Maryland recognises same sex marriages?

frogman123

New Member
what's wrong with the law? It's about time. The old timers who oppose this are the same ones who oppose(d) minorities and integration. Everyone in theis country deserves equal rights. Things change, and sometimes those things make some people uncomfortable- get over it.
 

4Father

New Member
I believe that his answer was one of prediction, and not set in stone

Right, it is his interpretation. I know the legislature can over rule him by being more specific, and I'm pretty sure the courts can say he is wrong too.
 
This is just a formal Attorney General Opinion. It in no way, shape or form means that Maryland now recognizes same-sex marriages from other states.

Writing and issuing AG Opinions is one of the functions of the Attorney General's office. A government official (e.g. the Governor, a state legislator) asks it for an opinion on some legal matter, and it researches (if necessary) and writes an opinion in response. In this case, a State Senator asked 'whether Maryland may recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other jurisdictions' and 'whether a Maryland Governor can issue an executive order concerning recognition of such marriages'.

The Attorney General issued a lengthy opinion discussing various aspects of the issue. The short answer to the first question was yes - same-sex marriages may be recognized under state law.

Such marriages may be recognized in several ways. First, legislation enacted by the General Assembly could provide for recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriages generally, or for particular purposes. Second, in the absence of legislation, the Court of Appeals, applying common law choice-of-law principles, could decide that such marriages will be recognized in Maryland, either generally or in particular circumstances. Finally, a State agency may also address the recognition of out-of-state marriages on particular matters within that agency’s jurisdiction, so long as the agency’s action is consistent with any relevant statutes and court decisions, including federal laws that may govern the agency’s activities.

Speaking to how the Court of Appeals might rule on the issue:

While the matter is not free from all doubt, in our view, the Court is likely to respect the law of other states and recognize a same-sex marriage contracted validly in another jurisdiction. In light of Maryland’s developing public policy concerning intimate samesex relationships, the Court would not readily invoke the public policy exception to the usual rule of recognition. You have posed the question in the abstract, but, of course, context matters. For example, to the extent that a particular matter is governed by federal law, the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which limits marriage for federal purposes to opposite-sex couples, would prevent recognition of the marriage for that particular purpose.

And, speaking to the second question:

Finally, with respect to your question concerning the Governor’s authority to issue an executive order, the Governor cannot legislate through an executive order. An executive order of the Governor must be consistent with existing Maryland law, as enacted by the General Assembly and construed by the courts. While the State Constitution and statutes accord the Governor broad powers in certain areas – for example, in matters concerning executive branch employees – many questions concerning recognition of out-of-state marriages arise in the courts and cannot be addressed in an executive order. The action of the New York Governor’s office in 2008 is not entirely analogous. In New York, the Governor’s counsel issued a memorandum to various agencies in that state directing them to comply with a state court decision concerning recognition of out-of-state marriages; there is no similar court decision in Maryland.


A few key points:

(1) The formal opinion offered by the Attorney General was in response to an inquiry (and offering such opinions is part of the AG's job).

(2) The opinion doesn't change state law or control Maryland policy on this issue.

(3) This isn't a suggestion as to what the Attorney General thinks Maryland policy should be, it is a legal analysis of the issue, and considered views regarding it.

(4) There is nothing 'effective immediately' to this - unless you mean, 'effective immediately' you will be able to read this opinion.
 

ItalianScallion

Harley Rider
What froglips doesn't understand is that this will bring us one step closer to gay marriages being legal and performed in Md. That will bring us all closer to the wrath of God just as we see happening in California.
Don Dwyer(R) is going to try to have Gaynsler impeached for this "opinion".
Sure froglips; only something for us "old timers" to worry about...:smack:
 

Highlander

ONE NATION UNDER GOD
what's wrong with the law? It's about time. The old timers who oppose this are the same ones who oppose(d) minorities and integration. Everyone in theis country deserves equal rights. Things change, and sometimes those things make some people uncomfortable- get over it.

Yep, everyone deserves equal rights. In 50 years child molesters and sheep fuc*ers will be fighting for "equal rights." Society needs to draw the line somewhere. I can't believe we, as a society, think two gay men should be able to get MARRIED! WTF!!!
 

bcp

In My Opinion
what's wrong with the law? It's about time. The old timers who oppose this are the same ones who oppose(d) minorities and integration. Everyone in theis country deserves equal rights. Things change, and sometimes those things make some people uncomfortable- get over it.
I see the problem here.

you look at discriminating against a skin color the same as discriminating against a choice.

You're statement above is not 100% correct. Not all that oppose gay marriage/special rights would have been against equal rights for minorities, and at the same time, not all that support gay marriage/special rights would have supported equal rights for minorities.

The two have nothing to do with each other.
 

mAlice

professional daydreamer
This was being discussed on that other radio station while driving in this morning. TB asked a caller "how does this have a negative impact on you personally", and true to form, the caller skirted the issue and never answered the question. Any response he gave was not indicative of an offense against his person.
 

ImnoMensa

New Member
This was being discussed on that other radio station while driving in this morning. TB asked a caller "how does this have a negative impact on you personally", and true to form, the caller skirted the issue and never answered the question. Any response he gave was not indicative of an offense against his person.

It triviliases any heterosexual relationship when it lowers the meaning of marriage.

Do heterosexuals not have the right to define a marriage as between a man and a woman. It takes away that right.

