And Now There Are 10! Maryland Marriages Begin

Yesterday, on January 1, 2013 same-sex couples were able to get married in the state of Maryland, making it the 10th jurisdiction in the United States where civil marriages between same-sex couples is legal (9 states and the District of Columbia).

Maryland legalized the practice as a result of the passage of Question 6 during the November 2012 presidential election; Question 6 was a referendum on a marriage equality bill that had been passed and signed into law last Spring.

Maryland is significant because it is the first state below the Mason-Dixon line to enact marriage equality, and it is also the first marriage equality state with a significant African American population (nearly 30% of the state's population).

Congratulations, Maryland! Next up are Illinois and Rhode Island very very soon.

WA: Marriage Equality Law In Effect Today!

With the certification of the passage of Referendum 74 earlier in the day, marriage licenses were issued starting at 12:01am Thursday December 6th in the state of Washington, becoming the 8th state in the United States to do so (following Massachusetts, Iowa, California, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York). The marriage equality enactment order starts getting tricky, because California has not been able to issue any further marriage licences since November 2008. Couples in Washington can marry after a waiting period of 3 days following the issuance of a license. There are some great pictures of same-sex couples (including Dan Savage and his husband Terry) lining up for marriage licences last night from Joe Mirabella.

As of January 1st, 2013 there will be (at least) 9 states (and the District of Columbia) where same-sex couples can receive legal civil marriage licenses and get married. Maryland's marriage law, which was also subject to a referendum which passed in the November 2012 elections, goes into effect on January 1st, 2013. Maine's marriage equality law, which was enacted by an affirmative ballot initiative, will go into effect on December 29, 2012.

Depending on what the United States Supreme Court decides to do with the pending appeal in the Hollingworth v Perry case striking down Proposition 8 California may become the 10th state to have legal marriage equality on January 1st 2013.

Marriage Equality Approved In Maine and Maryland

LGBT history was made last night when voters in Maine and Maryland voted to approve marriage equality at the ballot box for the first time in history.

Question 1 Results in Maine:      312,021 (53%)   YES  to  272,613 (47%) NO
Question 6 Results in Maryland: 1,208,068 (52%) YES to 1,112,998 (48%) NO

The victory in Maine was particularly sweet since in November 2009 a referendum on that state's enacted marriage law was rejected by a vote of 53% to 47%.

The victory in Maryland was even more exciting because there had been numerous questions raised about the way the campaign was run with Freedom to Marry, the primary organization in charge of the campaign to win marriage equality nationwide, initially refused to engage in the battle in the state. However, as polls consistently showed that Maryland's Question 6 was ahead (albeit far less ahead than Maine's Question 1) the LGBT activist community coalesced around Maryland and important high-profile donations from billionaires raised the profile of Maryland's attempt to make history.

With wins in Maine and Maryland there are now 8 states in which marriage equality is legal (or will be soon). Marriage is also legal in the District of Columbia and there are nearly 18,000 married same-sex couples in California and there may be many more married lesbian and gay couples soon depending on the Supreme Court's decision to take up the Proposition 8 appeal.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

POLL: Very Tight Race on MD's Question 6

A new poll of likely voters shows a very tight race in Question 6, the referendum on same-sex marriage in Maryland, with 47% of voters saying they want same-sex marriage to be illegal and 46% saying they want it to be legal. This new poll is from the same pollsters that had previously shown a 49%-39% lead for Question 6. The margin of error in the polls s 3.5 percentage points. The rule of thumb is that the vast majority of voters in the "Undecided/refused" category tend to vote against marriage equality.

The Baltimore Sun reports:

The numbers have moved amid television and radio commercials from the Maryland Marriage Alliance, which opposes same-sex marriage, and stepped-up efforts by pastors preaching against Question 6.

Much of the advertising is focused on African-American voters, a bloc that traditionally opposed same-sex marriage but had been warming to the idea. In late September, the Sun poll showed a majority of blacks in favor of Question 6 — evidently a high-water mark.

