Testimony Yesterday on Marriage Equality

The Post reported last night:

Supporters of same-sex marriage came to Annapolis on Tuesday armed with personal stories, emotional pleas for equal treatment and arguments about how allowing gay couples to marry could help Maryland's economy.

Opponents countered with biblical verses, research suggesting that children are better off with both a mother and a father, and warnings that "redefining marriage" could undermine other social institutions.

In all, about 140 witnesses signed up to testify on the highest-profile social issue facing the Maryland General Assembly this year. The committee hearing spanned more than seven hours. Same-sex marriage has good chance of approval, Maryland Senate leader says

A hundred forty people signed up to testify. I don't know what the usual legislative hearing attracts, but that sounds like a lot -- let's hear it for participatory democracy!

Skipping down a little ...

In the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee room, some of the most powerful testimony Tuesday was offered by an openly gay lawmaker, Sen. Richard S. Madaleno Jr., who called it "a badge of dishonor" to have to introduce people to his "partner."

"We had a church wedding 10 years ago this year, and in the eyes of our religion, our families, our friends and in my heart, he is my spouse," Madaleno (D-Montgomery) said. "But under Maryland's civil law, he is a legal stranger to me."

I think the key to this is for straight people to recognize the simple fact that gay people are people. They aren't an organization with a conspiratorial plan to take over the world, they are just folks. They fall in love just like everybody else, sometimes they want to marry and start a family and have a home and fight over the remote just like the rest of us.

Although some religious leaders testified in favor of the bill, opponents were bolstered by a parade of clergy members urging lawmakers to maintain Maryland's law, which limits marriage to a man and a woman.

"Your concern should not be pandering to the political move of the day but truthfully working to foster conditions which unequivocally have been proven to be the best environment for children and families," said Derek McCoy, a Beltsville pastor who is president of the Maryland Family Alliance. "Children do better economically, socially and educationally when raised by a mom and a dad."

Of course there is nothing "unequivocal" about any of the research findings on the subject.

Also, I note that there is no great movement from the Christian right urging lawmakers to prohibit divorce.

The same-sex marriage bill is expected to draw very little Republican support in the Maryland legislature - where Democrats hold lopsided majorities in both chambers. But to show some bipartisan support, several Republicans testified in favor of the measure early in Tuesday's proceedings.

Among them was Chrysovalantis P. Kefalas, who served as deputy legal counsel to former Maryland governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R). Kefalas said Ehrlich has continued to oppose same-sex marriage. But Kefalas said he considers the legislation to be consistent with Republican principles of freedom and limited government.

The idea that government should decide who you can marry is so obviously opposed to conservative principles that they must just cringe when they have to support this kind of thing. Some conservatives hold positions that support the status quo, keep the currently dominant group in power, and promote norms and beliefs that are held by, basically, white middle-class Christian men. Other conservatives derive their particular policy opinions from a set of principles including a trust in individual liberties and a reduced role for government in citizens' private lives. You can't have both at the same time, but the modern so-called conservative movement has comprised an uncomfortable alliance between those who hold the two types of beliefs.

Kefalas also disclosed that he is gay and long struggled to accept his identify.

"Under present law, I'm considered less of a citizen than many of you," he told the committee.

Man, that's gotta be tough, being a gay Republican.

Sen. Allan H. Kittleman (Howard), the only GOP senator to have announced support for the bill, also testified, appearing on the first panel with Madaleno and Sen. Robert J. Garagiola (D-Montgomery), the bill's lead sponsor.

"I don't speak for all Republicans in Maryland, but I speak for a lot of them," said Kittleman, who stepped down last month as Senate minority leader after getting flak for saying he would introduce a bill allowing civil unions.

Last week, Kittleman changed his mind and decided to support the marriage bill.

I suppose its newsworthy to note the dynamics within the Republican Party as the ones who stand up for principles are knocked out of power by the status quo politicians, but really, it doesn't matter what they say and do, Republicans in the Maryland legislature are so far outnumbered that they hardly have any influence except where they can block stuff in committee.

I'm waiting to get to the part where Ruth Jacobs talks about anal sex. Don't tell me it's not in here!

Tuesday's hearing grew combative at several points, particularly during testimony by Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a national organization that seeks to defend "religious freedom."

Nimocks argued that government should keep marriage between a man and a woman as an incentive to foster "responsible procreation."

"Men and women still comprise the two great halves of humanity," Nimocks said. "It matters that a child has a mom and a dad."

At several points in the hearing, proponents argued otherwise. Referring to Madaleno and his children, Garagiola said, "That is a very happy family."

In response to questioning by senators, Nimocks acknowledged that children of some same-sex couples could be better off than children of some heterosexual couples. But he said research has shown that in most cases, the best situation for a child is "a low-conflict marraige" between a man and a woman.

I would appreciate if someone would paste a link to such research into the comments to this post. I have read some findings supporting the idea that children do better by some measures in households with more than one parent, but none that found an effect for opposite-sex parent dyads.

Mary Ellen Russell, executive director of the Maryland Catholic Conference, made a similar argument in written testimony.

"Erasing from law the uniqueness of the relationship between men and women and the distinction of that relationship from any other relationship would deny to future generations a recognition of our natural origin that lies at the very core of who we are as human beings," Russell said.

Earlier in the hearing, Ryan Spiegel, a member of the Gaithersburg City Council, offered a different perspective, arguing that Maryland hotels and cake makers would be among the beneficiaries of legalizing same-sex marraige [sic]. He called the legislation "the right thing to do from an economic standpoint."

You can never tell with these things, of course, there is some precedent for politicians to back down from controversial issues and this one could fizzle just like it always has before, but the talk this year does seem more optimistic. In fact it is quite likely that the state of Maryland will take the progressive step of extending marriage law to same sex couples. The most we can do here is to keep the discussion alive, to bring out rational points pro and con and discuss their merits, try to keep The Nutty Ones from hijacking the debate, and let cool heads in Annapolis vote on the legislation when the time comes. We've elected leaders who we think will represent us well, now it's in their hands.