Talk:Same-sex marriage in Maryland/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Untitled

Lincolnite -- Thanks for italicising the name of the case! I reverted the other two changes that were made today:

(1) You had placed an end quote in the middle of the quotation from Judge Murdock's decision -- I'm sure you just didn't see the end quote at the end of the paragraph.

(2) I've re-linked the first use of "2007."

Hope you don't mind... you're absolutely right about italics for the section heading.

kdogg36 03:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Made a couple minor changes... added in that there are two different state legislators that plan to submit bills in 2008 into each house. This might require a new section if they do submit those bills. "2008 Legislation" or some other such thing.

140.90.131.108 18:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

In light of the ruling and likely future events under this topic, I'm going to try to rearrange this article somewhat when I get a chance. As you can see, the original article was based around the lawsuit, which was appropriate because that was pretty much the story of same-sex marriage in Maryland until yesterday. Now it seems like there will be many other things to talk about, so the lawsuit will just have to be one (major) section in a more expansive article. kdogg36 01:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Also -- when I did the article last year, I didn't know any better, and didn't treat the references correctly. And now I see that the ones from the Baltimore Sun are no longer available -- we should try to find existing references if possible. I'll work on this too, but if anyone wants to help with any of this, it would of course be much appreciated. kdogg36 01:04, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

This might prove useful as guide to who is supporting legislative action in favor of SSM ... http://www.equalitymaryland.org/pr_2008/pr2008.01.25.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.90.131.108 (talk) 17:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

MD Attorney General Says State Can Recognize Out of Jurisdiction Same-Sex Marriages

This should be referenced in the article:
http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2010/02/md-attorney-general-says-state-can-recognize-out-of-jurisdiction-same-sex-marriages/
Native94080 (talk) 18:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

This is not law yet. It is unclear yet what effect it will have on same-sex marriage in Maryland. LittleRoughRhinestone (talk) 19:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Please re-read the article.
"UPDATE: At a press conference this afternoon, Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler announced that the state, effective immediately, recognizes same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions and agencies should begin affording those couples rights."
Native94080 (talk) 23:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

[1] [2] Ron 1987 00:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

2011

Should HB55 and SB116 (Religious Freedom and Civil Marrigage Protection Act) be discussed here yet or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arrogant Oriole (talk • contribs) 02:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

NOM poll-- unfair bias against NOM

the poll by NOM has detail that is unnecessary. Mentioning Gary Lawrence is LDS is hardly relevant. Other facts may be relevant, but only if the other polls are analyzed to the same scrutiny. I'm going to cut down the critique. The mere fact that there is 1 poll out of 6 with the result should accurately explain things, especially with NOM as the sponsor listed. 76.27.41.184 (talk) 01:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary, it's appropriate context for the paragraph as a whole, documenting the poll as an unreliable push-poll; did you read the citations? Yes, similar detail for the other polls would be appropriate, but they appear to be non-agenda-driven. AV3000 (talk) 13:43, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Note what I did, I eliminated the LDS reference but added more detail about why it was said to be be a push poll. Attacking methodology is stronger then guilt by association. 76.27.41.184 (talk) 15:55, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Civil Marriage Protection Act probably will be signed into law soon

If you want to listen to the Second reading of the bill, it's happening first thing tomorrow morning around 10AM EST.---> Senate Proceedings

- Teammm ^{Let's Talk! :)} 08:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Governor Martin O'Malley will have a signing ceremony at 5pm EST on Thursday, March 1, 2012. - Teammm ^{Let's Talk! :)} 18:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Move premature?

Yesterday this article was moved without any discussion from "Recognition of same-sex unions in Maryland" to "Same-sex marriage in Maryland." I'm not sure this is appropriate. Currently, there is recognition of same-sex domestic partnerships in Maryland, but not marriage. A same-sex marriage law has passed the legislature and will be signed into law by the governor this week, but the law won't go into effect until January 2013 and could be overturned by referendum before then. If that were to happen, we'd still want article on the non-marriage domestic partnership that would remain on the books, yes? --Jfruh (talk) 18:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't believe so.- Teammm ^{Let's Talk! :)} 18:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)