Dozens of activists from both sides of the gay marriage debate packed a state Senate committee hearing Tuesday to make arguments about civil liberties, equal rights and protections for children.
The Judicial Proceedings Committee hearing marked this year's first public debate on legislation to legalize same-sex unions, a measure introduced by Gov. Martin O'Malley last week.
O'Malley, a Democrat, argued that the bill will grant necessary legal and financial protections for children of gay couples, giving them parity with children of heterosexual, married couples.
"We all want the same thing for our children — the opportunity to live in loving, caring, committed stable homes protected equally under the law," O'Malley told the panel. "It's not right and it is not just that the children of gay couples should have lesser protection than the children of (straight couples)."
Having reached the Senate floor with support from seven of the committee's 11 members last year, the bill is expected to meet relatively little resistance until it gets to the House of Delegates. Legislation died there last year when several House lawmakers rescinded their initial support, citing concerns about religious and family values.
Committee chairman Sen. Brian Frosh, D-Montgomery, said he expects to have a vote on the bill within two weeks.
Should both chambers approve the bill, opponents say they will petition the measure to referendum in the 2012 general election.
A recent poll conducted by The Washington Post found that half of Maryland residents now support legalizing same-sex marriage.
The poll released Monday found that 50 percent of residents favor same-sex marriage and 44 percent are opposed. The newspaper reports that's the highest recorded level of support in Maryland in a Post poll.
Opponents, who largely cited religious teachings during their testimony, said the governor's bill does not do enough to protect religious freedoms. They also said that while O'Malley's measure adds protections for religious organizations that do not recognize same-sex unions, business owners and wedding vendors would not be afforded similar shields under the bill.
Eric Baxter, a lawyer for The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, an interfaith law firm that defends religious traditions, said he fears photographers, cake bakers and other vendors could face lawsuits for refusing to provide services to gay couples.
"(They) may have very deep convictions of what marriage is, but this law does nothing to protect those individuals," Baxter said.
Restaurants and hotels are required to serve anyone requesting their services under public accommodations laws, but other wedding service providers, such as photographers, are not bound by the same law, according to Sen. Jamie Raskin, D-Montgomery.
Mary Ellen Russell, executive director for the Maryland Catholic Conference, which has repeatedly opposed the bill, said her group remains steadfastly opposed to what she called a redefinition of marriage.
"Every person's faith has to do with trying to uncover the truth about who we are as human beings," Russell said. "None of us come to public policy decision-making without some sort of moral judgment."
