CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

2012 Maryland Question 6

Maryland same-sex marriage referendum

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 23, 2026
Entity authorityQ6781419
Source-derived summary

Question 6 (colloquially called the Maryland same-sex marriage referendum) is a referendum that appeared on the general election ballot for the U.S. state of Maryland to allow voters to approve or reject the Civil Marriage Protection Act—a bill legalizing same-sex marriage passed by the General Assembly in 2012. The referendum was approved by 52.4% of voters on November 6, 2012, and thereafter went into effect on January 1, 2013.

Ballot measure

The ballot measure read as follows:

Question 6Civil Marriage Protection Act

Establishes that Maryland's civil marriage laws allow gay and lesbian couples to obtain a civil marriage license, provided they are not otherwise prohibited from marrying; protects clergy from having to perform any particular marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs; affirms that each religious faith has exclusive control over its own theological doctrine regarding who may marry within that faith; and provides that religious organizations and certain related entities are not required to provide goods, services, or benefits to an individual related to the celebration or promotion of marriage in violation of their religious beliefs.

The choices read as follows:

For the Referred LawAgainst the Referred Law

History

The Civil Marriage Protection Act was passed by the Maryland General Assembly in February 2012 and signed on March 1, 2012, by Governor Martin O'Malley. The Maryland House of Delegates approved the bill by a 72–67 vote, and the Maryland Senate approved the bill by a vote of 25–22. Sections 2, 3 and 4 of the bill were included to ensure that religious leaders, religiously controlled institutions, and their programs are legally protected from being required to officiate or provide facilities for a same-sex marriage or couple if they refuse.

Opponents of same-sex marriage announced the launch of the petition drive for the referendum two weeks later. "The General Assembly and the governor do not have the final word on marriage in Maryland," said Derek McCoy, executive director of Maryland Marriage Alliance. "The people do." Petitioners submitted more than twice the number of required signatures to place the referendum on the election ballot, and in June, the State Board of Elections announced that enough were validated.

Support and opposition

Support for Question 6 consisted of a coalition of civil rights leaders, clergy, businesses, partners, and politicians known as Marylanders for Marriage Equality.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “2012 Maryland Question 6” is maryland same-sex marriage referendum. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Maryland, Question and same-sex, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2012, 2013—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Maryland, Question and same-sex is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “maryland same-sex marriage referendum” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 23, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q6781419. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2012 and 2013.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “2012 Maryland Question 6”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 2012 Maryland Question 6 primary sources, 2012 Maryland Question 6 archive and Maryland research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “2012 Maryland Question 6”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from 2012 Maryland Question 6” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.