Marylanders debate same-sex marriage
Matthew Hazlett/ The Towerlight
When Lisa and Katie Simmons-Barth were planning their wedding, they often encountered the same dilemma. The same-sex couple wanted to sign-up for several businesses’ gift registries, but when they went to enter their names, they often were asked for a husband and bride’s name.
“But we were both the bride,” Lisa Simmons-Barth said.
The couple scouted across Baltimore until they discovered companies that would best serve their needs, which they said was a hunt.
“Sometimes people would be like, ‘oh, a gay wedding? I’ve been to one of those before,” Katie Simmons-Barth said. “It was a different experience.”
Eventually Lisa, who works at Towson as an Assistant Director in Housing and Residence Life, and Katie, who is the marketing and retail services manager for the University store, married in 2010 in D.C.
“I was … sure of myself I wasn’t going to feel different, what could be different, we were living as though we were married,” Lisa Simmons-Barth said.
“I was wrong, it mattered to me a lot more than I thought it would, that our family was there and that they were a part of it. And I look at her differently now.”
While the couple of 10 years is now married, their legal partnership is not yet obtainable in Maryland. But Question 6, which will appear on Maryland’s ballot Nov. 6, would allow same-sex couples like the Simmons-Barths to obtain a civil marriage license beginning Jan. 1, 2013.
A poll conducted by Public Policy Polling in May stated that 57 percent of Marylanders supported the law, while 37percent were against it.
2012 alumna Missy Humms said that same-sex couples are consenting adults and should be allowed to make their own decisions.
“Ultimately I support marriage equality because I don’t think we should limit people and their love,” she said. “Marriage is currently a contract you and a partner have with the state. You may have religious parts and vows – but when it comes down to it, this is a state contract.”
Senior Ron Ozarowski said he does not believe same-sex relationships should be defined under the umbrella of “marriage.”
“I believe that the rights that are afforded to committed heterosexual married couples should be extended to committed homosexual couples, but I do not agree that with the extension of these rights we should redefine the institution of marriage,” he said. “The institution of marriage is a timeless institution. We should not deviate from the institution’s timeless definition which states that marriage is between one man and one woman.”
The U.S. Internal Revenue Service does not allow same-sex couples to file joint federal income tax returns because the federal Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman.’
This law would entitle the couples to the financial and social benefits marriage provides in the state, including various tax breaks.
Same-sex partners, or any children they may adopt, currently cannot register under each other’s health insurance policy. This can be problematic in cases of short and long-term medical complications.
Despite that the Simmons-Barths’ marriage is legally recognized in Maryland, they said because Question 6 has not yet passed, they still take great measures in case of a medical emergency.
Katie Simmons-Barth has carried a notarized document in her wallet since 2007 that states Lisa can make informed medical decisions.
“I have friends who carry thick legal-sized envelope pack where all their documents are there, all their medical decisions are there, all their legal paperwork, anything that ties them together.” she said. And if they’re going out of town for a weekend, they ask ‘do you have our medical-decision making package with you?’ My straight friends don’t have to do that. They have that privilege all the time.”
The House approved the bill 72–67 this year, adding the condition that states clergy of any religious sect would be protected from performing any marriage ceremony that is against their beliefs.
Richard Cook is a parishioner at St. Matthew Catholic Church and a member of Catholics for Marriage Equality, an organization that, despite the doctrine of the Catholic church, advocates marriage inclusiveness.
He said that same-sex couples have the right to marry and that the traditions of the church are not progressive.
“I’m not troubled by the hierarchy’s position on this because the distinction I make is that what happens within the four walls of the parish, which the Bishops certainly regulate and what happens in the polling booth is completely different.”
Several campus organizations, including the Center for Student Diversity and the Department of Civic Engagement have promoted religious and political education about the referendum item.
Sam Hubbard, the Student Government Association’s Director of Diversity organized the “Marriage Equality for All!” event Oct. 9, which featured individuals discussing the pros and cons of same-sex marriage.
Some on the panel said that the battle for same-sex marriage is one that has waged for too long.
Mickey Dehn, a lecturer in the Department of Biological Sciences, who identifies as transgender, said that too many resources have been funneled into promoting same-sex marriage.
“It is has been a giant resource suck in every sense of the word for every other Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgender issue,” he said
Almost $44 million dollars was raised in opposition to Proposition 8, a California constitutional amendment passed in 2008 that states marriage is only legally recognized between a man and woman, according to a report generated by the Los Angeles Times. $38 million was raised to support the ban of same-sex marriage.
Funds like these, Dehn said, could have been distributed to other organizations, such as the Human Rights Campaign, that are fighting for equal employment rights and LGBT hate-crime prevention.
If approved, same-sex marriage could provide Maryland’s economy with a projected $3.2 million gain annually from increases in sales and tax revenue from weddings and wedding-related tourism, according to a study conducted by the Williams Institute, a research arm of University of California’s School of Law.
The Institute explored budgetary information from the seven states that have already approved same-sex marriage: Iowa, New York, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Washington, Vermont and Massachusetts, as well as D.C.
To vote on Question 6, visit your local polling station, or request an absentee ballot. Deadline is Oct. 30.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Same sex marriage is fine by me. The concept of this issue funneling a bunch of money from other issues on either side is an interesting point, one I hadn’t considered.
I will be voting against all the ballot measures except this one.
I really dont’ care if two men or two women get married.
TOMORROW (Tuesday 10/16) is the voter registration deadline. 10/30 is the deadline for registered voters to request an absentee ballot. Perhaps the Towerlight can clarify their final paragraph?
