Marriage Battle Continues -- This Time in Maryland
by Allie Martin and Jody Brown
September 6, 2006
(AgapePress) - - As voters in seven states prepare to vote in a few weeks on state constitutional amendments protecting traditional marriage, pro-family organizations are working together in Maryland to defend the institution.On Election Day in November, voters in seven states -- Arizona, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin -- will weigh in on initiatives to amend their state constitutions to define marriage as between one man and one woman. In November 2004, eleven states considered similar ballot measures; in all cases, the margin of victory favoring traditional marriage was decisive. Currently, constitutions in 20 states preserve the traditional definition of marriage.
Opponents of such measures often argue there is no reason to amend state constitutions defining marriage. State ordinances, they say, should be sufficient to prevent same-sex "marriage." However, as marriage proponents in Maryland have discovered, all it takes is one activist judge to stir things up.
Maryland state law states "only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in this state" (Family Law Article 2-201). But in January Baltimore Circuit Judge M. Brooke Murdock struck down the 1973 law, stating that the law "discriminates based on gender."
"There is no apparent compelling state interest in a statutory prohibition of same-sex marriage discriminating, on the basis of sex, against those individuals whose gender is identical to their intended spouse," the jurist wrote. Murdock placed a stay on her ruling pending an appeal.
Among the groups appealing the judge's ruling is the Association of Maryland Families (AMF), a group whose vision is to serve as a voice for the family in the public arena, and that is committed to protecting traditional marriage. On behalf of AMF, Liberty Counsel has filed a brief with Maryland's appeals court. According to Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, the brief shows how challenges to traditional marriage laws have been rejected by courts throughout the nation.
"We also point the court to all of the other marriage rulings that have come down just in the last few weeks, in which those courts have deferred to and respected the legislature through the will of the people," the Christian attorney explains.
The New York Court of Appeals and the Washington Supreme Court are among the state high courts that have recently rejected challenges to marriage laws. The AMF brief urges the Maryland Court of Appeals to do likewise. Staver is confident that, given the chance, voters in the Chesapeake State will follow the national trend on state marriage amendments.
"There's no question that when the people have the opportunity to speak on this issue regarding marriage, they always decide for traditional marriage," says Staver. "They never go the route of same-sex marriage. It's only a few judges that have occasionally struck down the laws."
The Liberty Counsel leader says it is critical that family advocates continue to engage same-sex marriage proponents to make sure that the people's will and the best interests of children and families are represented in these court challenges. "If we don't show up, we can't win," he states.
Over the past two-and-a-half years, Liberty Counsel has defended more than 40 marriage cases across the United States.
