Marriage in Maryland

Today, the HRC published a story written by Jason Lott who is a HRC Staff member. Jason begins the article by explaining how he met with Maryland state Senator Victor Ramirez (Pictured Left), and then expounds how the Senator is doing a wonderful job. The brunt of the article, however, focuses on how the "Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Act" is up for discussion this coming Tuesday and asks for anyone who is free and able to attend the hearing on dates that Jason provides.

I think that this article does two very important and noteworthy things in particular:

Initially, I love how Senator Ramirez is called out in a positive light. I think that far too often, social movements point out only those who are at fault in a given situation and who have caused considerable problems. However, in this case Senator Ramirez is being given a pat on the back for his excellent service. This will hopefully allow the Senator to see that the work he is doing for the gay community is being recognized and appreciated. With this type of recognition, he can see how much his time is worth to the GLTBQ citizens of Maryland and their supporters. The honoring of the Senator also accomplishes a more forward-looking goal as well. In thinking about trying to gain support in the future, the gay community represented by Jason is linking Ramirez to the good that he is doing. Therefore, his continued support is somewhat expected going forward. Should he become less than supportive at some point, it will not go unnoticed. In this way, Jason does a wonderful job of making sure that the Senator will continue to be admired for his good deeds, and called out should he choose to end his support.

Second, the article does the wonderful service of globalizing the virtual activist movement that is housed within HRC.org into a very finite atmosphere. By calling Maryland supporters to this hearing, Jason is filling them in on a possibility they might otherwise not be privy to. In this way, the only way that readers of the article can NOT attend the meeting, is if they CHOOSE not to attend. This puts the audience in a predicament where those excited to mobilize are able to, and those who might be too lazy to partake, are more likely to fall victim to their guilt. Though it may seem a bit unorthodox to force activists into action, I think that with today's increasingly virtualized activism it might be a necessary first step. There is something addictive and fulfilling about activism, and with that initial push, Jason might be gaining future wholehearted supporters.