males and females are in harmony together, and that is one of the beauties of marriage:-)

      3. Jake Harper says:

        “well go to new york with the other gays and live there we dont want you here”

        Two years from now, they’ll be saying that in Pennsylvania, about Maryland instead of New York. This is a fight you can’t win in the long run.

    3. God is on our side says:

      God will hold court and gays will not fare well.
      the liberals who put the gays up to stunts like this will also stand trial
      FYI- in court you put your hand on Gods bible, do you really think this is for show?
      God is the future, a gay cannot comprehend this because of mind sickness
      God changes nothing which needs changing (i.e. if it ain;t broke don’t fix it)

      1. Barbara says:

        I’m trying to be even-minded here, so I’ll give this a go. Don’t you think there are plenty of other things out there deserving of your attention if you are such a God warrior? Why is it that people like you aren’t ENRAGED over straight divorce? Is not a marriage a contract on your life before and WITH God? That’s what I was taught in Catholic school, anyway. This is pure and simply about hate because gays are a deviation from “normal”. Divorce used to be, too, but sadly, it has become commonplace and you will never hear an evangelical become as red in the face about it as they are about gays. Bottom line.

      2. God is on Our Side says:

        Speaking as a divorcee, it’s none of your business what I think about divorce.

      3. Barbara says:

        Actually, it is- considering you believe it is your business to interject in what people believe about gay marriage.

      4. Barbara says:

        If you follow the Bible, God is no more on the side of divorcees than he is on the side of gays- both are EQUAL SINS – especially since YOU broke your promise before God!

      5. God is on our Side says:

        What don’t you understand about this?
        I will account for myself when the judgement day comes!
        You better start worrying about yourself and your sins!
        FYI….. the farce of the idea of Gay marriage is the subject!

      6. Barbara says:

        Madam, do you realize how much of a hypocrite you are being? You are telling me that your divorce (a MAJOR sin before the eyes of God) is none of my business, yet people’s gay marriages ARE your business? You are better off not speaking at all.

  7. Wondering says:

    Actually, I have read DOMA, but do not recall its entirety. As I understand it, gays now actually have a benefit that straight married couples don’t have–tax breaks–because marriage is recognized by the government, including the IRS, as a union between one man and one woman. Two of the same gender don’t qualify for certain tax filing statuses.

    1. The New Gay says:

      And you think that’s fair @Wondering. It’s just a matter of equality. Honestly they can call it what ever the heck they want to call it, as long as I get the same benifits as you get. I will still call it a marriage because that’s what it is. Civil unions , Ok sure fine, but they have to come with the same benifits as marriage. The problem is until DOMA is done away with, Civil unions will never carry the same weight as marriage. Therefore for now, civil unions are not equal to marriage.

      1. Wondering says:

        Marriage is usually recognized by the state, a religious authority, or both. It is often viewed as a contract. Civil marriage is the legal concept of marriage as a governmental institution irrespective of religious affiliation, in accordance with marriage laws of the jurisdiction.

        It’s not just a matter of equality. Men and women are created differently. If two men or two women want to cohabitate, have a civil union, etc. that is fine. But please don’t use the terms husband and wife.

        Many, not all, heterosexual couples marry in a church and take their vows before God. Why do you want to take away the traditional religious values of those people? They aren’t hurting you.

      2. Janice says:

        Wondering, how are you an authority on who can use the term “husband” or “wife”? You have no superiority over me or anyone else, so lose the domineering, suppressive language.

        Also, how in the hell is gay marriage “taking away the traditional religious values” of people? I couldn’t give two s**ts if your church wants to marry me. Religious institutions should be able to marry and not marry who they please- that’s not the argument here, honey. This is about marriage under the LAW, not under the cross!

      3. Wondering says:

        Since you asked, I’ll tell you. I do not consider myself superior to anyone. As for the authority of use of terms husband and wife, anyone can use these words. I am just requesting that people not misuse the words.

        husband: a married man especially when considered in relation to his wife
        wife: a woman joined in marriage to a man and considered as his spouse

        I don’t see where using proper terminology is dominating, suppressive language. Perhaps you were feeling defensive when you read my post??

      4. Janice says:

        Sorry, honey, there you go again with the false definitions. I love how when people claimed that marriage is “defined” as between a man and a woman, I provided a simple Merriam Webster definition of marriage. What are you using to “define” these terms if not the dictionary? A husband and a wife are simply terms denoting a person’s gender and that he or she is married- NOT to which sex he or she is married to. Learn something.

      5. Wondering says:

        No false definition:-) The definitions above were taken from Random House Webster’s College dictionary.

        Here are more definitions taken from A Student’s Dictionary by the Dictionary Project:
        Husband-the male spouse in a marriage
        Wife-a married woman

        From Merriam Webster’s online dictionary:
        husband: a male partner in a marriage
        wife: a female parnter in a marriage

        You mentioned that you provided a simple Merriam Webster definition of marriage. Sorry, but I can’t seem to locate where you provided that information. However, I did look that up online as well. The first definiton given is: the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law

      6. Janice says:

        Here you go, sweetheart:

        Definition two states: : the state of being united to a person of the same sex

        If you ever took a library science class in your life (which I doubt), you would know that in a dictionary, when multiple definitions are given, neither takes precedence over the other- both are interchangeable definitions.

        You have only proven my point! Your definitions posted only stated the gender of the person labeled husband or wife, NOT what gender they are married to!

      7. Wondering says:

        To Janice:

        How exactly does that prove your point? It proves yours as equally as mine. Remember, the gay community wants the religious definition/context of marriage removed–you included.

        So, I suppose that when gays marry, if it is two men, they are husband and husband (since husband means male gender only in your choice of definition) and that two lezbeans (yes, I know, sp) would be wife and wife (since that connotates only female gender). Is that correct? If so, why were you so defensive that I requested for gay marriage partners to not be called husband and wife?

        No need to give an answer. Just something for you to think about.

