Box Turtle Bulletin

Posts Tagged As: Maryland

Maryland Balances Budget by Taxing Gay Widows

Timothy Kincaid

March 22nd, 2008

Although marriage equality, civil unions, and full domestic partnerships have been blocked from consideration by the Maryland Senate, three bills that would offer some protections for gay couples have been allowed out of committee.

Medical Decisions: would allow domestic partners to make medical and funeral decisions for each other, share a nursing home room and visit at their hospital bedsides.

This bill has received preliminary approval. Thank you.

Joint House Ownership: allow domestic partners to avoid paying recordation and transfer taxes when adding each other to home deeds.

This bill has received preliminary approval. However, it was first amended to remove commercial property.

But not everyone thinks that this is a good idea.

“Do you really want to encourage people to shack up and not commit to each other?” Sen. Alex X. Mooney, a Frederick County Republican, asked his colleagues. “This whole bill is a loophole.”

No, Senator Mooney, we WANT people to commit. That’s why we support marriage for gay couples – rather than oppose it like you do. Comments like this make you seem like a blithering idiot.

Inheritance: exempt domestic partners from inheritance taxes.

This one isn’t likely to pass.

The reason?

Sen. Ulysses Currie, chairman of the Budget and Taxation Committee and a Prince George’s County Democrat, said the inheritance tax would be a harder sell because it affects the state’s budget, which has been strained by deficits and a waning economy.

OK. Let me understand this, Senator Currie.

The reason that Maryland cannot treat gay couples like straight couples is because it needs the greiving gay widows to pay for the government’s budget problems.

Really?

You can’t treat gay people equally because you want gay people to pay higher taxes?

You have got to be kidding me!

COMMENT (1) • LINK

Maryland Senator Muse Champions Bigotry

This article is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of other authors at Box Turtle Bulletin

Timothy Kincaid

March 15th, 2008

Those who are regular readers know my frustration with the Democratic Party in Maryland. They have allowed one anti-gay legislator to dictate the level of discrimination that the state will impose on its gay citizens.

Let me be clear. Most Republicans in the state are far worse, many seeking to ban equality through revision to the state constitution. And some even oppose letting couples in a long term relationships make medical decisions for each other.

On the Senate floor yesterday, Republicans said that allowing an unmarried couple who have been partners only a short time to trump parents or children in crucial life-and-death medical decisions struck them as irresponsible.

“How far are we going to go?” asked Sen. Alex X. Mooney (R-Frederick). “Let’s not put domestic partners above the family. Let’s put them after.”

But that isn’t all that surprising from the Party that brought us Sally Kern. Such attitudes, however, are supposed to not prevail in the Democratic Party. Yet it is the Democratic Party leadership that has placed power in the hands of a man who blocked the chance of Senators to even consider marriage equality or civil unions.

Religious objections proved the determining factor in a key, evenly split Senate committee that a marriage or civil unions bill needed to clear before getting to the floor. The swing vote was C. Anthony Muse, a Prince George’s County Democrat who was lobbied intensely by gay rights advocates and lawmakers to pass a civil unions bill. But Muse, pastor of an evangelical Christian church in Upper Marlboro, said he ultimately was bound by biblical teachings that say only men and women should marry. The bills are likely to languish without a vote.

There will be a vote taken on some piece-meal rights such as health care decisions or inheritance. But Muse was not content in allowing gay people to make determinations about their own health without taking the opportunity to champion bigotry.

yesterday, he voted for several Republican-sponsored changes to the medical decision-making measure, including one that would have barred public schools from teaching about domestic partnerships. The changes were rejected. Muse said he is unsure how he will vote when the Senate takes a final vote on the bill next week.

I do not doubt that Senator Muse has experienced discrimination in his lifetime. But that does not excuse him for doling it out to those citizens that he dislikes.

And it’s time for the Democratic Party in Maryland to recognize that those minority legislators, be they gay or black or whatever, who campaign against the rights of other minorities, be they gay or black or whatever, are engaging in bigotry and have no place in any position of authority.

Senator Muse needs to feel the consequences of his homophobia. And as long as the Maryland Democratic Party continues to allow Muse to stand in the way of equality, they will receive no respect from me.

COMMENTS (16) • LINK

Rights of Gay Maryland Couples Threatened by One LegislatorDem

This commentary is the opinion of the author and may not reflect the opinions of other authors at this site.

Timothy Kincaid

March 7th, 2008

The Baltimore Sun is reporting that gay couples in Maryland may have to settle, at least for a while, for far less than marriage equality.

