MDPetitions Same Sex Marriage

[Mitchum]

Who didn't see this coming? MDPetitions is using the same Haterbase it developed from the anti DREAM Act petition to put Maryland's Same Sex Marriage on the ballot.

https://mdpetitions.com/

[Baltimatt]

It was originally developed for the same-sex marriage bill which didn't pass last year, but then the DREAM Act did.

[baltimoreron]

Who didn't see this coming? MDPetitions is using the same Haterbase it developed from the anti DREAM Act petition to put Maryland's Same Sex Marriage on the ballot.

https://mdpetitions.com/

Why should any law be forced down our throats? We have the right to petition, you should be happy that we use it -- whether or not a particular law suits your agenda.

You libbies were giddy when MOM "let the people decide about slots", why should it be different for any other law?

[Baltimatt]

So, they have a picture of a man, woman, and child with the part about letting the people decide about marriage. Why the hell do these clowns always show pictures of opposite-sex couples? Opposite-sex marriage will still be legal and people will still be able to have children. But these people have no problem with keeping same-sex families at a disadvantage.

baltimoreon--

Nobody is forcing anything down your throat.

[Marshan Man]

Civil rights vs. gambling isn't exactly the same thing... civil rights should never be put up for referendum IMHO...

[baltimoreron]

Civil rights vs. gambling isn't exactly the same thing... civil rights should never be put up for referendum IMHO...

And slots should not be part of the constitution.

[Baltimatt]

And slots should not be part of the constitution.

That I'll agree with. Unless gambling was prohibited by the constitution, there was no reason to amend the constitution. One hundred years from now, will people be scratching their heads wondering why video lottery terminals are in our our constitution? Maybe we should amend the constitution to require watering troughs and hitching posts for the horses outside retail stores.

[baltimoreron]

That I'll agree with. Unless gambling was prohibited by the constitution, there was no reason to amend the constitution. One hundred years from now, will people be scratching their heads wondering why video lottery terminals are in our our constitution? Maybe we should amend the constitution to require watering troughs and hitching posts for the horses outside retail stores.

Some are already scratching their heads.

BTW - I thought troughs and posts already were in the constitution? I better read it again.

[Mitchum]

I wouldn't even mind petitions if they were from the groundswell of the people of MD but not this phony baloney, out of state coordinated, astroturfed BS.

If I was an employer that was really into these issues I would make damn sure I would check the Haterbase before I would hire anyone.

[yuca]

Civil rights vs. gambling isn't exactly the same thing... civil rights should never be put up for referendum IMHO...

And slots should not be part of the constitution.

I agree on both points.

[Marshan Man]

No they shouldn't...

[regularguy]

Approximately half of Marylanders are ok with same-sex marriage, according to the polls I've seen, and the percentage seems to increase every year. (Younger generations are generally more accepting of the idea of equal rights for gays than are older generations.) The thing about a referendum is that a passionate minority can win if the other side is not as revved up. The anti-marriage-equality side is definitely feeling a sense of intense moral outrage, whipped up by preachers, so they will be super-motivated to vote on the issue.

[Saticon3]

Approximately half of Marylanders are ok with same-sex marriage, according to the polls I've seen, and the percentage seems to increase every year. (Younger generations are generally more accepting of the idea of equal rights for gays than are older generations.) The thing about a referendum is that a passionate minority can win if the other side is not as revved up. The anti-marriage-equality side is definitely feeling a sense of intense moral outrage, whipped up by preachers, so they will be super-motivated to vote on the issue.

I don't think you can whip it up enough to prevail in a referendum- get it on the ballott, maybe, yes, but not prevail. I think gay marriage in inevitable, and agree with you that the younger the population gets, the more the acceptance level rises.

But, I do think there is significant, home grown, sincere opposition here to SSM. I don't belive the opposition is hate driven either, but rather by religious beliefs, tradition, and ignorance. ( now, ignorance is not really a bad word, as it means not knowing something, not stupid) Everyhwere in the country where its been put to the voters, its lost, hasn't it? CA, another very liberal state, had it REPEALED by its voters. So, I don't think you can dismiss the oppostion as a few haters driven by special interests. If it goes down in MD, it will only do so if a large number of Dems vote against it, the Repubs cannot do it on their own.

[yuca]

I don't think you can whip it up enough to prevail in a referendum- get it on the ballott, maybe, yes, but not prevail. I think gay marriage in inevitable, and agree with you that the younger the population gets, the more the acceptance level rises.

It is inevitable. But we have a chance to do the right thing NOW.

When I look back at the civil rights movement, I find it sad that so many people had to struggle and die for the basic rights afforded to everyone else. We have a great opportunity to learn from those mistakes.

Instead, we're condemned to repeat them.

[regularguy]

If it goes down in MD, it will only do so if a large number of Dems vote against it, the Repubs cannot do it on their own.

Maryland has a fair number of fiscally-liberal, socially conservative Democrats. Think union-member whites; think super-religious blacks.

I'll certainly be voting in favor of same-sex marriage, but I'm not optimistic about my side winning.

[Baltimatt]

The cool thing is, if you are opposed to same-sex marriage, you don't have to get one. But hey, if you want to hurt children and punish them for having same-sex parents, go ahead and support repeal.

[regularguy]

The cool thing is, if you are opposed to same-sex marriage, you don't have to get one. But hey, if you want to hurt children and punish them for having same-sex parents, go ahead and support repeal.

And a lot of self-righteous people will do just that.

[DaggerJohn]

And a lot of self-righteous people will do just that.

Demonize much?

[regularguy]

Demonize much?

No.

Someone who would vote to strike down a secular civil-rights law because they want to impose their religious doctrine on everyone else is being... self-righteous.

[songfourone]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opi...,2691607.photo

Couldn't resist.