Streak of 30 votes against gay marriage to end!

[Steelplate]

It really doesn't matter because our entire culture is moving towards degeneracy and the laws will continue to reflect that. After this culture collapses because of its decay, the next culture will reject homosexuality as normal behavior and the cycle will start all over again, just as it always has.

Yeah....how much better it would be if we had a Christian run Nation that passed laws according to God's will....we could call it.....the Taliban-West.

 

[amrchaos]

If the voters want it, they should be able to vote for it, without imposing their lack of morality on the whole nation.

idiot...constitutional rights shouldn't be up for vote.

Let them vote for it.

The Supreme Court is still going to strike it down.

So if MD wants to waste their money during a recession, let them!!

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It is being imposed if a gay couple validly married in one state, moves to another state that also has to consider them married.

States that do not recognize same sex marriage are not obliged to honor it.

Yet.

.

Thanks for admitting you lied.

 

[WorldWatcher]

>


Passage of same-sex marriage does not impact the scenarios that you provide because Maryland's Public Accommodation laws already prevent businesses from discriminating based on race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability (see law below).

Are photographers going to be sued if they decline to provide services?

Commercial photographers can't currently decline to provide services based on race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability (see law below). Passage of Same-sex Civil Marriage or the rejection of Same-sex Civil Marriage won't change that.

Will landlords have any penalty if they don't rent to same sex couples?

Commercial landlords can't currently decline to provide services based on race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability (see law below). Passage of Same-sex Civil Marriage or the rejection of Same-sex Civil Marriage won't change that.

Will the bakery be able to refuse to bake wedding cakes with two grooms?

Commercial bakers can't currently decline to provide services based on race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability (see law below). Passage of Same-sex Civil Marriage or the rejection of Same-sex Civil Marriage won't change that.

Will private schools be able to refuse to admit the adopted children of same sex couples?

Commercial private can't currently decline to provide services based on race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability (see law below). Passage of Same-sex Civil Marriage or the rejection of Same-sex Civil Marriage won't change that. (Although religous private schools may.)

Will privately owned businesses be able to decline spousal coverage?

Can privately owned businesses currently refuse to cover spouses?

It doesn't affect anyone but them? Really????? The facts would suggest otherwise.

Passage of Same-sex Civil Marriage will change non of the above.



**************************************************

§20–301.
In this subtitle, “place of public accommodation” means:
(1) an inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment that provides lodging to transient guests;
(2) a restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility principally engaged in selling food or alcoholic beverages for consumption on or off the premises, including a facility located on the premises of a retail establishment or gasoline station;
(3) a motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium, or other place of exhibition or entertainment;
(4) a retail establishment that:
(i) is operated by a public or private entity; and
(ii) offers goods, services, entertainment, recreation, or transportation; and
(5) an establishment:
(i) 1. that is physically located within the premises of any other establishment covered by this subtitle; or
2. within the premises of which any other establishment covered by this subtitle is physically located; and
(ii) that holds itself out as serving patrons of the covered establishment.

§20–302.
This subtitle does not prohibit the proprietor or employees of any establishment from denying service to any person for failure to conform to the usual and regular requirements, standards, and regulations of the establishment, provided that the denial is not based on discrimination on the grounds of race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability.

MGA Statutes Text Page 1
MGA Statutes Text Page 1

*****************************************


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Race is not the same as behavior.

Race is biological.

Gender is biological.


Marriage laws on race were written on a biological trait, Civil Marriage laws written to bar same-sex couples are written on a biological trait (gender).



Can you show us any Civil Marriage laws, pertaining to this issue, that are written in terms of sexual-orientation?

Race is not the same as behavior.

As a follow up, do you then disagree with laws protecting religious rights since religion is a behavior?


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

The Loving decision has nothing to do with same sex marriage. Loving protects the rights of the children of biracial relationships, there are not children born of same sex relationship.

No it didn't. The Loving decision overturned Civil Marriage laws based on race, it had nothing to do with or required that children were required for it for those laws to be unconstitutional.


.>>>

 

[hazlnut]

If the voters want it, they should be able to vote for it, without imposing their lack of morality on the whole nation.

The red part of his nation pretends to be Christian and moral.

They are anything but.

 

[g5000]

States that do not recognize same sex marriage are not obliged to honor it.

Yet.

.

Thanks for admitting you lied.

Lied how?

When the US Supreme Court rules that discrimination against gay marriages is unconstitutional, no state will be allowed to discriminate against gay marriages as they would be violating the US Constitution.

.

 

[konradv]

You of course have proof of the gene that makes one a homo right?

No, and you of course know that is completely irrelevant to equal protection of the laws, right?

.

Was actually waiting for that idiot argument. No one is denying a homo anything that is not denied me. That is equal protection. No one is telling them they cant marry a women just like me and they are telling me I cant marry a man just like the homo's. Equal protection.

That's turning the subject on its head. It's not about what you want, but what the people in question want.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Okay enough with the bigot shit.....Being a homo is a CHOICE.

Proof?

Easy. No one forced them to suck a dick.

You're seriously using that as your answer?

 

[Cheddarmelon]

Interesting observation.

90% of those who are against same sex union, are men, talking about how men shouldn't be together. Rarely are lesbians mentioned, they are an afterthought.

I don't think you can find better anecdotal evidence that the primary motivation is "fags are icky."

 

[rightwinger]

Interesting observation.

90% of those who are against same sex union, are men, talking about how men shouldn't be together. Rarely are lesbians mentioned, they are an afterthought.

I don't think you can find better anecdotal evidence that the primary motivation is "fags are icky."

Guys dig lesbian sex

Unless it is between two typical middle aged and overweight lesbians....then the icky factor kicks in

But if you really want to talk icky....nobody thinks their parents should have sex either

 

[thanatos144]

No, and you of course know that is completely irrelevant to equal protection of the laws, right?

.

Was actually waiting for that idiot argument. No one is denying a homo anything that is not denied me. That is equal protection. No one is telling them they cant marry a women just like me and they are telling me I cant marry a man just like the homo's. Equal protection.

That's turning the subject on its head. It's not about what you want, but what the people in question want.

Only a progressive sees logic as turning it on its head....

 

[konradv]

Was actually waiting for that idiot argument. No one is denying a homo anything that is not denied me. That is equal protection. No one is telling them they cant marry a women just like me and they are telling me I cant marry a man just like the homo's. Equal protection.

That's turning the subject on its head. It's not about what you want, but what the people in question want.

Only a progressive sees logic as turning it on its head....

Where's the logic in what you said? You're playing with words. That's the fallacy of equivocation. The point is that the person should have the freedom to marry the person of THEIR choice, not yours.

 

[Noomi]

If the voters want it, they should be able to vote for it, without imposing their lack of morality on the whole nation.

What is immoral about letting two people who love each other to get married?