Author Topic: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage  (Read 6990 times)

Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« on: November 21, 2003, 10:14:00 am »
Read and discuss...
 
 Ehrlich Denounces Gay Marriage, Vows Legislative Fight
 
 By Lori Montgomery
 Washington Post Staff Writer
 Friday, November 21, 2003; Page B01
 
 
 Maryland Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. vowed yesterday to block efforts that would give gay couples the same legal rights as married people and said he would support legislation to ban recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other states.
 
   
 
 During an interview on WTOP radio, Ehrlich (R) was emphatic in his rejection of gay marriage, saying Maryland lawmakers should not bother trying to capitalize on a Massachusetts court ruling this week that recognized a right to civil marriage regardless of sexual orientation.
 
 "It's certainly not going to happen in Maryland," Ehrlich said. "End of discussion."
 
 Ehrlich, who won election last fall as a moderate, said he is "generally of a libertarian mind-set" on homosexuality. He said he opposes measures that seek to criminalize gay sex, saying that "the government really should not be sticking its nose into consenting adults -- their behavior in the bedroom."
 
 Gay marriage, on the other hand, "is far different," Ehrlich said. "The institution of marriage, obviously, is the bedrock of our foundation. It's been under attack; it's been weakened for many, many decades now. I'm not going to play a part in further weakening this incredibly important institution."
 
 In the wake of the Massachusetts ruling -- the most conclusive recognition by a court of a right to same-sex marriage -- Democratic lawmakers have said they intend to introduce legislation to authorize civil unions for gay couples when the General Assembly convenes in January.
 
 A coalition of Republicans and conservative Democrats, meanwhile, is planning to introduce "defense of marriage" legislation that would ban gay marriage and prohibit Maryland officials from recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere.
 
 Only Vermont allows civil unions of gay couples. Thirty-seven states, including Virginia, have passed laws that render legal recognition of same-sex unions moot within their borders.
 
 Asked whether he expects an explosive battle over the issue in Maryland, as some lawmakers predict, Ehrlich dismissed gay marriage as "a marginal issue" advanced primarily by interest groups to help recruit members and raise money.
 
 "It's a little bit like partial-birth abortion or the assault weapons ban. . . . If the major issue here is gay rights, for instance, this is an edge issue, a marginal issue. The major issue of abortion on the edge is partial-birth abortion, which is hardly ever performed. I oppose it. But you see my point," he said.
 
 Del. Richard S. Madaleno Jr., one of the chief advocates of same-sex marriage in Maryland, said he will press legislation nonetheless, saying legal marriage "would be of incalculable worth to the few people who would benefit."
 
 "It would allow such peace of mind when you think about putting your life in order," said Madaleno (D-Montgomery). "I wish the governor, who appropriately celebrates his marriage with Kendel in almost every forum, could look at other people, his friends, his staff people, who are in relationships that deserve the same sort of respect and security."

  • Guest
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2003, 10:45:00 am »
Don't blame me.  I sent money to Kennedy-Townsend.

mankie

  • Guest
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2003, 11:35:00 am »
Why should anyone care if a gay couple want to marry? Permission for a civil marriage should be a given, if a particular religion doesn't agree then that's up to them, although I can't see how the Catholic church can have a problem with it seeing as they condone sex between men and boys.
 
 Just my tuppence worth.

Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2003, 11:46:00 am »
It would seem obvious how gays have influenced the world negatively with their bad dance music and overemphasis on (bad) fashion. But how on earth would this further contribute to the weakening of marriage as an institution? Divorce rates would point to the fact that non-gays have done quite a job on fucking it up themselves.
 
    On another note, in response to Ehrlich's pregnant wife saying she'd like to "shoot Britney Spears", Britney responded by saying, "I think she needs to get laid." Classic.

godsshoeshine

  • Member
  • Posts: 4826
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2003, 11:47:00 am »
if two concenting adults want to enter into a commitment, i don't see how a secular state can really choose who is allowed and who isn't.
o/\o

Bombay Chutney

  • Member
  • Posts: 3959
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2003, 12:29:00 pm »
What a prick.
 
 
 "It's certainly not going to happen in Maryland," Ehrlich said. "End of discussion."

 
 At least he's open minded about it.
 
 
 Gay marriage, on the other hand, "is far different," Ehrlich said. "The institution of marriage, obviously, is the bedrock of our foundation.

 
 nice soundbite.  means nothing.
 
 
 It's been under attack; it's been weakened for many, many decades now.

 
 You can thank the heteros for that.  You've destroyed your own institution.
 
 
 
 Asked whether he expects an explosive battle over the issue in Maryland, as some lawmakers predict, Ehrlich dismissed gay marriage as "a marginal issue" advanced primarily by interest groups to help recruit members and raise money.

 
 "It's really not important.  They're only gay people, after all."
 
 
 "It's a little bit like partial-birth abortion or the assault weapons ban. . . . If the major issue here is gay rights, for instance, this is an edge issue, a marginal issue. The major issue of abortion on the edge is partial-birth abortion, which is hardly ever performed. I oppose it. But you see my point," he said.

 
 
 "I'm all for gay rights, as long as we don't have to give them anything important."

mankie

  • Guest
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2003, 12:38:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Skeeter:
  What a prick.
 
 
HA! A prick that will never stand erect for gays!  ;)

  • Guest
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2003, 12:40:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by mankie:
 
 
 HA! A prick that will never stand erect for gays!   ;)  
<img src="http://members.nuvox.net/~sfagan/funny/werd.jpg" alt=" - " />

Bags

  • Member
  • Posts: 8545
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2003, 03:52:00 pm »
Last night on The Daily Show, Jon Stewart went through a number of the Congressmen supporting the Defense of Marraige act, and noted their interest in this issue to a one as a result of their new respect for the institution of marriage, learned just after the dissolution of their marriages to their first wives....
 
 It was a beautiful piece, goddamn hypocritical motherf*ckering congressmen.

Sir HC

  • Member
  • Posts: 4059
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2003, 06:33:00 am »
What is the "institution of marriage".  Is that like a psycho ward?  It just doesn't sound appealing.  My biggest problem is that the conservatives won't come up with something equivalent that would allow homosexual couples to have the same legal and social standing as heterosexual couples.  They want to promote monogamy but not give a good avenue for it for homosexuals.

mankie

  • Guest
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2003, 11:27:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by Sir HC:
    They want to promote monogamy but not give a good avenue for it for homosexuals.
I think you'll find Connecticut Avenue is a good avenue for homosexuals, especially around 18th St. NW.

Sir HC

  • Member
  • Posts: 4059
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #11 on: November 24, 2003, 11:34:00 am »
And Dupont circle right over the avenue...

nancyboy31

  • Guest
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #12 on: November 29, 2003, 01:46:00 pm »
It's so nice to know that such open minded straight people won't let the "few" people who would like to be married and are gay get married. I mean can't he see that its wrong to not let people get married. I mean isn't that a right everyone should have. I think it is wrong that he is letting his opinion decide other people's future. But I guess that's how it works and i am being naive.

flawd101

  • Guest
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #13 on: November 29, 2003, 01:57:00 pm »
they could pretend to be married....

walkman

  • Guest
Re: Ehrlich on Gay Marriage
« Reply #14 on: November 29, 2003, 02:08:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
 
 "The institution of marriage, obviously, is the bedrock of our foundation.
the FUCK does that even  mean ?
 
 The bedrock of our foundation...sounds like a fucking geologist.