This time, the poll found 50 percent of black voters oppose the measure and 42 percent support it.

[...]

The new Sun poll found that 70 percent of the respondents who attend a religious service once a week are against Question 6.

"I'm a Catholic," said Laura Long, a 46-year-old Annapolitan who says she will vote no. "There are going to be some things not everybody can do," she said, saying marriage is one of them. "Leave it as religious sacrament."

But Charles McDougle, a 61-year-old black man from Temple Hills, said he sees same-sex marriage as a civil rights issue. "I'm not a theologian," he said. "I'm not trying to get into all the inner workings of the Bible on this marriage question."

A bright spot for supporters is that a slight majority of likely female voters — 51 percent — support same-sex marriage, the poll found.

June Stouffer, 64, of Washington County said the key to her decision to vote yes on Question 6 is "the fact that religious personnel are not required to marry people if it is against their beliefs."

Younger voters — those under 35 — are among the strongest supporters of the measure, the poll found. But they are also a group known for low voter turnout, [the pollster] noted.

This is not a good trend in Maryland, but it should be interesting to see if the campaign for marriage equality so that a post mortem analysis can identify changes in public opinion is a result of the heterosexual supremacists mendacious ads.

That's a pretty eye-popping number of 70% of religious people opposed to marriage equality. *sigh* I suppose it is too much to expect someone who believes in an all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful old dude in the sky to understand the concept that we're talking about a civil marriage license issued by the state very similar to how the state issues licenses for other activity. This has nothing to do with what churches or religious institutions want to call a marriage. But it is still annoying and frustrating that people can have such misguided views and the power to enact them into public policy through voting on ballot measures. It is precisely this combination opponents of equality count on.

Anti-Gay Marriage Side Using Same Ad Everywhere

The heterosexual supremacists who are paying Frank Schubert to run all four of the anti-gay marriage ballot campaigns in Maryland, Maine, Minnesota and Washington should be annoyed that he is charging each one of them for his services (to the tune of millions of dollars personally) while he is creating the same, identical campaign in each state. Surely there should be a buy one, get 3 free deal?
Look at this new video compilation of the identical ad airing in four different states from Leadership Lab's David Fleischer who has been fighting anti-gay marriage initiatives since the first one in 1998(!) in Hawaii which demonstrates that the fight around LGBT equality at the ballot box has always been about reconciling in heterosexual minds the connection(s) between homosexuality and children, regardless of what the actual issues (i.e. gay marriage) has actually been about. Do heterosexuals really think it is okay for their own kids to group up to be gay or lesbian, or would they try and take some action (i.e. vote) to stop that from occurring, if they could? Logically, of course, most parents must realize that there is no action that can impact their child's sexual orientation, but emotionally they may be able to be manipulated to vote a certain way to indicate that they wish they could do something about that.
Eventually, homosexuality will not been by a significant majority of heterosexuals as a "disorder," and that is the day when these ads by Schubert will stop working to enact discriminatory ant-gay laws at the ballot box. The million-dollar question this year is, is 2012 the year that happens? We'll know more in just over a week. Stay tuned!

Radio Ad Featuring Obama Promotes Question 6

Here is a transcript of a pro-Question 6 radio ad which Freedom to Marry is spending $100,000 to air in Maryland starting today. It features the audio of President Barack Obama endorsing marriage equality from May 2012

Two women discussing the election in a diner.  <diner SFX> 

Woman 1:  So who are you voting for for President? 

Woman 2:  (laughing) … Who do you think? 

Woman 1:  I know … but what about Question Six?  My Pastor says he’s ok with it, but I just don’t know… 

Woman 2:  I didn’t know either, but then I heard President Obama supported marriage for gay couples. 

Woman 1:  Really? 