I feel that my sentiments were misinterpreted in this article. Let me clarify two points: (1) I do support Marraige Equality and (2) I do not support funneling away money towards marriage equality legislation to support HRC lobbying efforts for other types of LGBT-related legislation. I do support funneling away money from legislative efforts to direct services supporting the LGBT community (e.g. housing, medical care, legal services, etc…), especially for those who are most in need.
Fixing our community problems through legislation is trickle-down thinking and by no means a cure-all. Racism didn’t end at the 13th amendment’s abolition of slavery. Sexism didn’t end with the 19th amendment’s granting of women’s suffrage or even with the passing of Title IX legislation in 1972. Inequalities for LGBT people are not going to end the moment that marriage equality laws are enacted.
I encourage others to vote for Question 6 on the upcoming MD ballot in support of equality for LGBT persons and because I don’t want to see another several million dollars spent on legislative lobbying when the LGBT people who need direct services the most are being largely ignored.
Amen Mickey. Let’s just hope that if and when marriage “passes” and the dust settles all of those donors will still open their wallets. My prediction is that the minute marriage equality “passes” the funds will dry up. HRC knows this, NGLTF knows this…which is why you’ll see little movement from them on a national level regarding this issue – the state by state process allows them to still court donation dollars in the name of a cause that everyone *appears* to be in support of (I challenge that notion). I WILL concede that that NGLTF is slightly more progressive in their approach (youth-focus), but they spend a great deal of time championing hate crimes legislation which is really a big nothing and only serves to drive the prision industrial complex.
(I’m glad you clarified. I read that and thought, “Ummm, I don’t want to speak for Mickey…but I doubt he’s jazzed about funneling money to HRC…lol)
GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT, AND FUCK HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN.
My Prediction. Both gay marriage and the scam, I mean Dream Act wil lget voted down and not pass… Slots will though.
Unfortunately, I think you may be right. I can’t even comment on the “scam” part of your comment, except to encourage you to do a little research.
John F.,
I have. They want to give in state tuition to illegals. Illegals who will also take spots from legal citizens who will be applying as well. Think about it, affirmative action will apply to them as well, so they will get a slot in school over a someone else. Not to mention the other students from Mexico and South America who come here LEGALLY and have to pay the full out of state tuition. What a bunch of MALARKY….. Now, think about this, they come get a cheap education, but cant be employed because they are not citizens, so they cant get a good paying job, so they dont add to the tax base.
The students who want in-state tuition have lived in the state all their lives…and in most cases were born here.
Don’t add to the tax base? Not true.
But don’t take my word for it…have a look:
http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2017113852_immigtaxes29.html
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-04-20/local/29470037_1_sales-taxes-tax-revenue-property-taxes
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/incometaxandtheirs/a/Illegal-Immigrants-Pay-Taxes-Too.htm
-J
@True American
The purpose of this law is to protect those children who were brought to this country by their parents or born in this country.
According to the law, these children will have to have attended a high school in Maryland for four years in order to qualify for in-state tuition. I moved to Maryland three years ago and all I had to do to qualify for residency was show that I’d lived in Maryland for one year.
Why should it be easier for me to gain in-state tuition than it is for someone who may have lived in the state for their entire lives, and has probably already worked in the state for several years?
Also, in order to qualify, these students must be working on getting citizenship while seeking their degree. Gaining citizenship is a hard process, but hopefully we can make it easier for these students to go through the process by the time they’re ready to enter the work force.
Why do you feel that you deserve special treatment because the woman you came out of also came out of a woman inside the borders of the United States?
If you were really a ‘True American’, you wouldn’t be so quick to deny the rights you were given freely, based on location of birth, to someone who, based on their location of birth, should be afforded those same rights.
Towson Student said,
“Why do you feel that you deserve special treatment because the woman you came out of also came out of a woman inside the borders of the United States?”
—R U KIDDING ME? Why do I feel I deserve special treatment over an illegal alien? WHY? Because I am a US CITIZEN. My parents are US Citizens. My father served in the Military to defend this country. You have got to be out of your mind to even ask such a question.
If they want rights, become a citizen first or get a green card. If they dont like the rules, they can go back Mexico. Its that simple.
Back? Most of them were born here. And contrary to popular belief, they pay taxes, just like you.
Your original argument was about paying taxes. They (and their families) pay taxes – yes, including payroll tax. So what’s the problem?
I think it’s a common misconception that it’s at all possible for an average foreigner to obtain US citizenship legally. Only via lottery can you obtain a green card without having family in the US or a job that will sponsor your immigration. Through family sponsorship, depending on your relationship to the sponsoring citizen you could wait up to 25 years just to obtain your green card, then you’re required to hold that for 5 years before obtaining citizenship. It’s quicker to obtain a green card through an employer, but few companies sponsor, especially if you don’t hold a graduate degree. I work with some very good Indian software developers who are still working as contractors years after being offered full-time jobs at my company because they would not be sponsored if they signed on for a salaried position.
Immigration is not some black and white issue where illegal immigrants could have just waltzed into the MVA and become citizens. It’s ridiculous what we expect immigrants to go through to gain citizenship. Perhaps if laws were loosened to allow more legal immigration, we would not have a problem.
I do not wish to argue for either side here, but I want to point out that John F. (above) is mistaken in saying “most of them (aliens) were born here”. Federal law as I understand it, grants automatic citizenship at the time of birth to all babies born in the U.S., regardless of their parents’ status. By Federal law, NO ONE actually born in the U.S. is an alien or would even pertain to the Dream Act. Therefore, John F.’s statement is inaccurate.
I stand corrected – that part of my statement was indeed inaccurate.
Leave your response!
Year In Review 2012-2013
The Towerlight in Print
Categories
Weather
Archive
Resources
First Class Chauffeured Washington DC Limousine Service
Recent Comments
recent articles
Links
Sections