        I have not been disrespectful towards you. Yet, you have been using a condescending tone, foul language, etc. Not just towards me but also towards others.

      8. Janice says:

        Well, I hadn’t understood that you didn’t want the PHRASE “husband and wife” used, I thought you merely didn’t want the TERMS used at all in a gay marriage. I did misunderstand that. Either way, even though I would never want my gay partner to be called “husband” (she is a SHE, so why would we use “husband” for her anyway? That makes no sense). I’ve never heard of a gay couple want to refer to someone male as wife or female as husband. I believe you have gay people confused with transgendered people, who may actually want to do what you are suggesting. I suggest you take that up with someone who is transgender because being gay is a very different thing. In a legal sense, I guess I would have to agree with you there on terminology, though- if a gay male couple is married then legally it would make sense to refer to each as a husband and not a wife. As far as use in the vernacular, conversational sense? You have no authority to tell gay/ trans/ straight people whether or not to call a female “husband” or a male “wife”.

      9. Enough already says:

        with the dictionary. We all know the first meaning in the dictionary is most common one. No need for library science class. Sheesh…

      10. Janice says:

        Just because one definition is more “common” does not negate the alternate definition, honey (it’s pure probability ratio of straight to gay marriages, that’s all). Seems there is a need for library science.

      11. Enough already says:

        or cherry picking, as JImmy likes to say.

      12. Jimmy says:

        Sorry, bud, best not to quote me if you’re going to twist my words around. No matter if you like it or not the definition of marriage has been fluid over the course of time regarding which sexes. Today, the definition is clearly regarding the union between two PEOPLE regardless of sex. Your religion may say otherwise, and that’s fine, but the secular term still stands.

      13. Jimmy says:

        Also, there is NO normal straight dude who would be here for DAYS on end arguing about this. I suggest you just come out of the closet and get it over with instead of trying to convince people that you are straight by crusading in a losing battle while propagating your own self-hatred.

  8. katie says:

    You know a lot of people preach about god hating gays and it being a sin but
    You fail to realize god does not like ignorance & hatred . For those who have to comment with such negativity I wonder how you would react if your son or daughter came to you and told you he/she was gay? Would you shun them like you are our society? You aren’t living in the 1920’s anymore its 2011 if you can’t learn to accept people love who they love then keep your negativity to yourselves. Our troops are overseas fighting for our freedom every day and guess what some of them are gay too, you should be ashamed of yourselves for saying such cruel things especially about those who are already afraid to come out in society. I am not a gay woman but one of my best friends is gay and I will proudly stand by her side when she takes her vows regardless of the cruelty amongst todays society.

  9. So very tired of the old arguments supporting discrimination... says:

    These religious arguments against marriage equality are so tired and so dated. Bottom line is that when people say things like is said above “I’m all for equal rights within limits.” that you are suggested you are okay with discriminating against those that do not live life as YOU live it. Meaning essentially that your way of living is the “right” way and that you can’t see there are other ways to be. Civil Unions do NOT equate to Marriage. There are over 1,138 Federal Rights, Privileges, Protections and Responsibilities that apply to Marriage. These do NOT confer with Civil Unions. So you can suggest Civil Unions all you want to “appease the gays” into thinking that solves all problems and you can get back to fighting crime or fixing the tax structure or whatever, but exactly when are you expecting the 1,138 protections to be modified, reworded, edited, debated to “apply” to the Civil Union you think is “ok” as a substitute? OH, ok, oh I see– you didn’t want that to happen? So then you are ok with Civil Unions not being equal thus being okay with discriminating against a large group of people?

    And please–stop with the “Marriage is for one man/one woman” argument too, because it was intended for procreation. Marriage is a later institution. You can procreate with IVF, you can adopt, you can choose to have many kids or no kids. You can even Foster needy children….and it doesn’t matter if you are single or married or straight or gay. The important thing is being surrounded by love.

    1. whatnow says:

      Religion is tired and dated. That thinking is why this country is the cesspool it is.

      1. Need more religion says:

        I disagree. I think that the lack of religion is what is causing our country to go downhill. Remember all of the controversy in trying to remove the words “under God” in the United States Pledge of Allegiance? Well, it is still going on. NBC purposely left out those words twice during coverage of the U.S. Golf Open. Christians are not free to have a National Day of Prayer, yet other religions may have their public ceremonies, etc. Our country was founded on a large basis because of the want for religious freedoms.

      2. Janice says:

        Right, religious FREEDOM. Why, then, is it that people like you want to PUSH Christianity only? Notice the pledge says “under God”. Why not “under gods”? A polytheistic religion is also religion…. but does that not fall under your very narrow umbrella of “religios freedom”. More like religious theocracy if you’re talking of only ONE religion if you ask me.

      3. Think outside the box says:

        @ Need more religion

        I guess you didn’t do your research and realize that the words “Under God” were added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954!!! There was no mention of God in the original Pledge, all you have to do is google it.

      4. Jake Harper says:

        “Under god” on U.S. money and in the pledge was added in the 1950s, during the anti-communist hysteria. It is blatantly unconstitutional, as it recognizes an establishment of religion, yet has never come before the Supreme Court.

        Perhaps you’d feel equally good about “One nation, with Mohammed as it’s profit.”

    2. Not Discrmination Arguement says:

      At the end of the day, it still takes a Man and a Woman in order for procreation to occur. Men and women are created differently.

      If you want the religious arguement taken out, then don’t call it a (traditional) marriage. Call it what it is, a civil same-sex union. No husband and wife, no husband and husband, no wife and wife.

      We do not live in a genderless society. We all have lifestyle choices to make.

      1. Ed says:

        Sorry, the term “marriage” is not a religious term. It was a secular term before it was ever used by churches. Learn some history.

      2. Jimmy says:

        I like this post. Take a look – Someone spouts the religious argument – it is shot down – an opponent spews the invalid procreation BS – it’s shot down. What’s left? Nothing. Perfect microcosm for this whole national debate. People are realizing this. It will pass. Good day!

