In All Fairness...

So I just got off the phone with a rep in Sen. Mooney's office, and in all fairness to them, I wanted to share what they told me.

It was explained to me that the bill as proposed (it's apparently been amended since the AG's office declared it unconstitutional, they say) doesn't directly speak to this case (guess they realized they couldn't make an exception to state law) but rather would seek to generalize state law on the question of church property. I was told that the UM is unique amongst denominations to have a specific code within MD law. This, they said, is simply cleaning that up and in no way affects this case. The legal precedent long-established in favor of the trust clause will still be the deciding factor.

I responded by asking, well, why, then, proposed this now? It seems to do nothing more, then, than make a painful situation for Sunnyside and the UMC into a three-ring circus involving lots of people with no stake in this. Why not wait, then? Why make it a political issue if it is, as seemed to be expressed to me, largely a bookkeeping issue?

So, we'll see. Legal precedent is on our side, and I've just heard from one of my colleagues who spoke with her reps and was told that bills thus proposed so late are rarely passed.

I did learn, though, when this piece was entered into MD code. You know when? the 1950s...right in the midst of the desegregation of the Methodist Church. I'll side with that any day.