Excellent news out of the District of Columbia today. A marriage equality bill was introduced in the City Council today with 10 co-sponsors (out of 13 members). Mayor Fenty has long said that he would sign such a bill. Under Home Rule, Congress has 30 legislative days to pass a joint resolution (that would have to be signed by President Obama) to reverse the City Council decision. The bill sponsors hope to have a vote on it before Christmas. Finally, attempts to force a popular referendum on the issue have failed in the past as DC's Human Rights Act does not allow popular referendums on matters of human rights.
I am personally extremely proud to be a resident of the District of Columbia today.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16826 posts, RR: 57 Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1838 times:
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12337 posts, RR: 12 Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1823 times:
First of all, the Congress will find some way to ignore this bill or all Republicans and enough Democrats will want to stay away from this bill for miles. If somehow it does pass and Pres. Obama signs it, then he will have to end DADT as to the Military, and eventually will lead the Federal government to recognize in all laws same-gender marriages.
Pellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1845 posts, RR: 8 Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1802 times:
Very Cool. I'm sure all the DC gays are loving this.
FLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1759 times:
While I don't swing that way, that's hopefully a sign of more openness and tolerance about that issue. I'd like to see it extend nationwide. I'm sick of seeing ultra-right-wing-bible-thumping-bigots bitching about something which, IMO, is a non-issue to them and non of their business anyways.
RJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1692 times:
Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 3): First of all, the Congress will find some way to ignore this bill or all Republicans and enough Democrats will want to stay away from this bill for miles. If somehow it does pass and Pres. Obama signs it, then he will have to end DADT as to the Military, and eventually will lead the Federal government to recognize in all laws same-gender marriages.
I don't think you followed my original post. Congress and President Obama do not have to sign anything; they would only have to pass a bill and sign it if they are trying to reverse the City Council decision (which is very unlikely to happen).
This has nothing to do with Don't Ask, Don't Tell. As for federal government recogntion, that will not change with this bill. All of the gay marriages performed in Mass., Connecticut, etc are not recognized by the federal government for tax purposes, etc. Hope this clears it up.
Quoting D L X (Reply 5): I wonder what pressure this will have in Virginia.
More likely to have a positive effect on Maryland...
September11 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3623 posts, RR: 23 Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1661 times:
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16826 posts, RR: 57 Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1633 times:
Quoting FLY2HMO (Reply 7): While I don't swing that way,
San747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4936 posts, RR: 13 Reply 12, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1632 times:
Good to see some positive initiative being taken in this matter!
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12337 posts, RR: 12 Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1617 times:
Quoting RJpieces (Reply 9): Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 3):
First of all, the Congress will find some way to ignore this bill or all Republicans and enough Democrats will want to stay away from this bill for miles. If somehow it does pass and Pres. Obama signs it, then he will have to end DADT as to the Military, and eventually will lead the Federal government to recognize in all laws same-gender marriages.
I don't think you followed my original post. Congress and President Obama do not have to sign anything; they would only have to pass a bill and sign it if they are trying to reverse the City Council decision (which is very unlikely to happen).
This has nothing to do with Don't Ask, Don't Tell. As for federal government recogntion, that will not change with this bill. All of the gay marriages performed in Mass., Connecticut, etc are not recognized by the federal government for tax purposes, etc. Hope this clears it up.
Quoting D L X (Reply 5):
I wonder what pressure this will have in Virginia.
More likely to have a positive effect on Maryland...
I stand corrected.
Still, and with that correction, I suspect that some Repubicans will try to push for a reversal bill and extort Pres. Obama to sign it. I also suspect that if the DC law is accepted it would set a significant precident and put pressure on the President to end DADT.
Slider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6518 posts, RR: 37 Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1591 times:
Because DC certainly doesn't have more pressing important issues...
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16826 posts, RR: 57 Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1586 times:
Quoting Slider (Reply 15): Because DC certainly doesn't have more pressing important issues...
Than basic civil rights and equal treatment under the law for all? Nothing is more important than that. NOTHING.
Mham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3001 posts, RR: 3 Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1535 times:
Why is it ok to deny single people the same "human rights" as gays?