      3. Not Discrimination Arguement says:

        Marriage is the social institution under which a man and a woman live as husband and wife by legal or religious cmmittments.

        Hmmm… I think that covers both the religious and historical issues here.

      4. Jimmy says:

        I guess by your logic, if it’s in the dictionary, then it must be? Have you read any literature from the 1800s? Try checking out the definition of “n***er”. Hell, pick up a dictionary from 1950- definitions change my friend! Surprise!

      5. Jimmy says:

        Oh, and, by the way, the dictionary actually does not describe marriage as only a union between a man and a woman.

      6. Jake Harper says:

        About time we banned the marriage of people who are sterile, then?

        Each one of these old and tired arguments that are brought out to rationalize banning gay marriage has an answer to show how ridiculous it is. I can’t believe people who are still using them haven’t heard the refutations before. They, and you, are intellectually dishonest.

    3. Not discrimination says:

      wow–feeling defensive? if it’s all about being surrounded by love and not sexual preference not mattering, why is this even an issue?

  10. jim says:

    Iam tired of the hole thing let the voters decide in 2012. then it will be over, I am tired of hearing about it.To many other larger problems that we should deal with!!!!!!

    1. Janice says:

      Sure! Let a majority dictate the rights of a minority through vote! Why not vote on interracial marriage while we are at it, or, hell, let’s put slavery up for a vote in Alabama, too!

      1. Get Over It says:

        Oh, honey. You keep talking about how some seem to think they have superiority over you and using words which suppress you. Yet you go and sarcastically call those who have differing views “honey” and make sarcastic statements like the above.

      2. Not civl rites says:

        The difference here is that one cannot choose to be born a particular gender or race. Sexual preference is just that–a preference! That’s why this is not a civl rites issue. No one is dictating your sexual preference except you.

      3. Janice says:

        Sweetie, calling hypocrites like yourself pet names is not the same as claiming superiority by law.

      4. To Janice says:

        Sweetie, honey, darling… I just love your condescending attitude and air of superiority. Oh, I mean hypocrisy. Dripping once again with sarcasm.

      5. Janice says:

        My point stands, honeybunch- no matter how much you dwell on my attitude, when it comes to the issue at hand, you have no facts to lean on!

  11. whatnow says:

    I support gay marriage. Don’t care if you call it marriage, civil union, whatever. But I wish gay people would have a little consideration for the heteros that support them and not use the term husband and wife. You know, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

  12. Larry says:

    Well, the Mayor has put her head in the noose! Just as the petition to keep the illegals from gaining the tuition rights as citizens in Maryland has more than the number of names to force it to the ballot where the Citizens of Maryland will defeat it, if the legislature imposes this on us also, we will get a pettion drive up also and put it to the ballot in Maryland and it will be defeated by the voters. I am tired of things being forced on us by a small minority just because they want it and the vast majority of the people in this State do not want something and find it very hard to support.

  13. Billiam says:

    Let the voters decide – let it come to a referendum or whatever you want to call it. The majority will rule at the end of the day. O’Malley pushed the in-state tuition and that will be defeated, rest assured. Now, SRB wants to join the fray on the marriage equality issued. Enough is enough – let the voters decide. The government gets worried when the people have too much of a voice. Well, they will hear me loud and clear by the time 2012 rolls around.

    1. LaVerne Cash says:

      I agree!

      1. Billiam says:

        You know what, forget it. I changed my mind. Janice is right- we shouldn’t vote on a civil rights issue! It’s also not a very conservative position, if you think about it. Telling people who they can or cannot marry through the law and government is an oxymoron to conservatism. In-state tuition for illegals, though, that’s another issue and I’m ready to vote!

      2. bmoregyrl says:

        @ Billiam I agree with your second comment. We should vote on illegals they have not rights to our money, the gay community has a right to marry whomever they want. That is the point most of us are trying to make. This not about religion its about rights period.

      3. Janice says:

        I’m glad you came around, Bill! I actually agree with your view on illegals and in-state tuition. Glad to see some sanity from you!

      4. Billiam says:

        Sorry to disappoint all of you – but someone posted under my name without my permission. I never said Jancie was right – I never said we shouldn’t vote on a civil rights issue. It just goes to show you how far someone will go to try to get their point across. So – whomever decide to post under my name – you’re an idiot. I would never tell someone what to do or who to marry – but I certainly am entitled to my opinion and intend to express it come 2012.

      5. Billiam says:

        “I would never tell someone what to do or who to marry” Yeah, because I will only tell them who they CAN’T marry!

    2. Not civl rites says:

      but this is not just about rights… Okay, say someone, perhaps a senior citizen (doesn’t really matter) wants to marry a child (gender doesn’t matter). Should those people be allowed to marry because it will make them happy and give them some bennies, real or perceived? Why do you suppose there are laws regarding marriage?

      1. Jimmy says:

        Ooooh! I love the “it will lead to man-goat marriage!” arguments. Please stop before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

      2. Not civl rites says:

        I must have missed something. Who said anything about a man-goat marriage? Is that what you secretly desire? Is that what is next on your agenda?

      3. Jimmy says:

        I am making fun of you people who think this is a slippery slope to child predation, incest, polygamy, and animalistic unions. Your side uses the “what if it leads to animal marriages!” all the time, please.

      4. Not civl rites says:

        Now, now. Getting a little testy here… I don’t refer to you as “you people”. You are the one bringing up animalistic tendencies. Now it sounds to me as if you are the fool.

      5. Jimmy says:

        You are “you people” to me because I do not consider myself in the same moral class as you. When I say “you people”, I am not referring to straight people, I am referring to bigots who are either in the closet and in denial, or severely disturbed by social change and desperately grasping for the past.

      6. Gays need to leave it alone says:

        So I guess we could say that the opposite is true. That “you people” in a different moral class than me are severly disturbed with society and desperately grasping for the future. Not having any tolerance to those who are not in your class of people. You are showing that you are the real bigot here.