Woman 2:  You haven’t heard him?  I’ve got the clip here on my phone… 

Woman 1:  You have that on your phone?!!?  (teasing) 

Woman 2:  Yes!  It’s THAT important…listen up:
Obama Clip: “Same-sex couples should be able to get married.  I had hesitated on gay marriage because I thought civil unions would be sufficient … You know, Malia and Sasha, they’ve got friends whose parents are same-sex couples, it wouldn’t dawn on them that their friends’ parents would be treated differently.  That’s the kind of thing that prompts a change of perspective.  When we think about our faith, it’s also the golden rule…” 

Woman 1:  That is SO true...  

Woman 2:  Isn’t it though?  I’d always kinda been on the fence, but Obama makes it so simple: it’s about fairness – treating everyone equal under the law. 

Woman 1:  Well, if that’s what a vote for Question Six means, I’m fired up and ready to go!

This ad is airing just as the word is spreading that Obama-Biden 2012 has endorsed the Yes position on Question 6. Hopefully this will give the campaign to defend Maryland's marriage equality law at the ballot the boost it needs to be victorious on election day. 

What is very important about this ad is that it is a direct appeal to African-American voters, by the most prominent and respected African-American politician in the country. This is an excellent about face from Freedom to Marry, which initially refused to include Maryland in its list of states where it was focused on winning the freedom to marry in 2012. At the time, many people speculated if the reason Freedom to Marry was abandoning Maryland was the racial make-up of the state, which is 30% African American.

There was some belief that because African Americans are more religious than other groups and the leadership and decision-makers in most LGBT orgs are white, that it would be more difficult to fight to defend marriage equality in Maryland at the ballot box. 

Maryland may still fail to pass Question 6, but at least the fight has been engaged and the divide between LGBT activists and African-Americans has been narrowed. One result of this activity is that the support in the African-American community for marriage equality in Maryland is now 42%, in a recent poll (with 53% opposing).

Obama Picks Pro-Equality Side In Gay Ballot Fights

Huge news today from the Obama for America campaign on the issue of marriage equality. The president's re-election team today sent out statements to the groups fighting to enact marriage equality in Washington, Maryland and Maine saying that President Obama is endorsing the pro-equality side in all four of these ballot measure campaigns.

The official statement of the President in favor of Washington's Referendum 74 (issued by Washington state Obama for America press secretary Paul Bell) is:

“While the president does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the president believes in treating everyone fairly and equally, with dignity and respect. Washington’s same-sex marriage law would treat all Washington couples equally, and that is why the President supports a vote to approve Referendum 74.”

While the official statement on Maine's Question 1 issued by Obama for America's Northeast regional press secretary Michael Czin reads:

"While the president does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the president believes in treating everyone fairly and equally, with dignity and respect. The president believes same-sex couples should be treated equally and supports Question 1."

The official statement on Maryland's Question 6 from Obama for America spokesperson Frank Benenati reads:

“While the president does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the president believes in treating everyone fairly and equally, with dignity and respect. Maryland’s same-sex marriage law would treat all Maryland couples equally, and that is why the president supports Question 6.”

Way back in April the Obama-Biden campaign released a statement in opposition to Minnesota's Proposition 8 copycat measure which would amend that state's constitution to ban marriage equality. That statement read (in part):

"While the President does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the record is clear that the President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples. That's what the Minnesota ballot initiative would do -- it would single out and discriminate against committed gay and lesbian couples."

Today's statements are especially significant because they show that not only is the President opposed to discriminatory measures like Minnesota's but they are also in favor of affirmative measures like Question 1 in Maine, Question 6 in Maryland and Referendum 74 which would all enact marriage equality if passed by voters on November 6th.

POLLS: Marriage Equality Ahead in Maryland

There have been many polls on marriage equality about Marriage Equality in light of the referendum campaign around Question 6, which if passed would uphold that state's marriage equality law.

The latest poll from Washington Post continues to show an edge for Question 6 in Maryland, with 52% in support of marriage equality while 43% oppose it.

This is the fourth poll in a row which shows that marriage equality is ahead in Maryland, as summarized by the LGBT Think Progress blog as 49-39, 51-43, and 54-40 and depicted graphically above. Veterans of previous ballot fights over marriage equality such as myself would note that none of these public polls are sufficiently above the all-important 50% barrier outside the margin of error for the poll, which makes us nervous.

