Chris Gregoire | Gay Marriage | Maryland | News | Thomas Roberts | Washington

BigGayDeal.com

Maryland and Washington Governors Speak to Thomas Roberts About Fight for Marriage Equality: VIDEO

Roberts

Thomas Roberts spoke with Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley and Washington Governor Chris Gregoire about the fight for marriage equality in their respective states. He also asked them about New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's call for a voter referendum on same-sex marriage.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

 

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Too bad the Good Governor of Maryland never mentioned that Civil rights have never been put to a public vote in the past. Yet now when Gay citizens want equal rights those rights ARE put to a vote. He's a GREAT spokesman for equality. BRAVO!

    Posted by: Sargon Bighorn | Jan 27, 2012 7:13:30 PM


  2. these are good people.

    Posted by: Stephen | Jan 27, 2012 7:15:13 PM


  3. Sometimes...on a good day such as today, listening to these two wonderful governors...I believe in the promise of America. I know, I'm channeling Pollyanna...but these moments are few and far between, so allow me the luxury of hoping that before I die, I'll marry my husband and live happily ever after. I'm 60 this year...can't waste any time.

    Posted by: Paul B. | Jan 27, 2012 7:32:02 PM


  4. Not sure why, but hearing Gov O'Malley speak made me a little emotional. I loved his responses to everything. Yes, I agree SARGON BIGHORN, it would have been nice to mention that, but everything else he said was so genuine and so spot on, that I can overlook that.

    Posted by: gabriel | Jan 27, 2012 7:32:54 PM


  5. Eh, I didn't like the way O'Malley ducked the question of whether this kind of thing should be on the ballot. And it's not even that it's this particular issue; I always hate it when politicians ignore a question, and respond with something else entirely. Seems smarmy.

    Posted by: Zlick | Jan 27, 2012 8:07:53 PM


  6. Actually, civil rights HAVE been put on the ballot in various states in the past - women's right to vote, for example - and voters at the time refused to extend that right to others.

    Putting civil rights on the ballot was wrong then, and it's wrong now.

    Posted by: Zandt | Jan 27, 2012 8:18:46 PM


  7. I have Christine Gregoire for my own governor, now I want Thomas Roberts for my own husband. And so does my husband...and don't confuse us with what that means. I hate definitions.

    Posted by: uffda | Jan 27, 2012 8:34:43 PM


  8. I'm also a Washingtonian and I'm proud beyond words of both my governor and my state. Not only does did Ms. Gregoire introduce the legislation herself, she's worked with legislators for some time to get the timing right on this (to be honest--they enlisted her). Add to that, a recent survey of voters shows that 55% have said they'd vote to uphold the law if it's enacted. Sure, it's not a done deal, but it makes me love living where I live even more.

    Posted by: Warren | Jan 27, 2012 11:33:31 PM


  9. I live in zindiana. If Delaware is the first state, zindiana must be the most backward and last. I do not expect much here with the republicants running the show. Right to work for less, and a smoking ban that will not pass, libraries closing, etc. zindiana is a mess. God bless these two great leaders!

    Posted by: billmiller | Jan 28, 2012 6:58:28 AM


  10. This idea of "protecting religious freedoms at the same time" is redundant. Tere are iron-clad guarantees for such freedoms and they have never been under threat (except hypothetically in some right-wing imaginations) anywhere where marriage equality has passed.
    No Catholic priest or Souther baptist preacher has ever been forced by the government to marry a Jewish couple or an inter-racial couple or a divorcee. That's church business to decide whom they will or will not marry and nothing changes when the government allows equal access for same-sex couples to civil marriage licenses.
    The fact that women are allowed to vote for mayor or for president or even to run for office related to their GOVERNMENT has never meant that the government will force Catholics and Baptists to allow women to vote for Bishops or become church elders.
    They can continue to discriminate as much as they want within their churches over the fact that someone is female or gay or black or hasn't finihsed communion or a 12-step marriage course or isn't wearing a purple hat with bells or any other reason imaginable.
    I think each time that comes up, people need to be reminded that the idea that priests will lose a court case for not marrying two women in a Catholic ceremony has never been anything but nonsense considering constitutional guarantees and centuries of precedents. They don't need to repeat what is already guaranteed for any reason other than as an unnecessary gesture to soothe irrational fears.
    Otherwise, we would ALREADY have had to have such extra wording about religions in place along the margin of every law in existence.

    Posted by: GregV | Jan 29, 2012 12:18:04 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Manila Luzon's Hot Couture: VIDEO« «