        I did not come here throwing around names, slurs, and making fun of people.

      7. Billiam says:

        “Gays need to leave it alone”, I think you need to apologize- he does have a point….

      8. Gays need to leave it alone says:

        To Billiam:

        Why do I need to apologize for using the word gays? “Gays need to leave it alone” was a title in response to “Leave the gays alone”.

      9. Billiam says:

        No, I am saying you need to apologize for calling him a bigot since you are being hypocritical. You said you did not come here to trow around names, yet you went ahead and did the same thing. Just do what I do – try to sound reasonable with your rage at least.

  14. whatnow says:

    To JQP – I wasn’t making a comment on religion or gay marriage. I was making a comment on the fact that “Where’s Common Sense” seems to think his/her opinion is more important than Kathy’s. Everyone’s opinion is equally important to them, whether you agree with their opinion or not.

  15. whatnow says:

    To Need More Religion – I should have used a question mark when quoting the poster before me. I was using sarcasm. I agree with you that we need more religion. I’m not particularly religious but when it didn’t have to be hidden and it was everywhere, the world was a much nicer and safer place!

    1. Need more religion says:

      Okay, now I understand. It does seem that all religions except Christianity can freely worship, express opinions, pray, etc. and that Christianity is being supressed. Yes, our world was a much nicer and safer place.

      All people should be free to worship, Christians included.

  16. Really? says:

    All of you need to understand that everyone has an opinion and that this country is not based on religion.In my personal opinion a “civil union” or “domestic partner” doesnt really bother me.What does bother me is the fact that alot of these couple adopt children or have children involved.I dont think its fair to the child to be raised in a home like that.Its my opinion and idc what any of you think

    1. Janice says:

      “A home like that”? What on earth does that mean? Is it fair for a child to be raised by a single mother or father? How about the child be raised in a group home or orphanage since that’s another alternative to gay adoption. There are ENDLESS sins committed in straight homes – alcoholism, domestic abuse, neglect- what about “homes like that”? And, don’t lie honey, you care what we think and it bugs you to no end- that’s why you posted. It scares you.

      1. Really? says:


      2. Janice says:

        Sweetie pie, the fact that my comments set you off so tremendously is only a testament to the fact that I hit the nail on the head. What I mentioned has EVERYTHING to do with it. You are trying to say that a home with gay parents is a bad home setting. Sorry to break it to you- but ever single home setting problem in history has been the fault of straight couples until now. So, please lay off the “home like that” references because I can give you a foot long list of straight “homes like that” that I would never want my child raised in, yet I cannot request the law to be against straight marriage, can I?

      3. Janice says:

        Also, why would anyone want to leave their kids in your home with all of your “f” this and “f” that? That doesn’t come across as very Godlike to me.

      4. To Janice says:

        Just saying…

        You criticize someone else for their choice of words, yet you yourself have cursed in many of your posts. So, does that mean you wouldn’t want a child to grow up in your home as well?

      5. Janice says:

        NO, honey, see- these people are claiming to be religious and holier than thou. I am not religious, therefore there is no oxymoron. I definitely would NOT want a child to grow up in my home- it has nothing to do with me being gay, but the fact that I don’t feel compelled to censor myself and restrict my life to raise a kid. I also would not want to raise a kid to grow up in the disaster that is our world today.

    2. Religious freedom says:

      Acutally, I believe this country is founded partially because of religious beliefs/freedoms. On our money (legal tender), “In God we trust”. Our pledge of allegiance “One nation under God”. During tradtional marriage in a religious ceremony which is recognized as a legal docment by the state, “What God has joined together let no man…”

      People of varying religions and also of no religion have come to the U.S. for religious( and other reasons) But lets not forget where we came from…

      1. Jimmy says:

        Sorry- not following. So, should the US espouse a Christian theocratic overtone in government? I am not sure you understand the meaning of religious freedom. If you truly believe ALL religions are equal in this nation, how then is it appropriate to select one (Christianity) and have it be the standard for which we base a law’s morality? You do realize that some religions are fine with gays and gay marriage and they teach that God made gay people gay, right? I can see your point with the references to God in civil ceremonies, currency, the pledge, but are you sure these people meant “God” as in the Christian God, or just a higher power in general? Who’s to say?

      2. Damon says:

        u cant even use that as an argument becuase u say one nation uinder God half the damn country has takin God out of schools and more

      3. Religious freedom says:

        Damon, that’s exactly my point! We need to put God back into our schools and nation. Go back to the foundation of America. Perhaps then we wouldn’t have many of the social problems that we have now. We would all be concerned with taking care of ourselves and others. IMO, it just seems that some populations only have self interests and don’t care about the rest of society.

        Now, your God may be as different to you as my God may be different to me. But, we would both be held to a higher being and moral code. Not just running around doing whatever it is that makes us happy because it is our right!

      4. Jude says:

        Put God back in schools? Which God? The God of which religion? Only Christianity? How about put “gods” back in schools? If you really want to get back to basics, let’s embrace polytheism. The ancients were polytheistic way before monotheism and Christianity were even thought of.

        What about people who are atheistic? You do know that one can be atheistic or agnostic and still live by a righteous moral code? You are confusing religion with a code of ethics and morality.

  17. Damon says:

    why does it bother straight people so much i mean come on you people act like it is going to effect your lives well news flash for you people it WILL NOT effect your life style so stop trying to pass judgement on others when u should pass judgment on yourself i may be 19 but when i say that biblical facts should be left out of this cuz it has nothing to do with the bibe im speaking the truth its not even a religious matter and i will vote YES because people need to let others live their life so as an ending to this argument i say to all you people who uaed the bibie as an excuse for not voting yes ur still going to lose

    1. Why does it bother u says:

      Why does it bother you that straight people feel this way? This issue affects all people and lifestyles. I don’t recall seeing biblical facts posted here. You are free to vote how you wish and no one is stopping you.