Then again, it's better to be publicly ahead then publicly behind. It's also encouraging to see that in Maryland, polls suggest that voters are supporting the referendum on Question 4 by an overwhelming 59% to 35% margin. Question 4, if passed, would enact a state version of the DREAM Act. It's hard to see Maryland voters passing question 4 and rejecting Question 6 on the same day, so the healthy margin for Question 4 is also encouraging.

Hat/tip to LGBT Think Progress.

Comparisons of Marriage Equality Fundraising By State

The fundraising totals for the marriage equality campaigns in Maryland, Maine, Minnesota and Washington have been released in the last few weeks. Respectively, the campaigns have raised $3.2 million (MD), $3.4 million (ME), $8.2 million (MN) and $9.4 million (WA). Knowing the specific total amounts of money raised to fight the anti-gay ballot measures in each state is important, especially in states like Minnesota and Washington where these amounts are at least 4 times as much as the heterosexual supremacists have raised.

However, probably a more useful way to analyze the data is to look at the per capita amount of money raised by the campaigns, which is displayed by the following graphic:

In this case, Maine leads with $2.56 per person (population of Maine is only 1,328,188), followed by Minnesota with $1.53 per person (population of Minnesota is 5,344,861), with Washington close behind with $1.38 per person (population of Washington is 6,830,038) and Maryland lagging with a mere $0.56 per person (population of Maryland is 5,828,289). All figures are taken from the 2010 Census. So it is not surprising that Washington has raised the most money, since they are the most populous state facing a marriage ballot measure right now, but Maine is doing significantly well considering the relatively small population of that mostly rural state. The more accurate number to use in the per capita calculation might be the voting population total, but generally one would not expect a huge voter registration variation between these four Blue states that would drastically change the overall results.

Using the per capita numbers would seem to suggest Maine has the best chance of winning, with Maryland the least likely. This seems pretty consonant with what insiders (and my gut) is telling me. Basically, any result is possible at this point, from a sweep of 4 wins, to a devastating debacle of 4 losses.

Of course money is not the sole determinant of who will win these campaigns, but it is significant that after losing marriage equality ballot measures in 32 states, the last few (North Carolina 2012, Maine 2009 and California 2008) the forces for LGBT equality have consistently out-raised the heterosexual supremacists, though usually not by much. It will be important to see whether a huge financial advantage that is present in places like Maine and Washington will lead to victories there.

We'll know the answer in roughly three weeks!

Maryland Pro-Question 6 Ads Released

The pro-Question 6 television advertisements in favor of marriage equality in Maryland that I have been blogging about this week will start airing on television tomorrow. They each feature an African-American minister, one named Rev. Dr. Delman Coates of Clinton, MD and the other is Rev. Donté Hickman of Baltimore, MD. The transcript of the ad was released by openly gay, African-American Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart in his Wednesday column:

As a Pastor, my support for Question Six is rooted in my belief that the government should treat everyone equally.

I would not want someone denying my rights based upon their religious views, therefore I should not deny others based upon mine.

It’s about fairness.

This law does not force any church to perform a same sex marriage if it’s against their beliefs.

And that’s what this is about.

Protecting religious freedom and protecting all Marylanders equally under the law.

Join me in voting for Question 6.

This seems like a pretty effective ad because it directly addresses the confused religious people who can't seem to understand that the fight around marriage equality is about civil marriage, and that to use one's religious belief to deny someone access to civil marriage is denying someone a right based upon a religious belief, which is precisely what religious people fear will happen to them.

Maryland Heterosexual Supremacists Release Ad

Yesterday I blogged about the Marylanders United for Marriage plan to start airing television and radio announcements this week in favor of Question 6, the referendum on that state's marriage equality law. Today comes word from Jeremy Hooper at Good As You that heterosexual supremacists opposing marriage equality in Maryland have released their first video attempting to convince voters to reject Question 6.

