Gay Union Legislation Defeated In Maryland;
House Bills Would Have Banned Legal Recognition

The Washington Post

March 6, 2004 Saturday
Final Edition

Two proposals to prohibit legal recognition of same-sex marriages in Maryland were defeated yesterday by a House of Delegates committee after arguments that the bills would humiliate gay men and lesbians.

The votes by the House Judiciary Committee mean that Maryland will remain one of a dozen states that have not passed a "defense of marriage" law to address marriages performed in other states.

One bill, which the committee defeated on a 13 to 7 vote, would have amended the constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman -- a distinction made in state law. The committee also voted 11 to 9 to reject a bill that would have prohibited recognition of a same-sex marriage performed elsewhere.

As gay-rights advocates claimed victory, conservative activists and lawmakers warned that the state was inching closer to having to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

"This opens the door," said Doug Stiegler, director of the Family Protection Lobby. "The fear of doing what is right is going to get [ Maryland ] in trouble in the future with lawsuits. The confusion from all over the country is going to come to Maryland . "

With San Francisco marrying gay couples and Massachusetts to begin doing the same in May, at least 20 other states are considering bills to strengthen laws against same-sex marriages.

In Virginia, the House of Delegates passed legislation to add civil unions, such as those performed in Vermont, to its Defense of Marriage Act. The bill is pending in the Senate. Both houses approved resolutions urging Congress to approve a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

Cheryl Jacques, president of the gay advocacy group Human Rights Campaign, said the decision by Maryland lawmakers might help to slow efforts in other states to oppose same-sex marriage.

"It becomes part of the firewall of states that is teaching others in the country that it is better for states to embrace all families, and this is the right message to send to their business community, tourists and families," she said.

Del. Anne R. Kaiser (D-Montgomery), who announced at a public hearing Thursday that she is a lesbian, congratulated her colleagues for "killing bills that many thought were redundant to Maryland law and others merely found hateful."

The committee's decision capped an intense lobbying effort by the Maryland Catholic Conference and Christian advocates to enact the proposals. But several delegates argued that the law was not necessary because the state already prohibits same-sex marriage.

In 1973, Maryland became the first state to define marriage as being between a man and a woman.

"The battle was fought and won 20 years ago by opponents of same-sex marriage," said Del. Neil Quinter (D-Howard), who voted against the bills. "This would just be piling on."

Del. Curtis S. Anderson (D-Baltimore) said he didn't want his gay constituents to feel singled out by the General Assembly.

"I think it sends the wrong message to gay and lesbian couples that we are anti-gay and anti-lesbian," said Anderson, who also voted against the bills.

But because state law does not address same-sex marriages performed in other states, some legal analysts and lawmakers said Maryland could be vulnerable to court challenges. The U.S. Constitution requires one state to accept a marriage license issued by another state, but there can be exceptions.

The Maryland attorney general's office recently issued an advice letter saying the state would not have to accept a marriage license granted to a same-sex couple in another state. That wouldn't stop someone from taking the matter to court, said Robert N. McDonald, chief of opinions and advice for the attorney general's office.

"The Maryland courts will have to decide in the context of a particular case whether Maryland law would recognize that type of marriage from out of state," McDonald said. He added, however, that state courts "probably would not recognize" such a marriage.

Some Republicans said they fear that a judge could require the state to recognize same-sex marriages. "It's sure as heck not about gay bashing," said Del. Anthony J. O'Donnell (R-Calvert), who co-sponsored the "defense of marriage" bill. "It's about state sovereignty."

After the votes yesterday, Del. Donald Dwyer (R-Anne Arundel) said his constituents overwhelmingly support the attempts to ban same-sex marriage. "People cannot believe we are fighting this issue and having to deal with it," said Dwyer, who supported the measures.

Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R) remained vague yesterday on the issue of same-sex marriage. Ehrlich refused to endorse President Bush's recent call for a federal constitutional amendment to ban such marriages.

The governor said that what people do in their "private bedrooms is their own business." He added, however, that marriage as an institution needs to be protected.

The Maryland General Assembly is considering a proposal to allow gay couples to register as domestic partners and make certain medical decisions for one another. "Next year's bill will be civil unions," Anderson predicted after the committee vote.