      1. Ed says:

        Wait- no biblical defenses for people who are against gay marriage? I hope you are joking. You did read the comments, right? Every poster against gay marriage is basing their opinion off of Biblical “facts”.

      2. damon says:

        how does it affect all peoples lifestyle just by knowing that gay people got marred please tell me total seriousness

    2. Ed says:

      Good for you, Damon! You have a bright mind and seeing the responses of young people give me great hope for our country’s future. I look forward to people like you being leaders!

      1. damon says:

        thank you

  18. whatnow says:

    I know it has been a while since I was in school but I was told that this country was founded to get away from the government telling them how they had to practice their religion. They wanted to be free to practice their religion without punishment. Now if you say you are a Christian, you are met with derision like I received from “haha” above. Being Christian doesn’t mean you are perfect, but it means you are trying. To “haha” – obviously you are not a sports fan, in particular the Orioles, all true Oriole fans say go home Yankee and don’t mean it meanly, its just a jest. No, I don’t find a lot of humor in the Bible but that doesn’t mean I’m going to lead a humorless life. How boring. Everyone, religious or not, should live by the Golden Rule and if you don’t know what that is, that explains a lot.

    1. Adam says:

      LOL freedom of religion does not guarantee you against public ridicule or people voicing their disagreement with your religious views! That’s a right given to people by the Constitution, too- the first amendment. Or does this only apply FOR Christians, who I hear throwing slurs towards Muslims and atheists daily? You all try to come off as pure as you can in your conservative ideology, but, in all honesty, conservatives are very selective with who they apply Constitutional rights to and when to have government intervene and laws created. I’m glad someone noticed that above. I was beginning to think I was the only one noticing it.

      1. whatnow says:

        I don’t try to come off as pure just because I say I’m religious. And yes, people have the right to criticize me. And when they do – and this is the part you don’t get – even if I am a Christian – I have the right to criticize back. Being a Christian doesn’t mean you roll over dead and let people run all over you. And as for conservatives being selective as to whom the apply the Constitution, take a harder look at the liberals, they are mighty selective to, they are not interested in your Constitutional rights UNLESS you are a minority. I have said nothing mean spirited on this blog today but because I admit to Christianity, I have been attacked left and right. No one said a word about my post about supporting gay marriage. More posts are anti-Christian then anti-gay marriage on here so ask yourself who is the real discriminator?????

    2. @ whatnow says:

      I agree with much of what you have posted. There seems to be a persecution against Christians in the U.S. Recently, someone was fired from his job because a person of differing views did not agree with the Christian’s perspective. His job performance had been phenomal and all reviews were excellent. However, a client found something online that the Christian had written and complained/stated he wanted this person removed from his job just because of personal viewpoints posted by Christian, which he kept to himself and did not share on the job…

      1. Adam says:

        This has nothing to do with gay marriage. Your paranoia of people attacking your religion is not relevant to the issue at hand. Nice try.

  19. Advocate? says:

    The article states, “Advocates are now looking for support in the religious committee.”

    Well, if this is not a religious issue, why are gay advocates going to religious community?

    1. Yeah, Okay says:

      Perhaps to show that not ALL RELIGIONS (or even all Christians for that matter) embrace bigotry, inequality, and judgmental mindsets? Just a thought!

      1. Yeah, Okay says:

        Plus- they are only courting them because they are trying to recruit the support of LAWMAKERS. They are not going to Christian churches to garner support. Don’t worry, your specific sanctuary of hatred will still be in tact.

      2. Advocate? says:

        Please tell me, what is the specific sanctuary of hatred that you speak of?

        So, are you saying that gay advocates are courting religious committees because they want the lawmakers’ support?

        But if it’s not about religion, keep religion out of it! Perhaps there are individuals within the gay community that don’t want religion to be invovled in this…

      3. Yeah, Okay says:

        The specific sanctuary is whatever “faith organization” that you attend that preaches the same anti-gay views you belt out.

  20. kathy says:


    1. who cares says:

      so let me get this straight you dont want it in maryland becuase it is gross thats a shame i bet ur no better

    2. Matt says:

      You are either a troll or a moron. For some reason I picture you having 10 cats and on an episode of hoarders. Here”s an idea…..why don”t you move /

  21. The New Gay says:

    I think Kathy is gross

    1. Billiam says: if the Old Gay wasn’t bad enough

      1. Billiam says:

        You can find me performing as “Old Gay” on Thursday nights at the Gentlemens Gold Club on Pulaski Highway. Bring your dollars!

  22. @Kathy says:

    I think no one should be allowed to name their child Kathy. Now how does that make you feel. And if your name is Kathy your not allowed to play or sit with the other kids.

    1. Not Kathy, My 2 cents says:

      I am not Kathy, but… Anyone, gay or straight, can be named Kathy. And anyone, gay or straight, who happens to be named Kathy, is allowed to sit and play with the other kids, gay or straight.

      A person’s sexual preference is a preference. It doesn’t mean that person cannot be a part of mainstream society. However, all people, gay or straight, are subject to the laws where they live. If you are not in agreement, you may choose to go someplace where you will be in agreement. Whether the law is regarding marriage or another issue.

      1. Janice says:

        Sorry, not a preference, babe.

        Are you telling me one can turn on and off who they are sexually attracted to? If so, could you magically make yourself physically attracted to a woman for 5 minutes? I’d like to know that trick.

      2. Jimmy says:

        Also, “However, all people, gay or straight, are subject to the laws where they live. If you are not in agreement, you may choose to go someplace where you will be in agreement. ”

        Is that so?

        Yes, why didn’t the slaves just flee the US for greener pastures. It was legal here. After all, it’s okay to have slavery legal in half of the country. Those that don’t like it don’t have to live in the South. But nevermind trying to change those laws.

        And our great grandmothers? Yes, instead of pushing for a change in the law to allow women to vote, they just should have left and found a country where women could vote.

        Do you see where you are making no sense?

  23. To Janice says:

    Sexual preference is just that. Scientists have conducted studies on this. Some tried to say there were genetic factors. However, that has not been replicated. In fact, it has been concluded that environmental and cognitive factors need to be explored.

