Monday the D.C. Council will begin the final debate on whether to legalize same sex marriage in the District of Columbia. According to the Washington Post:
After months of strategizing, the debate over whether the District should legalize same-sex marriage is entering its final stages as a council committee takes up the issue Monday. Hundreds have signed up to testify, setting the stage for one of the largest council hearings ever, officials said. Another hearing Monday is scheduled before the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics, which must decide whether to allow a ballot initiative on whether marriage in the District should be restricted to unions involving one man and one woman.
To get an initiative on the ballot, its supporters must convince the elections board that their proposal would not discriminate against gay men and lesbians. Most legal observers expect the board will deny the request. This summer, the board rejected a referendum proposal to block the city from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states.
Protestors and supporters of same sex marriage have signed up to speak. The Council is expected to approve same sex marriage before Christmas.
Because of the location and uniqueness of Washington, D.C., whatever happens will very much affect Virginia, Maryland, and other near-by states. Much of what the Council will consider involves protection of churches and clergymen who oppose same-sex marriage.
Some of the testimony will center on whether the bill, which is sponsored by council member David A. Catania (I-At Large), goes far enough in exempting religious groups and affiliated organizations from having to participate in same-sex weddings.
Under the draft before the committee, churches and religious officials would not have to marry same-sex couples. Religious organizations could also deny reception space and other services to same-sex couples “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available for purchase, rental, or use to members of the general public.”
Other than symbolism, how does same-sex marriage change anything? Since D.C. is not a state, can the federal government impose any sort of sanctions on what they might be getting ready to do? Would only those same-sex couples who reside in D.C. be able to actually benefit from marriage?
Should the legislation pass making same-sex marriage legal in D.C., should same-sex couples be entitled to everything traditional married couples are entitled to? If someone doesn’t approve of inter-racial marriage, are they allowed to opt out? Can’t ministers refuse to marry people without giving a reason?
How would this legislation affect same sex couples who live in Virginia? While Virginia does not recognize same sex marriage, could the couple be arrested? Would they be able to file a joint federal tax return and not a joint state return? Just how would all of this work?
The Virginia Marriage Amendment
(And then those after thought questions: will I be sorry I posted these question?)
Why does the government have anything to do with marriage in the first place?
‘same-sex marriage’ is a oxymoron!
Not everyone sees it like that, SA.
Virginia’s amendment even zaps heterosexual couples. There are groups working on that one as we speak.
It should be legal everywhere.
That said, I believe ALL “marriages” are civil unions because we have separation of church and state. The word marriage has religious connotations.If you want a marriage, go to a church that will marry you. If you want a union, go to the state. If you want a marriage and a union, go to both church and state.
@Posting As Pinko
I second that.
I don’t accept that marriage has any implicit connection to religion. I’m happily married and we had a ceremony that was explicitly non-religious.
Marriage is a social convention defined mostly by the people who undertake it. Because it does, in this bizarre society we live in, confer rights (ease in adopting children, visitation rights, commutation of benefits such as Social Security), we can and should allow those who God made gay full access to these rights.
Keep the CHURCH weddings segregated if you want to. But not the institution of marriage.
Who cares… I say let them get ‘married’ if they want to. I think it will be interesting to see what happens if they get divorced. If it’s two guys, which one gets the house, which one pays alimony and how much do they pay, same thing with two women.
Who knows, maybe it will shine a light on the way men are some times treated when it comes to divorce. They are almost never granted custody (no matter if the father is the better parent) and more times than not have to pay a monthly sum of money that leaves them virtually broke.
I can understand taking care of your kids but when you have a good job it shouldn’t be so much to the point where you either end up in a POS apartment or in the basement of your parents house.
@Rick Bentley
Then Rick, you would get just a civil union. A civil union is a legal pact. It has nothing to do with “marriage” per se. A legal pact doesn’t affect anyone other than those legally involved.
@hello
Since there’s no criteria for being a parent other than “feed your children, cloth them, shelter them, send them to school and don’t beat them,” it’s hypocritical to say gay couples can’t parent.
I’m not sure what you are suggesting, PAP, but if you are suggesting that someone can be content with a civil union … I got a marriage. I see no reason to dumb it down to a “civil union” when the historical term is “marriage”.
The person who married us was liscenced. It was not held in a church and there was no reference to any fictitious “God”.
