Mr. Dwyer and Me...

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
Remember the note I wrote to my state rep? One of his administrative folks wrote me back, and boy, have I lost all faith (be sure to click and read the links THEY provided me with):

Reverse chronological order:

You must be kidding me.

You provide me a link to a religious site filled with Biblical quotes from Mr. "I hate gays Dobson?"

Guess Mr. Dwyer missed the chapter on Separation of Chruch and State, too.

Let Mr. Dwyer know that he has confirmed that the Republican Party as I knew it is now truly dead.

No response required. Actually, I'd prefer it if you didn't.

Gary Reich


On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Delegate Don Dwyer wrote:

January 27, 2006


Dear Gary,


The Constitutional Amendment Delegate Dwyer proposes simply allows the issue to go before the public for a vote. If Marylanders are in favor of same-sex marriage, the vote will reflect that and the Amendment will die. Keep in mind that Maryland voters passed a referendum in favor of abortion in 1991. And the conservatives of the General Assembly have not contended with those wishes. The issue of same-sex marriage is too important to be left to judicial opinion in Delegate Dwyer's estimation. As a representative of the people, he's fighting for the people's right to define their own societal norms (as elucidated through governmental policy).


In regards to the social consequences of same-sex marriage, we refer you to the following two articles. You'll find many common arguments against and objections to gay marriage, including how gay marriage has hurt traditional marriage in other nations.


http://www.defendmarylandmarriage.com/11arg.html



http://www.defendmarylandmarriage.com/Caleb_art2.htm



Regarding equal rights and freedom to love who one wants, Delegate Dwyer is in full support. He actually co-sponsored legislation this year that allows the transfer of property, medical visitation, and the sharing of medical benefits (as well as other rights) between any two consenting adults regardless of relationship. The problem for him arises when those rights are conferred on the basis of sexual lifestyle. He believes a request for an official (or governmental) redefinition of marriage should go before the people.


If you would like further explanation or authoritative research on the issue, feel free to contact us again.


Courtney Smith

Research Assistant

Delegate Don H. Dwyer, Jr.

31st District



-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Reich [mailto:garyreich@mac.com]
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 9:03 PM
To: don.dwyer@house.state.md.us
Subject: Gay Marriage



Mr. Dwyer,


You, sir are exactly the reason that hundreds of thousands of Republicans are fleeing the party. Unfortunately, you and most of the party have long lost sight of about what the Republican Party was formed for--and at its core--is about: individual freedom with a limited and non-intrusive government.


Your quite in Friday's Washington post is what struck me to write this letter to you:


"The evidence is now on the table. We must pass a constitutional amendment."


I, for one, as have many Marylanders, have had it with state lawmakers passing laws that are very obviously a direct violation of the Equal Protection Clause as well as meddling in the affairs of "the sanctity of marriage." Let me assure you, Mr. Dwyer, that with a 50% divorce rate, the "sanctity of marriage," as you put it, is far from an untouched treasure that we need to "defend," as our governor has put it.


The other item you are quoted as saying follows:


"This issue is not for the courts to decide."


I say, sir, that the issue of marriage, and who it can and can't include is not for you and state lawmakers to decide. Please stop wasting the salary I pay you dealing with such foolishness in order to "save us" from some imaginary evil and remember what being a Republican is about - freedom, not exclusion. I wouldn't mind a tax break while you are at it.


Respectfully yours,


Gary Reich
 

floyde

macrumors 6502a
Apr 7, 2005
808
0
Monterrey, México
Wow, scary stuff, especially this bit:

We are committed to not remain silent as the homosexual agenda attempts to overtake the laws and social order of Maryland.
The "homosexual agenda" is the kind of thing you expect to hear from a satirist, I didn't know these people actually said that sort of thing out in the open.

I wonder if there ever was an argument against gay marriage that didn't include the word "God" or "Genesis".
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
floyde said:
Wow, scary stuff, especially this bit:



The "homosexual agenda" is the kind of thing you expect to hear from a satirist, I didn't know these people actually said that sort of thing out in the open.

I wonder if there ever was an argument against gay marriage that didn't include the word "God" or "Genesis".
I'm honestly speechless.

A state elected representative sent me to a gay hate site in disguise?
 

leekohler

macrumors G5
Dec 22, 2004
14,162
19
Chicago, Illinois
Your state rep should be removed from office. Isn't this a violation of separation of church and state?

Wow- that second link was particularly offensive. I never knew we could take down society all by ourselves! :) These people are seriously delusional.
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House


So I have done a little research on asshat™, my delegate:

Dear Margaret,

It was brought to my attention that the prayers offered at the Brooklyn Senior Center at mealtime bother you. You apparently posted a plea for help or suggestions as to how stop the Christian prayer. Below is your posting on the Maryland atheist website:

I am subjected to hearing “grace” said aloud at an Anne Arundel County senior center. It ends in a Christian deity being mentioned. Why can’t a moment of silence be sufficient? It’s not fair to myself or anyone else not of Christian beliefs to have to listen to others prayers in order to have a nice meal with other senior citizens. Is there any law that would help me to change this practice? I have complained to the director of the Departments of aging and nothing has changed. Any input or suggestions would help. Thank you, Margaret Sayre

My recommendation would be that you immediately stop any attempt to interfere with the religious freedoms of my constituents who0 use the Brooklyn Park Senior Center .