Although the state’s legislature is overwhelmingly Democrat, it appears that not only is marriage considered an impossible goal, so too is civil unions or really anything other than small package of selected benefits. And it is all due to one man:

[Sen. C. Anthony ] Muse, a Prince George’s County Democrat, opposes same-sex marriage but had considered supporting civil unions. He said yesterday that while civil unions are “off the table,” he’s concerned about providing equal rights. He said a more narrowly tailored bill could have the support in the full Senate to pass.

Although there are between 340 and 425 benefits provided by the state that could be provided on an equal measure, gay couples can at best expect a trickle.

Lawmakers expect that the alternative measure would combine three existing bills conferring some rights and benefits, such as hospital visitation rights, to same-sex couples into one bill. They plan to build upon that with other protections.

Muse, an evangelical minister, seems to base his objections to civil equality on his own religious beliefs. While this is not uncommon in Republican politics (to the dismay of fiscal conservatives, federalists, and libertarians), the Democrat Party prides itself – and rightly so – in placing equality of citizens as a higher priority than the observation of religious exclusionary traditions.

But as of yet I have not heard of any repercussions to Sen. Muse’s obstinate religously motivated political actions coming from either the state or national Democrat party. Muse seems to be free to dictate discrimination, and it does not appear to me that any Democrats in positions of leadership are willing to stand up to him and call him on his bigotry.

I have no doubt that there are a great many of our readers that are Democrats. Further, I am convinced that members of the gay community are far far more dedicated and contribute more time and money per capita to Democrats than nearly any other constituents.

It is a disgusting betrayal of trust that this state be dominated by Democrats who are willing to give their gay citizens merely the barest pitance. I think it may be time for loyal gay Democrats to contact their friends in Maryland leadership and in the national Democrat leadership and ask why Sen. Muse has been given veto power on providing any measure of equality to gay couples.

Perhaps a good question might be why Sen. Muse continues to sit on that committee.

And if the State or National Party is unwilling to stand up for gay citizens, perhaps the next fundraising appeal should receive the following response from gay party members:

Of course, in words I support the Party. And naturally some day, when the populace is in total agreement about the Democrat Party and such an act isn’t controversial, I’ll send you a check for $1,000. But in the meanwhile, here’s a check for two cents. Oh, and I’ll be sure to tell everyone just what a great person I am for giving you anything at all.

We deserve better, people. Let’s demand it.

C. ANTHONY MUSE
Democrat, District 26, Prince George’s County
James Senate Office Building, Room 304
11 Bladen St., Annapolis, MD 21401
(410) 841-3092, (301) 858-3092
1-800-492-7122, ext. 3092 (toll free)
e-mail: anthony.muse@senate.state.md.us
fax: (410) 841-3410, (301) 858-3410

Maryland Democratic Party
188 Main Street Suite 1
Annapolis, MD 21401
410-269-8818 (main)
410-280-8882 (fax)
webdem@mddems.org

Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington, DC 20003
Main Phone Number: 202-863-8000
(For questions about contributions, please call 877-336-7200)
email here

COMMENTS (3) • LINK

Maryland AG Endorses Marriage Equality

Timothy Kincaid

February 14th, 2008

As we have noted before, the current front in the battle for marriage is in Maryland. Now WBAL is reporting that the Attorney General has spoke in favor of marriage equality.

“In five, 10, 15 years, there is no question in my mind we will have gay marriage in the state of Maryland and across the United States,” said Gansler, who acknowledged his arguments would be unpopular with some but that he was obliged as the state’s top lawyer to seek justice.

Interestingly, Gansler was the one who successfully defended the state’s anti-marriage legislation before the Supreme Court last year. Nevertheless, he can see that defending a legislature’s right to make a decision doesn’t make that decision right.

“All of us have gay friends, right? If you say to somebody, I’m not going to stand up for you, what good are you?” Gansler said.

That is a message that I wish everyone would hear.

COMMENT • LINK

Maryland Legislator Calls Anti-Gay Bluff

Timothy Kincaid

February 5th, 2008

The main argument against allowing gay couples the same civil benefits and obligations as hetero couples is that “Marriage is a Religious Institution”.

So State Sen. Jamie B. Raskin proposed legislation that would entrench just such a notion. The state would cease to recognize marriages at all and replace them with domestic partnerships that would be open to both gay and straight couples. The if you wanted to “respect a religious institution” and get married you could do so in a religious place, your church. The Washington Post reports:

Under their proposal, all couples — straight or gay — would be on equal footing with secular unions. Religious marriage in churches, synagogues and mosques would be unaffected, as would existing civil marriages.

The word “marriage” would be replaced with “valid domestic partnership” in the state’s family law code.