A marriage is not religious. If you want to MAKE it religious, you can.
Just as you can with a birthday party.
@Rick Bentley
You can celebrate as much love as you want with your marriage, Rick. Again, it’s a legal thing and your legal right. Remember that marriage was a practical arrangement at the start and still in with some people. It was about procreating and later, money and land and status. In some cultures, that’s still the way it is. I don’t see that as “dumbing down” or disrespecting your marriage in the least. It’s just that really, the law and government doesn’t give a damn about your feelings. They only care about the contract.
Are you arguing that more people should just do civil unions?
If so, I would argue … why?
I mean everything, in the eyes of the state, is a civil union. The moral issue is based on religious mores, not contractual ones. I think people should absolutely celebrate their religions and their love in any way they see fit. But everyone should have the right to enter a contractual agreement.
The state should grant civil unions. It is up to the people involved to make a marriage. And they may call it what they want. The state should be sanctioning civil unions as a contractual arrangement. People, churches or whatever the belief system is can do marriages.
Hello, men are actually treated far better now than they were many years ago in divorces. My husband only got custody of his kids because his ex agreed to it. She had told him he had a week to come pick them up or she was putting them in an orpanage. I am serious.
They were ages 3,5. He never got one red cent in child support. When he brought it up to a lawyer he was almost laughed out of the room. Did I leave out the part where she demanded them on holidays? She only lived 25 miles away and saw them once a month, if it suited her.
Rosie O’Donnell and her spouse are splitting up. There are children involved. I suppose it will work like any other split up.
Pinko…. “it’s hypocritical to say gay couples can’t parent.”. Please point out where I stated that gay couples can’t parent… I said nothing of the sort, please re-read what I said before putting words in my mouth.
“She had told him he had a week to come pick them up or she was putting them in an orpanage.” MH! HOW HORRIBLE! That’s exactly what I mean about not needing a license to have kids. Anyone can do it and be complete jerks. It’s not about gender. It’s about being a jerk!
@hello
Er…I wasn’t referring to anything you said, hello.
Oh I see what you mean now, hello. No, I was just addressing the custody thing there. Sorry for the miscommunication.
Let them get married, or have a civil union.
I know a few couples who have been together for a long time, and when it comes time to make medical or financial decisions, the spouse is basically ignored, in place of a family member.
And once it is legal, then remove the employer benefits for life partners! If you want those benefits, get married.
How will same-sex marriage impact the couples who live in Virginia?
Once again I am going to say the the patch work of state laws will only cause problems.
I cannot possibly see how same-sex marriage hurts me, one way or the other. I don’t see how it hurts anyone else.
How did that marriage amendment get passed 2 years ago in Virginia? I think those who opposed organized much better than those in favor. Those who really were in the murky middle might not have understood the issues. I just don’t think many people who feel like I do even voted.
Too much agreement here. This is not like us.
“The state should grant civil unions. It is up to the people involved to make a marriage. And they may call it what they want. The state should be sanctioning civil unions as a contractual arrangement. People, churches or whatever the belief system is can do marriages.”
That makes sense. So of course it runs contrary to prevailing political winds (“Defense of Marriage”).
“Too much agreement here. This is not like us.”
let me try to start an arguement . umm … I believe that gay marriage in Spanish should NOT be sanctioned. If you come here and want to get married you must learn English and expect no special treatment.
Also, if someone applies for a gay marriage liscense and it is determined that they are here illegally, I believe they should be turned over to ICE.
I knew you could do it, Rick.
Now there’s an illusive statistic.
There is some story being leaked on ICE ….I haven’t figured out the details.
Meanwhile, only SA disagrees (I think) with same sex marriage. How did the that amendment get passed? No one I am friends with voted for it. Maybe they just didn’t want to admit it.
I don’t care who marries whom. (or enters into a civil union)
I don’t even care about polygamy as long as it isn’t with children under 18. I don’t like those poor young women being forced to marry old goats, just to become brood mares.
Equality Prince William (www.equalityprincewilliam.org) is an active organization that addresses equal rights issues for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender individuals (GLBT) from a local perspective.
Here’s their take on same-sex marriage:
We support issuing Virginia Marriage Licenses to same-sex couples and see this as a way to add to the stability and vitality of the institution of marriage in the Commonwealth of Virginia and this nation.