Interestingly, the ad tries to convince people that by allowing more people to get married somehow it will change the way in which heterosexuals will be able to get married. The ad does not use the words "protect marriage" or "defend marriage" and it also says that "everyone deserves love and respect" but no one has the right to "redefine marriage."

Ads In Favor of Question 6 To Begin On TV, Radio

The fight to defend Maryland's marriage equality law from a referendum (called Question 6 on the November 6th ballot) will be heating up soon when ads start running in favor of the measure, the Washington Blade is reporting.

Public records indicate that the campaign to defend Maryland’s same-sex marriage law has purchased hundreds of thousands of dollars of airtime on local television stations ahead of next month’s referendum.

Documents posted on the Federal Communications Commission’s website indicate that Marylanders for Marriage Equality has purchased $297,325 of air time on WBAL in Baltimore for 291 30-second advertisements that are scheduled to run from Oct. 10 through Nov. 6. FCC records further note that the campaign has also purchased $253,000.01 worth of air time on WJLA in D.C. from Oct. 29 through Nov. 6. Marylanders for Marriage Equality has also purchased airtime on WUSA in the nation’s capital, but documents filed with the FCC do not indicate a specific cost.

FCC records further indicate that the campaign has also made inquiries into potential media buys with WJZ in Baltimore and WRC in D.C.

Documents further note that Media Strategies and Research of Fairfax, Va., produced the ads. Josh Levin, campaign director of Marylanders for Marriage Equality, declined to answer questions about their specific content. He stressed, however, that they are part of what he described as the campaign’s ongoing outreach to Maryland voters on Question 6.

The fact that the Maryland campaign has started airing television and radio ads to convince voters to support the Question 6 referendum on marriage equality will probably not stop the grumbling by LGBT activists about the secretive nature of the campaign being conducted by Marylanders for Marriage Equality.

The group responsible for defending Maryland's marriage equality law has refused to announce publicly basic information that the campaigns in Washington, Minnesota and Maine have all released:  the total amount of money raised, the number of donors the campaign has, the number of volunteers and previews of the campaign's voter persuasion media.

The quote from the campaign manager Josh Levin is typical of the press-aversive strategy the Maryland campaign has embraced. What could possibly be the point of "declining to answer questions" about the content of paid advertisements less than 7 days before the media will be publicly available? Do you think Frank Schubert (the heterosexual supremacist campaign manager for all four anti-equality campaign ballot measures) does not know what the content of his ads will be and will use this information in some way that is deleterious way? It appears to me that it is simply secrecy for secrecy sake and out of step with an electoral campaign in the era of social media. It is notable especially when the campaigns in the other states have been behaving so strikingly differently.

What do you think?

Marriage Equality Leads 51%-43% in Maryland

Finally there is a new poll out of Maryland about the pending referendum on marriage equality called Question 6. In May 2012, a poll showed a 57%-37% lead for supporters of marriage equality and in July 2012 (the last known public poll before this new one) showed a lead of 54%-40%.

The new poll from Gonzalez Research shows 50.9% in support of Question 6, 42.8% against Question 6 and 6.3% are undecided with a margin of error ±3.5 percentage points. This indicates that there may not be a majority of support for marriage equality in Maryland. A Yes vote is always more difficult to get in a ballot measure fight and neither opponents or proponents have begun advertising on Question 6 yet.

That being said, there is some good news in the internals of the poll, which indicate that support of African American voters for marriage equality has increased from 33% in January to 44% now.

However, the Maryland marriage equality campaign is starting to raise concerns among LGBT activists for its reluctance to discuss how much money it has raised to date and what it plans are for airing television ads before the election.

Baltimore Ravens Player Supports Marriage Equality

There's a brouhaha brewing over the appearance of Baltimore Ravens football player Brendan Ayanbadejo in a video supporting marriage equality in Maryland. Delegate Emmett Burns wrote a letter to Ayanbadejo's boss where he tried to get the football player sanctioned for stating his view about marriage equality, which Burns opposes.

