Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 4:04 PM ET, 02/ 9/2011

Brochin reconsiders same-sex marriage opposition

By John Wagner

Brochin.jpgSupporters of Maryland's same-sex marriage bill appear close to picking up a vote from an unexpected source: Sen. James Brochin (D-Baltimore County).

Brochin had previously expressed support for civil unions but balked at granting full marriage rights to gay couples.

The day after a seven-hour hearing on the legislation, however, Brochin issued a news release Wednesday announcing he is reconsidering his position and would hold a press conference Thursday morning "to discuss his stance."

Brochin said in the news release that he was moved by testimony at the hearing, particularly that of the bill's opponents, which he called "appalling."

"Witness after witness demonized homosexuals, vilified the gay community and described gays and lesbians as pedophiles," Brochin said.

His news release seems to suggest Brochin will announce his support Thursday for the same-sex marriage bill. In it, Brochin quotes himself saying: "For me, the transition to supporting marriage has not been an easy one, but the uncertainty, fear and second-class status that gays and lesbians have to put up with is far worse and clearly must come to an end."

In a brief interview Wednesday afternoon, Brochin said he was not ready to announce his position. "I need another night to sleep on it," he said.

Picking up Brochin's support could prove crucial to efforts to pass the same-sex marriage bill in the Senate.

Twenty four votes are needed to pass the bill. A survey last week by The Post found 20 senators publicly committed to voting for the bill and another six either undecided or undeclared. Advocates for the legislation say they are close to nailing down a few other votes.

By John Wagner  | February 9, 2011; 4:04 PM ET
Categories:  General Assembly, John Wagner, Same-Sex Marriage  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: 2010 Census: Montgomery, Prince George's populations soar, Baltimore shrinks
Next: Brochin confirms plan to vote for Md. same-sex marriage bill

Comments

It's time.
Cheers, Joe Mustich, Officiant,
Red Studio Farm, Washington Green, CT USA.

Posted by: cornetmustich | February 9, 2011 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Even If you have an S TD, you are not alone.Find others with same STD at site named STDRomance//. you may be upset and think your life is over. However, once you settle down and learn the facts, you'll realize that having STD is not the end of the world, and it's not the end of your social life.

Posted by: herpesfinder | February 9, 2011 9:13 PM | Report abuse

It is appalling that we are still debating this issue. Gay people should have the right to marry the consenting adult of their choice, the same way that straight people have that right. This is an Equal Rights issue and not a special rights issue.

Posted by: jrwash | February 9, 2011 10:15 PM | Report abuse

I was there - Besides the usual trash, there was Maggie Gallagher lecturing people on moral values etc. She of course is the mother of 2 illegitimate children.

I saw Peter Spriggs talking with Rev Bowers, a so. baptist minister. also present was Peter spriggs from the hate group Family Research council, one of the groups responsible for the genocide of gays bill in the Ugandan parliment. BTW Spriggs looks like he aged 10 years since 2010, it would be real interesting to know what his problems are.

And the utter freakout was a minister with a T shirt that said "gays, 3rd sex, lesbians. Then some bible passage and the last line : Worse then animals.

He would go up to some kids there for some other reason and open his jacket to put his filthy T shirt in the kids face.

So here we have someone calling gays worse then animals. Yet not so long ago he and his people were slaves, treated like animals, and their women often pregnatized and the slave master then sold off his mullato children.

And they were also lynched and often castrated, I've seen the crude B&W pictures on the web.

This is America? I used to think the Westbob baptist church were the worst. I guess I was wrong.

And its all in the name of God. Oh yes, that nut case minister also ranted about "12 or 13 people he knew were going to hell.repeat repeat repeat.

Pardon me while I puke.

And thanks to Sen Brochin if he is going to support the marriage bill.

Why is the USA so far behind almost every country in western Europe, 7 with Marriage, about 10 wwith civil unions. Add 6 in one catholic Latin America (3+3), Canada, 3 countries in E Europe, Israel, RSAf, Nepal NZ AU, 3 of the 4 citystates in Europe (not ctng vatican) etc.

And of course the ultraconservative churches new BS is not "protect marraige, But Marriage is Under attack."

That is just exactly btw what hitler said in Sept of 1939, when he claimed that germany was attacked by Poland. His excuse for starting WWII.

Posted by: SJames6621 | February 10, 2011 12:41 AM | Report abuse

SJames6621, how dare you equate being a slave with being gay. People don't choose color and it's not something you can hide when it's convenient. Your logic is just as twisted as the abhorrent homosexual life style. You are either a man or a woman there is know third sex. The Maryland legislator can pass any law they like but the bottom line is it will be a shame and regardless of what you may call it will only be a marriage in the strange minds of homosexuals

Posted by: cheverly1 | February 10, 2011 7:53 AM | Report abuse

cheverly1

he didn't compare slaves to gays, he compared the treatment that slaves got with some of the treatment that gays are getting, from people like you!

Posted by: dougreimel | February 11, 2011 6:52 PM | Report abuse

I think we are missing one essential point in this debate. The institution of marriage is not a creature of government. Marriage (M/F) was adopted by government because it was the only form of "couple" that existed in the not too distant past.

Now that we accept that other froms of relationship exist (MM & FF) it is fine for the government to expand to incorporate these and perhaps any others one might imagine. After all, what is magic about the number 2? That is the civil rights issue and it should be settled appropriatly under the term Civil Union. Candidly, marriage can be a subset of Civil Union as its social tradition is of the M/F variety.

None of this implies that the government has the right or title to the term marriage should be allowed convey that term and its traditions to relationships other than those of the traditional M/F variety.

This issue is a tipping point for me. I have no other issues with the gay community now or in the past. I fundamentally believe the gay community in pursuing marriage not civil union is turning to the government to obtain what the many churches of the world will not give them. The governemnt should not attempt to rectify this by fiat.

Posted by: swan_502 | February 12, 2011 8:48 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company