I'm in the packed hearing room. At this point we have a parade of black pastors explaining their objections to SB116. "A sleeping giant" one of them said.
In the first hour's panel, many, many lawyers claimed that this bill would protect both religious freedom and civil marriage. That's what the title claims.
But Prof. Robin Fretwell Wilson's testimony blew them out of the room, by pointing out that every other state that has passed a gay marriage bill has included more conscience protection than this bill and that offering conscience exemptions is perfectly consistent with Maryland and U.S. anti-discrimination principles.
I was watching the pro-SSM legislators faces. They were paying attention.
I was also amused by the conservative GOP woman (I didn't catch her name) who testified that gay marriage is a conservative position; and that "no republican legislator had lost his or her seat for voting for same-sex marriage."
Some pretty outdated Human Rights Campaign (HRC) talking points, after the last election.
NOM's Chairman, Maggie Gallagher, will testify in support of our historic understanding of marriage -- in law, culture and society. To hear her, monitor this page on the Maryland General Assembly website tomorrow (under Judicial Committee Proceedings). The hearing is set to begin at 1PM EST.
By NOM Staff|Posted in Maryland, Same Sex Marriage|Comments Off on Alert: Maggie Gallagher to Testify Tuesday in Maryland SSM Hearings
At least that's the way the Deseret News reported it. The LA Times version (surprise, surprise!) is somewhat snarkier, turning to professional atheists and a former Mormon to contest his claim, rather than any serious legal scholar.
The LA Times reporter also manages never to note that Elder Oaks was formerly Dean of the University of Chicago Law School, and a respected legal scholar.
Stella Morabito, a Maryland resident, writes in the Washington Examiner, "the trend towards same-sex marriage seems far less a civil rights issue than a scheme to divide the family and conquer the individual."
Maryland legislators will hold public hearings Feb. 8 on a bill to recognize same-sex marriage. This bill and the legislature that will consider it neatly capture the growing disregard in our society for the collective rights, responsibilities and roles of birth-parents. [Continue reading]
As a lifelong Roman Catholic, state Sen. Katherine Klausmeier grew up with the clear understanding that marriage is between a man and a woman.
But the Baltimore County Democrat also empathizes with young gay couples, including two women who recently sat in her office and described the joy of raising children.
As the Senate prepares to consider making same-sex marriage legal in Maryland, Klausmeier wakes up in the morning believing she'll vote one way, but by the end of the day has a different idea.
... Klausmeier is one of a half-dozen lawmakers who have yet to declare a position on the bill — a group large enough to determine its fate.
Republican lawmakers in Indiana are resuming their push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.
A legislative hearing is scheduled for Monday. Opponents say the amendment isn't needed because Indiana law already bans gay marriage, but supporters worry that courts could overturn that law.
An amendment banning gay marriage passed the General Assembly in 2005 when Republicans controlled the House and Senate, but constitutional amendments must go through two separate Legislatures before being put to a public vote. In 2006, Democrats won control of the House and the proposal never cleared that chamber.
Republicans now control both chambers, giving the proposal a better shot of passing. If it clears the Legislature this year, it would have to pass again in 2013 or 2014 before getting on the ballot.
By NOM Staff|Posted in Indiana, Same Sex Marriage|Comments Off on Indiana GOP takes another shot at marriage amendment
"Georgene Rice of KPDQ-FM interviews Maggie Gallagher with the National Organization for Marriage in California. She discusses the Supreme Court’s recent decision to deny an appeal to the D.C. same-sex marriage decision. They discuss whether it was a procedural decision or if it goes to the merits of the question of same-sex marriage. She also outlines the other defense of marriage actions that are being considered in the courts all across the nation."
"Domestic violence risk. According to national surveys, men and women who frequently attend religious services are about half as likely as nonattenders to perpetrate physical aggression against intimate partners, according to both partners (Appendix B). This link persists net of the offender's social integration and support, alcohol and substance abuse, and low self-esteem and depression (Ellison & Anderson, 2001). More frequent attenders also report less often being a victim of partner aggression in marital, cohabiting, or dating relationships (Appendix B). Further, being a CP or biblically conservative does not predict being a perpetrator or victim, nor does having an interfaith marriage. Still, in the rare cases (7.5%) in which marked disparities exist in spouses' biblical beliefs, conservative men married to more liberal women are more likely to be aggressive than men married to women with similar biblical views (Ellison, Bartkowski, & Anderson, 1999). Overall, higher religious attendance decreases the risk of exhibiting or experiencing domestic violence, although substantial disagreement between partners on spiritual matters may increase the risk of partner aggression." [source]
By NOM Staff|Posted in Science|Comments Off on Religion Reduces Risk of Domestic Violence
A lot of Internet chatter focuses on state-level divorce rates, but the best social science research suggests people who actually practice their faith do indeed have lower divorce rates:
"Divorce rates. As in prior decades (Mahoney et al., 2001), three recent longitudinal studies tied higher religious attendance, particularly by wives or by couples who attend the same denomination together, to decreased rates of future divorce (Brown, Orbuch, & Bauermeister, 2008; Vaaler, Ellison, & Powers, in press; Woods & Emery, 2002). Null findings emerged for personal importance of religion, affiliation, or spousal similarity in affiliation using two nationally representative samples (Vaaler et al., in press; Woods & Emery, 2002)." [source]
On Tuesday, the Iowa House of Representatives voted 62-37 in favor of giving the people of Iowa the chance to vote on marriage, sending HJR 6 to the Senate for approval.
But Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal has vowed to block the measure from ever coming to a vote in the Senate, even if it costs him his seat.
Tell Senator Gronstal it’s time to stop forcing his personal views on the people of Iowa. It’s one thing to vote against the amendment – it’s another thing altogether to use his legislative position to block the will of the Senate and the will of the people of Iowa.
Then help spread the word to your family and friends – we’ve added new facebook, twitter and email buttons to make it easy to update your social networks, too.
Faithfully,
Brian S. Brown,
President
National Organization for Marriage
By NOM Staff|Posted in Same Sex Marriage|Comments Off on Iowa Action Alert
From the 