I find it inconceivable that one of your players, Mr. Brendon Ayanbadejo would publicly endorse Same-Sex marriage, specifically as a Raven Football player. Many of my constituents and your football supporters are appalled and aghast that a member of the Ravens Football Team would step into this controversial divide and try to sway public opinion one way or the other. I am requesting that you take the necessary action, as a National Football League Owner, to inhibit such expressions from your employees and that he be ordered to cease and desist such injurious actions. I know of no other NFL player who has done what Mr. Ayanbadejo is doing.

So far there has been not much of a public response from Ayanbadejo beyond some brief comments expressing "surprise" at the letter from Burns but the Ravens plan to issue a response backing their player.

It should be interesting to see how this story develops.

MD Anti-Equality "Arguments" Demolished in Print

The Baltimore Sun published an editorial on Sunday which completely demolishes the arguments of the heterosexual supremacists who collected signatures to put Maryland's pending marriage law up for a referendum this fall.

Below are two paragraphs which basically encapsulate the way to take down the two (frankly ridiculous) arguments from opponents of marriage equality who claim that allowing same-sex couples to legally marry in the state would 1) affect what is taught to children in schools about marriage and 2) violate the religious freedom of business owners and others.

To wit:

The law passed by the General Assembly this year says nothing about what should or should not be taught in schools. Contrary to what opponents may try to imply, it includes no mandates about curriculum whatsoever. What is taught in schools is determined not by the legislature but by local superintendents and school boards, and they are focused on making sure students master reading, writing and math. Values are now taught at home, and they will continue to be if this law is affirmed.

As for the question of business owners, the opponents are raising the notion that, for example, a baker who opposed same-sex marriage and refused to produce a cake for a gay wedding could be sued for discrimination. This law has nothing to do with that, either. The gay marriage law is silent on the issue of public accommodations because that has been settled law in Maryland for more than a decade. Just as that hypothetical baker can't now refuse to serve someone because he is Catholic or black or disabled, he cannot refuse to serve someone because of his sexual orientation. That was the result of a law championed by then-Gov. Parris Glendening in 2001. It was controversial at the time, but it has not led to bakers (or anyone else) getting busted by the thought police in the decade since.

But the real delightful part of the editirial is this ending note:

The opponents are resorting to spurious arguments to convince voters that the law will somehow be unfair to those with objections to gay marriages because they don't want to face the real question of fairness at stake. Should the law treat people differently because of their sexual orientation? Or should everyone be treated equally? Maryland's gay marriage ordinance doesn't require anyone to violate their religious beliefs or personal conscience. As much as we hope the debate over this issue will persuade everyone in the state of the value of acceptance and tolerance, the law doesn't force anyone to change the way they think. All it does is to remove a major vestige of discrimination from state law, and that is something all Marylanders should be able to support.

Doesn't get any more clearer than that, really. Your move, heterosexual supremacists! I'd love them to answer these two questions in the editorial "Should the law treat people differently because of their sexual orientation? Or should everyone be treated equally?" And if the answer is no, what is the reason for different treatment under the law for different groups of people based on sexual orientation. And, you don't get to refer to any religious-based reasons, because we're talking about how the state will treat its citizens.

Maryland Finalizes Marriage Referendum Language

The official language of the referendum on Maryland's marriage equality law has now been set.
The measure will be known as Question 6 on the November 6, 2012 ballot and will look like:

Establishes that Maryland’s civil marriage laws allow gay and lesbian couples to obtain a civil marriage license, provided they are not otherwise prohibited from marrying; protects clergy from having to perform any particular marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs; affirms that each religious faith has exclusive control over its own theological doctrine regarding who may marry within that faith; and provides that religious organizations and certain related entities are not required to provide goods, services, or benefits to an individual related to the celebration or promotion of marriage in violation of their religious beliefs.

The organization defending the law is Marylanders for Marriage Equality. They praised the ballot language as "accurate and straightforward." (A YES vote on the referendum supports marriage equality, just like the ballot measures in Washington and Maine.) The latest polling shows that marriage equality in Maryland is supported 54 percent to 40 percent.