    1. Sigh.... says:

      Wrong. I love your vague “scientists”. It’s like the classic, generic “well, they said…” Who is they? Sources?

      1. Scientific Information says:

        For starters, how about the Human Genome Project…

      2. No thanks says:

        That’s already been debunked. Do you not know that in the world of science on this topic, citing something from 2003 is like citing ancient history?

      3. No Gay Gene says:

        Okay, a link regarding APA…this was published in 2009

        The attempt to prove that hom o sexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there’s no hom o sexual “gene” — meaning it’s not likely that hom o sexuals are born that way.

  24. To Jimmy says:

    Slaves did not have a choice. They were bought, sold, and brought here. Same with women, they did not have a choice to be born as men. These laws were changed and rightly so.

    However, sexual preference is a choice. No one is saying that an individual must be straigt or can’t be gay. However, we don’t need to change the law to allow individuals to marry.

    1. Jimmy says:

      Even though reasonable people know being gay is not a choice, you will never admit to it. So, let’s try this – your religion is definitely a CHOICE, so why don’t you stop complaining about this law infringing on your “religious rights”?

      Or let’s try this one: what if the law said, let’s say, in Massachusetts or another gay friendly state, that straight marriage wasn’t legal? What then? Would you rest on your laurels and just say “oh, I will move somewhere where I can get married”. No, you would feel the law was discriminating against you.

      1. It's a choice says:

        I am perfectly reasonable and I know that being gay is a choice. I have been trying to post some scientific findings but my posts don’t go through.

        . It is unlikely that a major gene underlying such a common trait could persist over time without an extraordinary counterbalancing mechanism (1993, 262:2064).
        Evan S. Balaban, a neurobiologist at the Neurosciences Institute in San Diego, noted that

        the search for the biological underpinnings of complex human traits has a sorry history of late. In recent years, researchers and the media have proclaimed the “discovery” of genes linked to alcoholism and mental illness as well as to home sexuality. None of the claims…has been confirmed (as quoted in Horgan, 1995).
        Charles Mann agreed, stating: “Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated” (1994, 264:1687). It appears that the gay gene will be added to this category of unreplicated claims.

        The real issue here is home sexual actions that society has deemed immoral and, in many instances, illegal. Since no study has firmly established an underlying genetic cause for home sexuality, arguments suggesting “equal rights” are both baseless and illogical.

      2. No thanks says:

        Nice cherrypicking. Care to include some of the scientific findings used by the American Psychological Association? Surely it must have been pretty frustrating for you having to have sifted through just as many findings that support my argument to get to what you’ve posted to support yours.

      3. No thanks says:

        Also, what is “home sexuality”. Any research with simple spelling or grammatical errors like that (especially about the topic at hand) should not be held as legitimate sources. Weren’t you taught that in high school?

      4. It's a choice says:

        The reason for writing home was intentional to see if the word hom o sexual was part of what was keeping my post from going thru.

        There is much more research that I could have included but I don’t need to show/prove to you anything.

        I am on a blog stating my opinions just as you are.

      5. Wipen and chillin says:

        I do not believe it is reasonable to conclude that an able bodied sole wants to have a pole inserted into his hiney hole by choice. Maybe if one of them cuts off their fork, knife and spoon and has it formed into a female vag… then it would seem ok, by natures standpoint anyway.

  25. V says:

    To sound like a bad bumper sticker/t-shirt slogan, LGBT is fine by me. Since MD recognizes same-sex marriages performed in other states, let said marriages be legalized here

    1. No it's not says:

      @V, no they don’t, its just an opinion and not honored/recognized by any agency in Maryland.

      1. Not so says:

        Actually, it is the present law followed by the state. Do you not understand the role of Attorney General?

      2. I agree, it's not... says:

        It is not a law in MD. In fact, many agencies are not following Attorney General Gansler’s opinion. He himself is under fire for illegal acts.

        One that is following his opinion, AACPS. They are now providing benefits to same-sex marriage partners for those married elsewhere.

      3. Jamie J says:

        I saw Gansler’s pants dripping some fluid from his rear end area on WJZ, and one of those inner city pit bulls lapping in up. Can’t say for sure but he is a little suspect.

  26. Jake Harper says:

    Maryland is billed as “America in Miniature”, isn’t it? If Maryland “falls”, it represents the future of the United States. I think this fight is bigger than just equal marriage in Maryland.

    1. Susan McGovern of Middle River says:

      If Maryland RISES by passing such common sense equality, I will be more optimistic about the future for my two boys.

      1. damon says:

        i agree with u 100% im only 18 and i have a 1 yr old son myself

      2. @Damon says:


        On an earlier blog you wrote that you were 19 years old. Now you are writing that you are 18 years old with a 1 year old son. Something doesn’t jive here.

  27. Ernie says:

    If all straight people quit procreating then there would eventually be no more gay people. There problem solved.

    Religion has no place in government. You can’t have freedom of religion without having freedom from it.

    1. It's a choice says:

      Exactly. If straight people quit procreating, there would be no more gay, straight, etc. There would be no more people period.

  28. The Real Billiam says:

    Unfortunately, someone is posting, yet again, under my name – it’s a sad state of affairs when an individual who can’t post under his own name has to use someone else’s name to get his (or her) point across. I will refrain from making any more comments or posts regarding this issue until the individual who is posting under my name comes forward and admits it or apologizes, because I expect this same individual is incapable of doing both, much less doing one. If you have to get your point or agenda across in this manner, I feel bad for you.

    1. The Real Billiam says:

      I had a brain fart again, sorry, guys. It was me… I must be looking pretty crazy by now. Sorry, I didn’t mean it.

      1. Me says:

        you’re an idiot…the fact that you can’t come on here and have a normal conversation doesn’t surprise me. I’m not sure you’re capable of anything that requires even minimal brain effort. Keep hiding behind your computer because apparently you’re unable to come to an “intelligence” gunfight with nothing more than a pea-shooter.

