Take Action: Sign the Delaware Marriage Equality Petition
It is the last day of Gay Pride Month, and we should remind ourselves that our LGBT family, friends and neighbors still have a little ways to go to be able to enjoy all of the rights the rest of us do. If you haven’t signed the Delaware Marriage Equality Petition, please click on the link below and add your name to the 7700+ Delawareans who want to see gay marriage legal in this state.
Sign the Delaware Marriage Equality Petition here.
Once you’ve signed, pass this on to your friends, family neighbors and Facebook pals to ask them to sign this as well. It is important to make sure that the right to marry who you want is the rule of law in Delaware.
It is now time to remove religious bias from government.
signed it a while back. I do wish that Delaware Right to Marry and Equality Delaware and others would update their sites more frequently.
I also think every candidate running this year, no matter what party, should be asked for a definitive statement on where he or she stands on this issue.
Asking every candidate for their position on this issue is a good idea, Steve.
We can win on this one and give the Tea Party fits all over again.
I support marriage equality, period.
There’s one on record! Thanks Mr. Groff. Would you vote to repeal DOMA, then?
Steve, Thank you for the support. We need more people to sign the petition. Bill Humphrey and I joined forces early this year because we were duplicating our efforts. It is only recently that Bill will be working on this full time. Bill from Delaware Right to Marry will be doing the communicating and doing lobbying with the legislatures. I will continue to collect petition signatures to repeal the Marriage Ban. I have stopped updating Facebook “Delaware Marriage Equality ” as I no longer have access to those Facebook pages. Delaware Right to Marry is doing the communication. You can write to Bill with your concerns at director@delawarerighttomarry.com – The legislatures are currently out of session so there isn’t a whole lot of information to relay at this time. Please be patient for the time period and refer individuals to the online petition – the more signatures – the louder the voice!.
Thank you Delaware Liberal for giving us a voice!
Have any legislators committed to introducing legislation for marriage equality this upcoming session?
I signed it. Not happy that it wouldn’t let me hit submit until I agreed to getting emails about..? whatever, but I signed it anyway. I signed it because I will never ever ever understand why anyone would ever give a flying fig about who anyone else is marrying!Don’t we all have bigger fish to fry?
Don’t worry; they never send you emails.
I would work to repeal DOMA.
@Pencadermom: That was a technical error in the form. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. I have just fixed it.
@Steve Newton: I will be sending more in the near future, but as Charles noted above, I only just started working full time at the beginning of June. I spent the past month updating the PAC’s databases and systems. And also I know campaign emails can be pretty annoying/spammy, so I was trying not to send many until it was necessary.
Ir is just Another in a long lone of very bad progressive ideas, but I commend them for dedicated hard work. I saw a volunteer in heat collecting signatures yesterday afternoon of course I turned him down, but liked the dedication.
I believe that marriage is under the purview of organized religion. The government should not be in the marriage business. Government has a legitimate role in the regulation of contracts and consequently I support civil union equality because it is a contract. HOWEVER, I support true civil union equality, which should not be limited to same sex relationships. ANY two people should be able to establish a civil union, including those who are related or unrelated.
Marriage is a contract, too, Dave. Ask Family Court if you don’t believe me.
“I believe that marriage is under the purview of organized religion. The government should not be in the marriage business. ”
Then government would have to choose which religion’s marriages to recognize and which to deny. Which puts government in the religion business instead.
The civil part of marriage is definitely the business of government. I’d rather government be in the marriage business than the religion business.
“I believe that marriage is under the purview of organized religion. The government should not be in the marriage business. ”
I guess that Dave therefore agrees that DOMA should be overturned as swiftly as practical.
The candidate surveys from both PDD and Stonewall Democrats included questions on these issues.
@Geezer,
Yes, you are correct. Marriage has both symbolic and contractual aspects. What I was suggesting/proposing is that religions are free to “sanctify” relationships as they see fit. The government should limit itself to the contractual aspects. As regards government recognition of marriage, I do not believe they should be doing that. There should be a separation between church and state. Couples getting married in a church/religion would still have to have a civil union/contract through the state to obtain a civil union contractual relationship.
In sum, want to have a nice ceremony, with presents and stuff? Have at it, but the state should not routinely recognize such arrangement unless the parties go through the process to create a civil union contract.
And yes I would repeal DOMA but not for discriminatory reasons. Rather because it is none of the government’s business who is married. It is only their business who has a contractual relationship. I would replace DOMA with a law that permits any two people of legal age able to enter into a legal contract.
I understand all that, Dave. But we’re not living in a world in which you, or any of us, gets to wave a magic wand to create such a world. In the one we inhabit, the government calls the contract you speak of a “marriage license,” and good luck getting your priest, pastor or rabbi letting you engage in the religious observance before you have one.
In short, we’re not talking about the perfect world here. We’re talking about this one, in which we have two choices: Allow gays to “marry” in the legal sense, or ban them from doing so. Your position is not among the options.
Well why can’t it be among the options? Why do we have to have a limitation of only dealing with what’s on the table. Why can’t we put something else on the table? Why can’t we just say that equality means two people of any persuasion can have a contractual union. Why do we have to limit it to any class of people? Marriage was originally a covenant that joined families and created dynasties. It wasn’t romantic. There was no love involved. It was just business. There are classes of legal age people of opposite sex who cannot legally marry, who are excluded from civil unions just because they are opposite sex. Why can’t we pursue true equality?