A person i adore and trust and is GOOD GOOD GOOD, who is also a devote Catholic, said to me “a government has no right to restrict the marriage rights of adult citizens. To do so would be legalized discrimination. Religious groups can maintain their own right not to recognize such marriages based on their beliefs and doctrines but a government has no right to do so.” Yep, he knows what “all folks are created equal” means and what the 14th amendment means (ya know the right to life, liberty and property)
and so too do more and more states by stating folks should NOT be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation.
And that is what the Maryland law is all about – stopping discrimination against LGBT by allowing legal marriage – marriage equality while stating that religious groups can still do their thing.
MD passed marriage equality – allowing LGBT to have civil marriages but some anti-gay rights folks got thousands of signatures to have a referendum – vote put on the ballot to see if the people of MD support this law and if they don’t then they can get it tossed (think CA proposition 8).
NOTE: we have elected officials propose bill and vote on them and elected governors sign them into law or veto them every day. Civil rights issues traditionally are not put on the ballot for the general population to vote on because many bigoted folks would try to maintain legalized discrimination. The Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s would have never been passed if it was up to the people of the south to vote on the matter. Women’s right to vote during a time when it was only legal for men to vote – would have never passed it was up to the general population to vote on it. This is why we have elected officials – they r supposed to represent us and the greater good and to uphold the Constitution of the United States over corporate interest or religious institutions.
The media and conservative extremist wrong-wingers are quick to siege on the situation at Gallaudet to exploit for their own purposes.
All i got to say on the matter is:
1. A Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) taking steps to try to have discrimination legalized against LGBTQ calls into question her/his ability to support justice and equality for LGBT students on campus.
2. A University should examine how well a Chief Diversity Officer can perform their duties if they hold beliefs and values that say LGBTQ should be denied the right to marry legally (the MD law does not affect religious practices)
3. NOBODY should be attacking LGBTQ over this controversy
NOBODY should be attacking People of Color (POC) and Women over this controversy
NOBODY should be attacking Drs. McCatskill and Hurwitz over this controversy
NOTE: Oct 16, Dr. T. Alan Hurwitz released a msg to the community on this topic – it has been added to the comment section below or this link.
4. I hope and pray the better angels of our nature will manifest itself and reconciliation will emerge so that trust, respect, and justice can be fully self-evident in the Office of Diversity and through out the campus.
As a Holocaust survivor always told my classes – “Hatred is simply a waste of time.”
So please folks VOTE
if u live in Md or have loved ones that do – pls make sure they know what Question 6 on the ballot is all about.
VOTE YES to Question 6 on Nov 6
this is a vote of NO to H8
voting FOR the referred law means you want to keep LGBTQ marriage rights.
Note the law preserves the rights for religious groups to do otherwise so i have NO idea why so many religious groups are trying to get folks to be AGAINST the referred law.
Hence my big question as to why Question 6 is even on the ballot if not for bigotry: (bold added by me)
Civil Marriage Protection Act (Ch. 2 of the 2012 Legislative Session) Establishes that Maryland’s civil marriage laws allow gay and lesbian couples to obtain a civil marriage license, provided they are not otherwise prohibited from marrying; protects clergy from having to perform any particular marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs; affirms that each religious faith has exclusive control over its own theological doctrine regarding who may marry within that faith; and provides that religious organizations and certain related entities are not required to provide goods, services, or benefits to an individual related to the celebration or promotion of marriage in violation of their religious beliefs.For the Referred Law
Against the Referred Law—–
For the Referred Law = supporting the current law above (LGBT can legally marry in MD but religious groups do not have to follow such practices)