      2. Jill says:

        You’re right, “Me”. Billiam does seem like an idiot. There are too many split/ multi-personalities on this thread. It’s honestly scaring me a little…

  29. Jethro Hooper says:

    MARYLAND GAY RIGHTS GROUP WANTS SAME SEX MARRIAGE BY NEXT YEAR… and I want banana cream pie coming out of the water faucet by next year.

    1. Colleen says:

      What’s that? You want a banana in your pie hole? Closet case.

  30. Little D'wayne says:

    Hey, Whats Next? Letting illegal aliens obtain a drivers license?

    I’m for equality. Hell I even would like to see Ellen D. drop down on her knees and lap up Rosey O. How much however do we need to take before we all end up f**kin crazy?

    How about the gay guy from Doogie Howser getting married? News to him and his 3 dollar bill companion, me I would like to hear more of Mrs. O’Bama chowing down on cheese fries and explaining why she looks manly.

    Just an untwisted view of events. Peace my peeps.

  31. cleverweber says:

    Gays arent coming out of the closet because they want to, its because god has openedf the door and told them to come out from hiding ,so when he returns all sin will be in the light,,the devil will appear first,as its showing,and i belive if they quit begging and acting like the own the world to be reconized,people might mind ther own business, but no, they want this and want that, i guess if Billy leaves Tommy, Tommy wants him alimony. he wants his 50%, and employers,ah pay that mariage insurince for two guy,s,the adopted baby,and then get sued over discrimanation onnce he says you treat married women different,I have a question? When my wife was ill, i took off work to help, boss had to do the same thing also for his wife, but when Billy gets sick, does Tommy stay home to his honey?Two grown men off work?, oh and belive me they will stay home if its the common cold to get his……….Wife? a glass of orang juice. Do they flip a coin to see whos the wife and whos the husban? I sware ,Maryland is what it is, Mary….Land, named after Jesus mother,when England came here and established it with the church,,Did gays win at fort mchenry? or was it the real men who set us free.

    1. Elizabeth says:

      You need some serious help. This is the most delusional F—-d up post I have seen in my entire life.

  32. Tammy says:

    Alright people lets think for a minute. You all are saying that gay marriage should not be allowed due to the fact that they are unable to procreate…… Well dont you think there is enough procreating in this world now????? There are children out there that have no one to call mommy and daddy, Children living within the system? There are those people that are in same sex relationships that would love to adopted a child and give it a home and to loving parents, is this such a crime. Does it matter what the sex of the person is who loves that child? as a child would you rather live within the system and have no one to love or love you, or would you rather be in a family that you had two people that loved you and cared about you. Who are we to judge? No one has that right for the exception of GOD himself.
    I am not gay and have 3 children of my own and just think that people need to stop playing GOD and let GOD play GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    1. Wondering says:

      We must be reading different blogs. I did not see where “you all” are saying that gay marriage should not be allowed due to the fact that they are unable to procreate. Yes, there are some that have stated that. However, others have stated other reasons as well. I personally don’t see where people have thought they are playing GOD.

      Each one of us is entitled to our opinions.

      1. Elizabeth says:

        You are ALL claiming to speak God’s thoughts on gay people and, you know what? It doesn’t even matter if you are! Want to know why? THE US IS NOT A THEOCRACY! Please move to a Middle Eastern country if that’s what you desire!

    2. Curious says:

      My understanding is that gays are currently free to adopt, just as singles are.

      How does it work when they adopt? Do the kids have two mothers or two fathers? Or do the roles really get confusing and they still have one of each? But that can’t be, because mother is a female parent and father is a male parent. And it takes both a female and male to procreate, and then you have the biological parents, who may/may not be known/involved in their lives.

      Yes, I realize that gay or straight, there are issues that arise concerning adoption. Right now, this discussion is regarding gay married couples.

      I guess the gay community wouldn’t need to worry about the IVF route, since they can adopt all of the unloved children produced by straight couples, right?

      1. MzB says:

        curious.. when a child is adopted by a gay couple the child is then blessed with two loving parents… End of story!

  33. bmoregyrl says:

    Gays have rights to marry whomever they want.

  34. God is on Our Side says:

    Gays need to seek help.
    They think being married will make them accepted mainstream.
    Gay marriage is illegal in courts and in the Bible.
    Even considering gay marriage will continue to confuse our children.
    You can’t wear pink and not be accountable in his eyes.

    1. Elizabeth says:

      Wear pink? How about “you can’t wear cotton blend cloth”? You do know that is also forbidden in your beloved Bible right alongside a ban from eating shell fish. Check Leviticus.

      1. God is on our Side says:

        Elizabeth, take some time to read the Bible.
        Gays and warped perverts think they can conspire to make children wear pink.
        They deceive young children saying support your local gays and wear pink.
        All the while lusting after children and confusing them to think it’s okay to wear pink.
        Try as you may to deceive, but the plan liberals and gays have devised will fail.
        Gay marriage is ILLEGAL and those who choose to break the law will pay.

      2. Elizabeth says:

        LOL this is the most ridiculous claim I have ever heard! Almost every little girl wears pink- my grandmother was certainly not gay and bought me pink dresses for almost every birthday and I am a straight mother of 2!

        Can someone else please comment on this ridiculous claim- even if you are against gay marriage? I have never heard of this in my life!

        Those who chose to break the law will pay? Really? I thought conservatives were against laws and a nanny state?

        What about when drinking alcohol was illegal? Did everyone who drank during Prohibition “pay”? For God’s sake, Jesus drank wine!

      3. God is on our Side says:

        Ridiculous? No!
        The more mainstream these gays try to make themselves, they try to become accepted.
        YEAH! Wear pink it’s okay, support the gays, it’s okay.
        everyone sees this and there will never be a Mr. and Mre. Gay.
        I will not waer pink.

      4. Diane King says:

        LOL. OK, I’m convinced. God is on our side is either a troll or a raving lunatic.

