Maryland to Recognize Same-Sex Marriages, Sleestak Vows to Impeach State AG

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by iGary, Feb 25, 2010.

  1. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #1
    Don Dwyer, as many may know, is a sleestak, currently representing the citizens of Glen Burnout, MD.

    Link.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #2
    [insert Helen Lovejoy pic here]

    Good for Maryland! Legalization in Maryland would be nice, but this is a good start.

    And I seem to remember you talking about Don Dwyer before, sounds like a major league jackass.
     
  3. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    I thought you guys got rid of that nut case? Come on, Gary!

    Anyway, good for Maryland.
     
  4. StruckANerve macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Location:
    Rio Rancho, NM
    #4
    With all the same sex marriage stuff going on in this country I am baffled at how all these laws were enacted in the first place. Hasn't anyone taken this issue to the supreme court on it being unconstitutional?
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    That will probably happen with the Prop 8 trial.
     
  6. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #6
    In fairness, he did make some cogent points in his own defense. I'm paraphrasing here, but I believe he said, "hssshhhhhh ssshhhh ssssshhhhssss!"

    He then held his rubbery arms out in a sleepwalker pose and shambled slowly towards the interviewer. Maryland GOP chairman Enik could not be reached for comment, but is widely rumored to be distraught over his discovery that what he thought was the atavistic past of his species instead turns out to be its degenerate future.
     
  7. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
  8. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
  9. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #9
    How can Maryland not already have gay marriage? Aren't you supposed to be one of the good states?
     
  10. iGary thread starter Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #10
    Heh.

    They've voted on it several times. At least my representative voted correctly.
     
  11. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #11
    Speaking of Prop 8 trial, not to derail this thread much, but I haven't heard anything about it lately. Are they close to reaching a decision?
     
  12. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #12
    I haven't heard anything yet.
     
  13. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #13
    The guys at Courage Campaign said not to expect a ruling until mid-March
     
  14. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    This seems like a good step forward, other than Sleestak who seems to have totally overreacted.
     
  15. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #15
    Seems like as good a place as any to post this. Despite the usual rhetoric from "Protect the Family" types the UK government has just removed the ban on religious entities performing Civil Partnership ceremonies. Previously UK CPs, which legally are marriage in all but name, were not permitted to have any religious symbolism at all. However, certain Churches and religious groups have campaigned that they wish gay members of their congregations to celebrate their unions in the same way as their straight members.

    Before the usual voices kick off please notice that nobody is being "forced" to perform CPs in their Church, Temple whatever if they don't want to. This allows those organisations who want to do this, to do this.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8546827.stm
     
  16. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #16
    That's so weird. It seems like you guys did it the opposite of us. Many churches have been "marrying" gay folks for decades. I didn't know you guys had even forbidden that.

    Well, good for you! :)
     
  17. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    I'd guess a church in Britain could "marry" you before, but you'd have to have a separate (and non-religious) ceremony at the registry office.
     
  18. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #18
    Exactly. The Civil Partnerships Act 2005 expressly forbids any religious references at the CP ceremony, probably because Tony Bliar was worried the Vatican would ex-communicate him or something :)rolleyes:). However, those same-sex couples who wanted to have a religious feel would have their legal CP in the morning, then get a blessing in front of their friends and family down the local friendly god-house of preference.

    Very strange way of doing it IMO, but it's good to see that the pressure to drop the ridiculous side of the Act has now won through. Especially good because it was the pressure coming from the religious organisations themselves that swayed the decision.
     
  19. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #19

    Maybe the same reason that mixed races were not allowed to marry not that long ago...
     
  20. abijnk macrumors 68040

    abijnk

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #20
    The proposed date for closing arguments is June 16. There is a whole bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo going on in the mean time (documents, objections, etc.). Hopefully that will be the actual date. Then after closing arguments it could be anywhere from 5 minutes to 5 weeks (or longer) until we know the judge's final decision.

    Back on topic, way to go Maryland!
     
  21. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #21
    Any news on this? What happened with Sleestak's lawsuit?
     

Share This Page