Gay marriage in Maryland
Quote:
http://www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi...8/01_13-49/COL
Eric Hartley: Gay marriage opponents already lost
Published January 13, 2008
Here's how inevitable gay marriage is in Maryland, in one form or another.
There was a debate on the issue last week in Annapolis, and the supporters didn't even bother speaking.
True, it wasn't actually a debate over a marriage or civil union bill; it was a General Assembly committee hearing about insurance regulations, not ordinarily one of the more scintillating shows in town.
But make no mistake, this was about gay marriage. By a 12-4 vote, a joint Senate-House committee approved inserting a definition of "domestic partner" into state insurance rules.
|
Further down in the column, Hartley says:
Quote:
The battle will really be fought - and won - in quiet, dry areas like life insurance, health insurance, wills, hospital visitation and child custody.
The revolution will not be televised - not much, anyway. It will happen in half-empty rooms before committees you've probably never heard of, like Thursday's hearing before the Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive & Legislative Review.
"If they can get two or three more of these things passed, they don't need" a marriage law, said Doug Stiegler, executive director of the Maryland Family Protection Lobby, one of two people who spoke against the insurance regulations. (No points for guessing that the other was a lobbyist for the Catholic Church.)
Exactly right, Doug. Once there is de facto gay marriage, changing the law to reflect that reality (whether we call it marriage or temporarily use a euphemism like "civil union" to appease the religious right) won't seem like such a huge step.
|
While I'd rather have a ringing endorsement from a legislative body, I'm willing to take regulatory reform for starters. If the conservatives can have their agenda, I guess we're entitled to ours. |
