This week Maryland lawmakers heard testimony on a marriage equality bill that is currently being considered in the legislature. In a somewhat inventive argument against marriage equality, Robert Broadus, head of the newly formed anti-gay marriage group Protect Marriage Maryland, said at a packed, near seven-hour public Senate committee hearing, that the bill was “poison” and that it risked laying the groundwork for people marrying non-humans, among them androids.
From On Top Magazine:
Broadus began his remarks by saying the bill was “poison” and no amount of tweaking would make it acceptable.
He added that marriage was based on the idea that “individuals of the same species can reproduce.”
“This is why … people don’t marry with non-humans,” he said. “But also if you pass this bill you will set the groundwork that one day when artificial intelligence is that advanced, we will be considering whether or not people can marry their androids.”
Points for creativity. This is a variation on the usual “gay marriage will lead to legalized bestiality” meme and we all appreciate a fresh argument, no matter how contrived, desperate or absurd it is.
But in case you’ve jumped to the conclusion that Broadus is in any way anti-gay because of his a-slippery-slope-too-far argument, he has been quick to make it known that he’s not against gays – he even refrains from punching them when they hit on him, he says – it’s just that they’ve now got “so much power” they have to be curtailed.
Again from On Top Magazine:
“I’ve known plenty of gay people. I’ve hung out with gay people. I’ve been hit on by gay people,” Broadus said a YouTube clip uploaded before the hearing. “I don’t turn around and punch them. In school, if I saw the gay kid getting picked on, I stood up for the gay kid and tried to stop it.”
“The problem,” he explained, “is that they have gained so much power at this point in time.”
The rest of the video explains how Broadus believes that Maryland citizens are “clearly a people of faith” who oppose gay marriage and the “changing” of the “definition of marriage.”
Broadus also touches on the fact that there are now seven openly gay elected lawmakers in Maryland. While not necessarily indicating support for marriage equality itself, this would seem to suggest however that Maryland voters believe that those legislators will act properly on behalf of the people. Broadus doesn’t comment on this aspect, however.
Following the hearing, Democratic Senator James Brochin, previously against marriage equality, said that his position had shifted and he would support the bill, adding, “The demonization of gay families really bothers me. Are these families going to continue to be treated by the law as second class citizens?”
Brochin brings the number of votes up to 21. The measure will need 24 votes to pass the Senate. Several Democratic legislators remain undecided but advocates are hopeful that the numbers will be there when it comes time to vote whether persuaded by their arguments or by the offensive and sometimes bizzare arguments of marriage equality opponents.
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.