|
Voice Reader Comments Here's what readers had to say about this article: On 7/17/06, Marion Manning of Silver Spring wrote: You mention that the "...seven candidates ... most of the time weren't particularly distinguishable from each other when it came to basic issues. All were liberal pro-environment, pro-choice, pro-social justice, etc..." However, Del. Gareth Murray's voting record, at least on an issue of concern to gay and lesbian citizens does not reflect a "liberal" position. During the debate, Del. Murray was the only candidate who did not support marriage rights for gays and lesbians. Furthermore, Del. Murray does not appear to support civil unions or even a domestic partnership type of arrangement for those of us in loving, life-long relationships with persons of the same gender. In 2004, Del. Murray refused to vote for the Medical Decision Making Act -- which was written to grant domestic partners medical decision-making and hospital visitation rights. The bill passed the House of Delegates by a vote of 103-30 that year, with 23 Republicans supporting it ... but not Del. Murray. In 2005, Del. Murray again tried to derail the Medical Decision Making Act (please see attached links). On the contrary, at least one of the candidates is particularly distinguishable from the others when it comes to an issue of basic rights for many in our community. www.washingtonblade.com/2004/4-2/news/localnews/progay.cfm www.equalitymaryland.org/News_2005/News2005.02.18.htm
On 8/17/06, Matt of Silver Spring wrote: First of all, I take offense to Ms. Manning's claim that Delegate Murray is anything less than a staunch advocate for equal rights. I have met Delegate Murray, and find him one of the hardest working advocates for equal rights in our county. I encourage readers to inspect what Delegate Murray actually said in his interview in the Blade (in the article Ms. Manning posted)--legitimate and thoughtful concerns, especially when considering the "down low brother" culture. Further, Murray's concerns about the religious vote have been constantly misunderstood: he supports full and equal rights for gay couples--- civil unions (legal unions, full-right unions, whatever you want to call them) as he has said publicly, but notes marriage is a religious ceremony, and conveys no rights. Herein, Murray brings up a relevant point--- semantics have really gotten in the way of the core issue of equal rights; enough, unfortunately, to cause backlash across our nation [by far more than stereotypically 'religious' voters] via broad state referendums banning any same-sex unions. It doesn't hurt for Marylander's to push for marriage, but let's make sure we get our footing first. It is clear that Delegate Murray supports equal rights, and as an African American growing up in the turbulent civil rights movement, he ostensibly has extra incentive to propose public policy that will actually achieve these rights. It is true, Murray did not vote for the medical decision making act in committee in 2004, but it was only after he saw the majority of HGO had passed the bill. His vote was an act of protest over how the bill was crafted, not over the concept of the bill. Delegate Murray certainly did not try to "derail" the medical decision-making act in 2005. In fact, he proposed his own version of the bill, the Basic Human Rights Act, partially out of fear that Governor Ehrlich would veto anything establishing a state-run registry for domestic partners. Shelving this worry, Murray melded the fundamental idea of the Basic Human Rights Act-- improving privacy to prevent unauthorized access of information about domestic partners-- into a successful amendment to the Medical Decision Making Act-- which he voted for in 2005, by the way. In fact, Murray gave a speech on the House floor supporting the Medical Decision Making Act! Although happy with the Medical Decision Making Act's passage, Murray's initial worry with the Ehlrich proved all too poignant. It is an often overlooked fact that the Medical Decision Making Act (of 2006) was vetoed by Governor Ehrlich, as Murray predicted, and Equality Maryland was forced to make back channel negotiations with Ehrlich. This produced a far less satisfying bill, likened to advanced directive legislation. I'd have to agree with Ms. Manning's conclusion that Delegate Murray is
distinguishable on the issue of basic human rights for the community. I'd
add, of course, that along with Heather Mizer, he is probably one the best
representatives for equal rights that we could elect. Dan Furmansky,
Executive Director of Equality Maryland, our areas biggest GLBT group,
would agree as well, as Equality Maryland has endorsed Murray for the 2006
election! Despite past disagreements notable in old press, Furmansky has
recognized Murray's true intentions, and I quote Furmansky from the
Washington Blade, in a far more recent article (compared to Ms. Manning's
post): Click here to send your own comment. |