  35. Taking sides says:

    Some individuals here sound like they aren’t given choices/preferences in regards to sex. You know, EVERYONE, has choices about whom they engage in sexual relations. Some say you can’t decide who you are attracted to, turn it on and off, etc. Human sexuality is complex and there are problems within each type of relationship. You make it sound like the straight community is against you and it is somehow their fault. That is your thinking and you can feel that way. However, perhaps if you looked at the situation differently, you would see that no one is taking away your choice of partnership.

    1. Elizabeth says:

      What are you smoking?

  36. Frank Smalley says:

    If an article is going to be written this poorly, it’s probably better to just run the story on TV.

    1. Advocate? says:

      I don’t know if you have been following this particular blog, but the original article has been edited. I have noticed this with other articles as well. I guess someone out there is trying…

      1. God is on our Side says:

        Probably a gay.

      2. Janice says:

        I love your posts, please keep going- you only further our cause by proving that opponents to gay people are bordering on mentally deranged!

      3. God is on our Side says:

        @ Janice, why do you resort to name calling?
        another defect?

      4. Jill says:

        You have a severe mental disorder. Anyone questioning needs to read “God is on our side’s” posts above about wearing pink. Very deranged, Very sad.

  37. MzB says:

    God is a belief one makes a choice to accept: therefore the BIBLE does not dictate to everyone! Everyone should have a choice and the choice’s of others are none of anyone else’s business. I don’t understand why so many people think they have the right to conform the entire populations to their beliefs… isn’t this why we have WARS?!?!? I am straight and I am all for gay marriage!

    1. Elizabeth says:

      Thank you so much for this!!! You are BLESSED with common sense and compassion!

      1. Just saying... says:

        Who gave you the authority to say someone is BLESSED with common sense and compassion?

      2. God is on our Side says:

        Answer that question???????
        You’re probably wearing pink cotton blend and trying to confuse young kids.

      3. Elizabeth says:

        LOL I am now convinced “God is on our side” is an elaborate prank! There’s no doubt! Nobody can be this nuts!

    2. MzB says:

      Just saying… I’ve been blessed by many things thank you. I am pretty sure common sense was much needed to get me where I am and compassion is an absolute!

      1. Just saying... says:

        That’s interesting. When I feel blessed, it’s not because of things. I agree that common sense and compassion are good and necessary attributes for all people.

        I think my comment was misunderstood by both you and Elizabeth.

      2. Elizabeth says:

        How could I have “misunderstood” your comment when I haven’t even replied yet? What do you mean by “Who gave you the authority to say someone is BLESSED with common sense and compassion?” Jesus himself gives people the power to bless objects and other people in the Bible. Even so, I haven’t actually blessed anyone. I was saying he was blessed. How many times have you heard the saying “she’s a blessing” or “bless your little heart”? Sir, you are in no way an authority to tell me I cannot tell someone they are blessed. I’m sorry that bothers you so much- perhaps you are longing for someone to tell you that you are a good person?

      3. Just saying... says:


        My apologies. I didn’t mean to refer to you as misunderstanding my comment. I was thinking of someone else. This board is becoming very strange…

        Now that being said, I made my first comment to you because it seemed that you didn’t believe in religion. Usually, people of faith use those words. Again, my bad…

      4. Elizabeth says:

        I wish people wouldn’t assume that all people who support gay marriage are not religious (even Christians for that matter), or are gay themselves.

        Thanks for your apology- this is a strange board indeed- on both sides!

  38. MzB says:

    If you’re against something be against it per choice, don’t hide behind ignorance or religion!

  39. Data says:

    Maryland’s Population Growth Slowest in 28 Years
    (Net domestic migration losses continue to be large.)
    Maryland gained just under 14,700 people (0.3%) between July 1, 2007 and July
    1, 2008, the smallest increase since 1980. Continued substantial losses from net domestic
    migration for the fifth consecutive year were the major factor behind the slower growth.
    According to estimates released by the U.S. Census Bureau, Maryland’s total
    population gain in the most recent year was ranked 34th largest in the U.S., while its 0.3
    percent growth rate was ranked the 44th highest, the lowest rankings of both measures this
    decade. Since April 1, 2000, Maryland’s population has grown by nearly 337,100
    people, ranked 17th in the U.S. This 6.4 percent increase (ranked 24th) is below the
    overall U.S. gain of 8.0 percent.
    The U.S. Census Bureau’s population estimates are derived from estimating
    individual components of change, including, births, deaths, net international migration
    (including the movement of federal citizens to and from overseas assignments) and
    domestic migration comprised of state-to-state movements of population (and changes to
    group quarters population).

    1. Janice says:

      This is not true. I’m not on here to prove simple, obvious facts. Any idiot who’s lived in this state for 20 years can tell you that the population has risen dramatically over the past 10. There are census maps out there showing this- I suggest people go look for them if this is what they are basing allowing gay marriage on- population growth, really? LOL. How absurd?

    2. Data says:

      here we go again…

      You keep asking for proof from the opposing side, yet when it’s presented, you dismiss it as false. The facts presented are current and true. And based on the census report. I have not seen you ar anyone else present any evidence to support your position. However, you don’t need to prove anything to anybody here. We are all entitled to our opinions.

      1. Jimmy says:

        What does population have to do with this again? Guess I missed it. Are you proposing that just because a gay couple can’t procreate that they cannot get married? You are setting yourself up for an obvious failure with that argument. How about the barren, the elderly, or those who simply choose to marry without kids? Please stop.

  40. What about us says:

    How about the bi and transgender poplulations? Can we get married too? What’s the higher up think about that one?

    1. Janice says:

      What do you mean can the “bi”s get married? What’s wrong with you? Bi’s are covered by the combination of straight and gay marriage. When both are legal, you should have no problem. As far as trans, the same thing goes. In fact, trans people can marry right now, so long as their partner is of the opposite sex. Am I missing something?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s

Watch & Listen LIVE