“If people want to maintain a religious test for marriage, let’s turn it into a religious institution,” said Sen. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Montgomery), the bill’s Senate sponsor.

Naturally, the anti-gays do not support this idea. It turns out that, surprise, they didn’t really mean what they were saying. What they really want is preferential treatment for heterosexuality.

“What they’re talking about is an even more radical departure from traditional marriage than even advocates for gay marriage are talking about,” said Del. Christopher B. Shank (R-Washington), the minority whip. “They’re creating a situation for one special interest group that basically diminishes the value of marriage for everyone else.”

As I have said before, the Democrat majority in Maryland has an obligation to find some method of providing protection for their gay citizens. Considering their overwhelming control of the state and the support that Democrats demand and receive from the gay community, it is unconscionable that no provision be made.

Pragmatically, civil unions may be the best that can be hoped for. But I believe that Raskin’s proposition has the potential to remind some legislators that secondary status – civil unions or domestic partnerships – are something they would never ever accept for their own relationships.

Let’s hope and pray that decency and integrity will rule the day and that Maryland’s elected leaders will come to believe that all persons, gay and straight, are equal and entitled to equal protection under the law.

COMMENTS (9) • LINK

Maryland Introduces Bill to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage – Are Democrats Committed to Equality?

Timothy Kincaid

January 25th, 2008

Legislators in both the State Senate and the House have introduced bills to remove the gender requirement in state marriage law.

More than a fourth of state lawmakers have signed up to sponsor a bill that would legalize same-sex marriages in Maryland, the measure’s proponents announced today.

Although the bills have substantial support, they are unlikely to succeed. The leadership in both houses oppose the bills.

Gov. Martin O’Malley and House Speaker Michael E. Busch have said that they prefer civil unions. Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller opposes both same-sex marriage and civil unions.

Maryland’s legislature is predominantly Democrat with a 33 to 14 advantage in the State Senate and 103 to 36 in the House. The leaders of both chambers are Democrats, as is the Governor.

The efforts today can probably best be viewed as an inter-party squabble, an effort on the part of some Democrats to force the hand of their leadership.

Although in control, the Maryland Democrat Party has done nothing to advance the rights of gay couples. They sat back after the state Supreme Court declared that gay persons are not equal under the Maryland Constitution and decided that it was just too soon and they are just too busy to find some measure of protection that they could put in place.

This will be an interesting case to watch.

The AP is currently reporting on the frustration that many gay individuals are feeling over the lack of courage on the part of Democrat Presidential candidates to stand up for equality. They quote Bay Windows editor Susan Ryan-Vollmar.

“They’ve merely settled on what the Democrats have staked out as a safe, consensus position, just far enough ahead of where the party was in 2004 to give a sense of progress but not so far as to threaten Middle America,” Ryan-Vollmar wrote. “That’s not leadership, it’s poll-tested and party-approved pandering, pure and simple.”

And some gay writers are starting to question whether Barack Obama’s flirting with the anti-gay black vote by embracing ex-gay Donnie McClurkin was all that accidental in light of his endorsement by Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell. Even his language used on Martin Luther King’s birthday which was often described as supportive of gay people spoke of “embracing” gays but not necessarily supporting their cause. Those of us familiar with anti-gay religious dogma are weary of “embracing” and “loving” that is not coupled with support for civil equality.

Meanwhile, the Democratic National Committee is being sued for anti-gay discrimination. Documentation released seems to suggest that the DNC may assume that it own the gay vote while showing contempt for the gay voters. (Queerty has a good synopsis)

As we told you earlier, a poll of Marylanders by the Baltimore Sun demonstrated that they overwhelmingly support civil unions or marriage for gay couples. So the legislature leaders cannot claim that the will of the people is not behind couple recognition.

In is into this sense of uncertainty that this bill is being introduced. And the Maryland marriage vote may well become a ‘put up or shut up’ moment. If the Democrats in the Maryland legislature defeat marriage equality without putting in place civil unions, gay men and women may become so disheartened that they question how much energy they wish to place in advancing candidates of a Party that takes them for granted. Gays may begin to ask if being “a bit better than the Republicans” is enough.

COMMENT (1) • LINK

Maryland Marriage Poll

Timothy Kincaid

January 17th, 2008

The Maryland legislature may find itself entering into the fray in the great marriage debate. And with that in mind, the Baltimore Sun thought they’d find out what the residents of the state think.

19% favor gay marriage

39% favor civil unions instead of marriage

31% oppose both

11% really couldn’t give a darn

Now I predict the anti-gays will claim “81% support a ban on gay marriage”, but interestingly, only about 15% of those polled were in favor of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

COMMENTS (2) • LINK

Newer Posts »

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.