San747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4936 posts, RR: 13 Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1530 times:
Quoting Mham001 (Reply 20): Why is it ok to deny single people the same "human rights" as gays?
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1519 times:
Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 13): I suspect that some Repubicans will try to push for a reversal bill and extort Pres. Obama to sign it. I also suspect that if the DC law is accepted it would set a significant precident and put pressure on the President to end DADT
Lots of you are forgetting Obama is against gay marriage aren't you? Besides he has far more pressing things right now and at the end of the day this is a state thing, not a federal thing.
RJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1507 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 24): Besides he has far more pressing things right now and at the end of the day this is a state thing, not a federal thing.
Well yes it is clearly a state thing, but the federal government does not recognize gay marriages that are legally performed in states that allow it, so there is also a federal component to the issue.
Charles79 From Puerto Rico, joined Mar 2007, 1307 posts, RR: 5 Reply 21, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1524 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 24): Lots of you are forgetting Obama is against gay marriage aren't you?
No we are not, he's been very clear on this issue in the past and is one of the reasons why we are holding a march in DC this coming weekend.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 24): at the end of the day this is a state thing, not a federal thing.
DC is not a state, falls directly under Congress' jurisdiction per the Constitution, that's why Congress (and ultimately the President) could get involved in the district's decisions.
Having said that, gay marriage is also a federal "thing" as without federal recognition we won't be afforded certain benefits at the federal level (like federal tax benefits or serving in the military, etc).
Quoting Mham001 (Reply 20): Why is it ok to deny single people the same "human rights" as gays?
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16826 posts, RR: 57 Reply 22, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1523 times:
Quoting Mham001 (Reply 20): Why is it ok to deny single people the same "human rights" as gays?
Can I have some of what you're smoking? Any single person has access to marriage benefits. All you have to do is get married!
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1516 times:
Quoting Charles79 (Reply 26): DC is not a state, falls directly under Congress' jurisdiction per the Constitution, that's why Congress (and ultimately the President) could get involved in the district's decisions.
I know this but even Obama isn't stupid enough to get involved in this as far as DC goes. It will pass and won't be opposed as for the other 50 states leave it up to them.
Quoting Charles79 (Reply 26): Having said that, gay marriage is also a federal "thing" as without federal recognition we won't be afforded certain benefits at the federal level (like federal tax benefits or serving in the military, etc).
Taxes? I thought the object of gay marriage was you wanted to be able to marry your partner? Again marriage is handled by state laws and should be left as such. Not sure why you want to drag Obama into this, it's going to hurt him and he doesn't need any more of that lately. He is getting slaughtered.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16826 posts, RR: 57 Reply 24, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1513 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 28): Not sure why you want to drag Obama into this,
Because I got fed up at Clinton over this. He talked the talk, but when it came time to do things for gay rights, we got swept under the rug. So yeah, I do want to call Obama on his word. We voted him in. Is he interested in keeping our vote?
25 NIKV69: Why can't you understand that it is not an issue for the WH? It's up to each individual state on how the laws governing marriage will go. You knew Ob
26 OA412: Who in this country other than gays is denied the right to marry?
27 N867DA: Since marriage is essentially a legal construct these days (two people can live together intimately their entire lives and never marry) it makes sens
28 DocLightning: No, because the Equal Protection clause is found in the Federal Constitution. Yes, he did. And in the next sentence basically that he wanted to legal
29 RJpieces: Ehhh, I wouldn't put that much faith in Obama. Don't treat him like some kind of liberal messiah--take him at his word on some things. Gays always ha
30 Mt99: While much of the gay population would love believe everything Obama says, everyone alson know that he does have his political hands tied to do certa
31 NIKV69: True but most of the laws governing it are state and not federal. Understood but again it will boil down to the state voting on it not him or the con
32 Mt99: Procedurally yes.. But you are saying that the POTUS does not inherently does not carry a sense "direction" when he/she would speak. The POTUS words
33 RJpieces: You are ignoring what everyone has said in reply to this. There is a federal component to gay marriage that needs to eventually be addressed. Obama c
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Future is bright!
From Puerto Rico, joined Mar 2007, 1307 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