You state that it is not fair for you, or anyone else who is not a Christian, to have to listen to others prayers in order to have a nice meal with other senior citizens. You go on to ask, “Is there any law that would help me change this practice?”

If the atheists of Maryland want something different then I would suggest building an atheist Senior Center where you won’t have to hear any prayers but leave my people alone!

If you would like to further discuss this issue in person, I will gladly meet with you.

Constitutionally yours,


Delegate Don Dwyer, Jr.
AACO Dist. 31

Cc. Virginia Thomas, AACO Dept. of Aging
Carolyn Boy’d, Brooklyn Park Senior Center
Kevin O’ Keefe, AACO County Executive Liaison


Delegate Don Dwyer, Others, Ordered to Leave State House After Leading Prayer

On Sunday January 9th, Delegate Dwyer, Senator Greenip, and Mr. Doug Stiegler of the Association of Maryland Families converged on the State Capital along with nearly 400 citizens and 80 church leaders from the four corners of the state for the purpose of lifting the state and our elected leaders up in prayer before the start of the 2005 legislative session.

This annual prayer has been going on for nearly 9 years and was started by Senator Greenip in an attempt to bring prayer to the legislative process. The group, outside, surrounded the Capital building along the lanes of State Circle while the group of pastors and church leaders prayed inside.

After Delegate Dwyer escorted nearly 40 pastors into the House Chamber, a security guard ordered Delegate Dwyer and the pastors to leave the chamber. When Dwyer questioned the guard, the guard indicated he had been directed to instruct Delegate Dwyer to leave. Delegate Dwyer refused to leave and continued with the prayer in the House Chamber with the Pastors.

"I explained to the guard that this is the people’s House and Chamber and I refuse to leave. Call it civil disobedience if you like," Dwyer said.

The guard then went to the other House and informed Senator Greenip that she and her guests had to leave the Senate Chamber. She ignored his request and kept praying with the nearly 40 pastors in the Senate Chamber.

Delegate Dwyer said, "God's people will not be silenced in Annapolis."
 

aquajet

macrumors 68020
Feb 12, 2005
2,384
0
VA
The Debate

We are asking concerned citizens to contact state legislators with your concerns. During these conversations, you may encounter some objections. We offer the following information to familiarize you with the talking points.

You say ...

Delegate _______, I am in favor of protecting marriage as it has always been defined - between a man and a woman only. I would like you to support any legislation that protects this understanding of marriage, especially the proposed constitutional amendment by Delegate Boutin.

If the delegate says ...

I don't believe a constitutional amendment is necessary. Our laws already define marriage as between a man and a woman.

You say ...

Consider this amendment an insurance policy against recent court actions. If Maryland's Judicial branch decides that our current marriage laws are unconstitutional, we will be exactly like Massachusetts and same sex marriage will be allowed immediately.

If the delegate says ...

It's already in our constitution.

You say ...

Respectfully, sir or ma'am, I must disagree. The only Maryland law that defines marriage was enacted in 1973 and is quite vulnerable to judicial activism. We must have this in our constitution. (If you want proof, you can visit LexisNexis and view the law yourself. Click Maryland Code, Family Law, and then Marriage. This page is also accessible from www.mdarchives.md.state.us. Click Maryland Manual On-Line, and then Maryland Code (laws).)

Or you may respond ...

Sir or Ma'am, could you tell me where in the constitution that is? I can't seem to find it here. In my research, the only Maryland law defining marriage that I have uncovered was enacted in 1973 and it is vulnerable to nullification by the courts.

If the delegate says ...

Let the courts rule first. If they rule in favor of same sex marriage, we can take actions then.

You say ...

Sir or Ma'am, that will be too late. That was what they said in Massachusetts and you can see how that turned out. If you don't proactively protect marriage now, you are giving a major advantage to the enemies of traditional marriage. Why allow them to get that far? Are you in favor of marriage as it has been defined throughout history?

If the delegate says ...

I will not support legislation that protects marriage as we know it.

You say ...

That is unfortunate sir or ma'am. Then I will not vote for you again and I will work to have you replaced in 2006. We want legislators that will respond to the wishes of the people. Thank you for your time.
Oh, that's rich. They've even drafted a nice little debate, complete with the standard answers against the matter, just in case you're too much of a moron to know the issues yourself. Utterly pathetic. :mad:
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
aquajet said:
Oh, that's rich. They've even drafted a nice little debate, complete with the standard answers against the matter, just in case you're too much of a moron to know the issues yourself. Utterly pathetic. :mad:
The guy really is pathetic - I was speechless when I got the e-mail back with links to Focus on the Family?!?!?. I am honestly considering never associating myself with the Republican Party again. Ever.
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
aquajet said:
Oh, that's rich. They've even drafted a nice little debate, complete with the standard answers against the matter, just in case you're too much of a moron to know the issues yourself. Utterly pathetic. :mad:
I just re-replied to my e-mail with:

That is unfortunate sir. Then I will not vote for you again and I will work to have you replaced in 2006. We want legislators that will respond to the wishes of the people. Thank you for your time.
 

vniow

macrumors G4
Jul 18, 2002
10,282
0
I accidentally my whole location.
Do you personally know any gays or lesbians?