Why should a definition that has stood for over a thousand years be changed by people who simply want the monetary advantages of marriage .
What right do they have to define what the word marriage means?

We can call plugging in the electric cord on your toaster as a marriage, it involves male and female. We can call hooking up your garden hose a marriage
it requires a male and a female. It doesnt work any other way, you simply cannot connect two male ends or two female ends together and have it work without a lot of Duck tape ,because it isnt a marriage.

They can find another word, to describe their relationship, but it isnt marriage.
 

mAlice

professional daydreamer
It triviliases any heterosexual relationship when it lowers the meaning of marriage.

Do heterosexuals not have the right to define a marriage as between a man and a woman. It takes away that right.

Why should a definition that has stood for over a thousand years be changed by people who simply want the monetary advantages of marriage .
What right do they have to define what the word marriage means?

We can call plugging in the electric cord on your toaster as a marriage, it involves male and female. We can call hooking up your garden hose a marriage
it requires a male and a female. It doesnt work any other way, you simply cannot connect two male ends or two female ends together and have it work without a lot of Duck tape ,because it isnt a marriage.

They can find another word, to describe their relationship, but it isnt marriage.


Well, lets see...when I worked in hospitality, we "married" the ketchups from two half empty bottles. How does one determine which bottle is male, and which bottle is female?

And your argument still doesn't explain how a same sex marriage personally impacts your life. It simply, in your opinion, makes something trivial.
 

Pushrod

Patriot
This is just a formal Attorney General Opinion. It in no way, shape or form means that Maryland now recognizes same-sex marriages from other states.

Writing and issuing AG Opinions is one of the functions of the Attorney General's office. A government official (e.g. the Governor, a state legislator) asks it for an opinion on some legal matter, and it researches (if necessary) and writes an opinion in response. In this case, a State Senator asked 'whether Maryland may recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other jurisdictions' and 'whether a Maryland Governor can issue an executive order concerning recognition of such marriages'.

The Attorney General issued a lengthy opinion discussing various aspects of the issue. The short answer to the first question was yes - same-sex marriages may be recognized under state law.



Speaking to how the Court of Appeals might rule on the issue:



And, speaking to the second question:




A few key points:

(1) The formal opinion offered by the Attorney General was in response to an inquiry (and offering such opinions is part of the AG's job).

(2) The opinion doesn't change state law or control Maryland policy on this issue.

(3) This isn't a suggestion as to what the Attorney General thinks Maryland policy should be, it is a legal analysis of the issue, and considered views regarding it.

(4) There is nothing 'effective immediately' to this - unless you mean, 'effective immediately' you will be able to read this opinion.

So Tilted, I wonder if the AG would also answer in the affirmative if a Senator asked for an opinion on whether Concealed Carry Permits issued in other States had to be honored in Maryland? Especially since this is a Right protected by the Constitution. If McDonald is decided in our favor, would this be a good inquiry to make of the AG and could it possibly be answered in the affirmative? :elaine:

I think if McDonald is affirmed through the P&I clause of Ammendment XIV section 1, the AG would have no choice but to say Maryland would have to recognise all other States CCW permits. :starcat:
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
This was being discussed on that other radio station while driving in this morning. TB asked a caller "how does this have a negative impact on you personally", and true to form, the caller skirted the issue and never answered the question. Any response he gave was not indicative of an offense against his person.

How does a rape three counties away from you have a negative impact on you personally? Since it clearly doesn't, does that mean rape should be a legal, accepted practice?

Is that really the determination - immediate detrimental effect on me personally?
 

mAlice

professional daydreamer
How does a rape three counties away from you have a negative impact on you personally? Since it clearly doesn't, does that mean rape should be a legal, accepted practice?

Is that really the determination - immediate detrimental effect on me personally?

Rape is against one's will. Homosexuality is consensual.
 

mAlice

professional daydreamer
So Tilted, I wonder if the AG would also answer in the affirmative if a Senator asked for an opinion on whether Concealed Carry Permits issued in other States had to be honored in Maryland? Especially since this is a Right protected by the Constitution. If McDonald is decided in our favor, would this be a good inquiry to make of the AG and could it possibly be answered in the affirmative? :elaine:

I think if McDonald is affirmed through the P&I clause of Ammendment XIV section 1, the AG would have no choice but to say Maryland would have to recognise all other States CCW permits. :starcat:

Good argument :yay:
 
S

shiki

Guest
This seems like a no-brainer to me or does the Full Faith and Credit clause of the US constitution mean nothing?
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
And your argument still doesn't explain how a same sex marriage personally impacts your life. It simply, in your opinion, makes something trivial.
In my opinion, there are a few effects:
  • Dilutes the meaning of "marriage" by adding new unions it includes
  • Dilutes the meaning of the union between two same gendered individuals, by calling their relationship something it is not
  • "Slippery slopes" to adding in consensual, adult incest and polygamy as "marriage", since every argument used in favor of same gendered unions being redefined as "marriage" applies to those unions as well
  • Will lead, over generations, to a lower societal standard and regard for what marriage is, which leads to worse parenting and more crime. This is evidenced in divorce becoming easy to obtain in the 1960's, lowering the societal regard for marriage, and the result increase in single parent homes, which is a strong contributing factor into most crime statistics and school problems. For the simple minded Nuck (not you, mAlice), this does not equate same gendered unions with divorce, it is used to show another example of how lowering the regard marriage is given effects society at large
 
Top