Yes. My uncle was the 77th person in the United States to die from AIDS. Others in my family are unfortunately homosexual. I love them all. Also, I know several ex-gays and ex-lesbians.
This guy's a creep. Unfortunately homosexual?? How do people like this even come into public office?
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
vniow said:
This guy's a creep. Unfortunately homosexual?? How do people like this even come into public office?
Because people don't investigate their delegates. I voted for this guy - why?

Because he was the Republican choice at the time - I had no idea who he was.

Lesson learned: Know your candidates and don't just vote for the sake of voting.

This guy is seriously delusional, as is his entire staff. The deeper I dig, the loonier he gets.
 

aquajet

macrumors 68020
Feb 12, 2005
2,384
0
VA
The Constitutional Amendment Delegate Dwyer proposes simply allows the issue to go before the public for a vote. If Marylanders are in favor of same-sex marriage, the vote will reflect that and the Amendment will die. Keep in mind that Maryland voters passed a referendum in favor of abortion in 1991. And the conservatives of the General Assembly have not contended with those wishes. The issue of same-sex marriage is too important to be left to judicial opinion in Delegate Dwyer's estimation. As a representative of the people, he's fighting for the people's right to define their own societal norms (as elucidated through governmental policy).
Could you clarify Gary -- Dwyer provided you with links to Focus on the Family? If that's the case, then this has absolutely nothing to do with "fighting for the people's right to define their own societal norms," and has everything to do about his own personal beliefs on the matter. If the majority of Marylanders believe homosexuals should be able to marry, I wonder if he would still sing the praises of "the people's right to define their own societal norms."

I don't know about you, but I'd much prefer people be open about their bigotry.
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
aquajet said:
Could you clarify Gary -- Dwyer provided you with links to Focus on the Family? If that's the case, then this has absolutely nothing to do with "fighting for the people's right to define their own societal norms," and has everything to do about his own personal beliefs on the matter. If the majority of Marylanders believe homosexuals should be able to marry, I wonder if he would still sing the praises of "the people's right to define their own societal norms."

I don't know about you, but I'd much prefer people be open about their bigotry.
Check the links in the first post.
 

aquajet

macrumors 68020
Feb 12, 2005
2,384
0
VA
Ah, missed those.

If Marylanders are in favor of same-sex marriage, the vote will reflect that and the Amendment will die. Keep in mind that Maryland voters passed a referendum in favor of abortion in 1991. And the conservatives of the General Assembly have not contended with those wishes.
I don't think so. Call them for what they are: neoconservatives. Real conservatives work for the people.

If the amendment dies, something tells me that it won't be the end of the issue.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
Unfortunately, though your Mr. Dwyer is a genuine scary-moster, he's roughly at the center of Republican Party ideology at this point in time. He and his socially reactionary pals are calling most of the shots. An equivalent trend occurred in the Democratic Party in the 1970s -- which is when I became an independent.
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
IJ Reilly said:
Unfortunately, though your Mr. Dwyer is a genuine scary-moster, he's roughly at the center of Republican Party ideology at this point in time. He and his socially reactionary pals are calling most of the shots. An equivalent trend occurred in the Democratic Party in the 1970s -- which is when I became an independent.
Well I registered independent last year, but still held onto the Republican platform for its ideals...they've effed up the platform so bad, I won't even be associated with them anymore. I'm done.

I mean get this - he tells an atheist senior to go build her own senior center because she is trouncing on his people's rights. She has just as much right to her non-religion as their religion, that's why it stays out of government.

**sigh**
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
pseudobrit said:
The guy is totally off his nut.

I predict a GOP leadership position in his future.
Yeah, I still can't believe it. When I opened the links and saw "James Dobson," I was like - errr, huh? :confused: :eek:

I'll do everything I can to get this toolbag ousted this year.
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,408
Holy crap. I'm speechless and that has happened very few times in my life.

iGary, you should forward this to all the elected Republicans in your state and send it to local newspapers (letters to the Editor). This cretin needs to be exposed. Like you said, people don't know who they're voting for.
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
Christ, the more I dig, the better it gets:

From his own Web Page:

My intent was merely to share the excelent writing and study of my 8th grade nephew. Had I intended to cause contention I would have written much more than my nephew.
Grammatical and spelling errors, his.
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
From his "My Important Issues" page:

First and foremost that the State and U.S. Constitutions are the foundation of civil law in this state. We must likewise recognize Moral law as the Ten Commandments.