Marriage is a civil contract at which churches are often, but not always, asked to preside and provide blessing. As current law stands, no church is required to preside over and bless the marriage of all who ask. In keeping with Constitutional separation of Church and State, extending equal civil marriage rights to same-sex couples will in no way require that any church be required to marry same-sex couples.
In lieu of civil marriage rights in the Commonwealth being extended to same-sex couples, we feel that civil unions, domestic partnerships, or other state-recognized arrangements would provide some of the benefits of marriage. We likewise support these arrangements.
Dear Slow,
I really wish you would change your avatar!
Slowpoke is also in agreement with the majority on the blog, but since he is being stubborn about his gang symbol avatar, no one can see his comment 🙁
“I don’t even care about polygamy as long as it isn’t with children under 18. ”
I’m comfortable with keeping polygamy illegal. I see no good to it.
Let’s try this.
I don’t see any good to it but apparently some of them do.
Actually, I don’t think polygamy is illegal. I got a quick correction on that one from some of my Mormon friends. Most polygamy is based on the first wife being the legal ‘state’ wife. All other wives are eclesiastical wives. The state has no jurisdiction since the marriages are not licensed.
Bigamy is illegal because that involves 2 licenses at the same time.
I just don’t care as long as children aren’t victimized. I guess I said that to be fair. I can’t see why anyone would want to share husbands, other than sequentially, and I cannot imagine having 2 or more wives.
Get the chain saw out and start sawing those wrists.
@CindyB
Yeah, that’s pretty much my feeling….except I think they should call all state-licensed unions “civil unions” and use the marriage term only for religious purposes.
Off topic but just saw a very interesting stat about Obama. Some how he has managed to do what took Bush almost 3 YEARS to do. Play 24 round of golf: http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0910/obama_ties_bush_on_golf.html
Way to go Obama! At this rate you will have played about 150 rounds of golf in your first term!
good thing we don’t have any wars or economic crisis going on… oh, wait.
Test. I changed the picture…I thought!
And another try!
I deleted the picture of me in my younger days, and this still pops up.
You might have to erase me and let me in again? Seems like this image may be cached.
I don’t care who marries whom–it doesn’t threaten my marriage in any way, and I see plenty of heterosexual couples who are crappy spouses and parents..
I heard a joke one time that gays should be allowed to be just as miserable as everyone else who gets married. Why should only the heteros suffer? 😉
Off topic, but one of my children was diagnosed with H1N1 today. Please, people, remember to WASH YOUR HANDS and STAY HOME IF YOU ARE SICK. This is a public service announcement.
Hello, put a sock in it. No one cares but you.
Thanks Emma, I hope your child recovers quickly. Have you had the vaccine since you are in health care?
The staying home seems critical. I know so many people who think it is macho to go to work sick. Thanks a lot, sickos!
Maybe it’s just me, but if I ever saw two men in public in a lip lock I think I’d puke. No, I know I’d puke. Sorry, but PC hypocrisy isn’t my way. At least I stick to my views no matter how unhip. So sex between two men is celebrated by society, yet we still have R ratings on movies………….and for what reason? Are we in fear that children will be exposed to what sex was always meant to be, between a man and a woman, or are we now going to change the biology books as well?
Well SA, I guess you won’t be getting any invitations to the annual and much-believed drag queen race in high heels that happens before each Halloween on 17th St. in DC. See Post’s “Going Out Guru” section today. It’s interesting you only focus on men SA. Gay women are as much if not more a part of the campaign for marriage. They don’t bother you?
Not sure what you mean by “what sex was always meant to be.” If you mean for procreation, then I guess we shouldn’t allow postmenopausal women to marry either, or infertile men or women. Most gay men and women can procreate unlike the above. If you mean that only heterosexual sex is part of nature, I don’t think you would find much scientific support for that.
I think the joke Emma tells above is the way to go.
Another Try
much beloved…not much believed. Ack.
Chingao!!
I honestly can’t believe that ‘normal’ people truly support what goes on in the gay community. I can understand not discriminating, because they are different, but to act as though it is absolutely normal? Come on, you’ve got to be kidding! So how many of you, if there are any, straight people regularly take your kids to gay functions? Luckily they are a very small minority that has suddenly become very center stage. Why, I don’t know.
And so Leila, do you deny biology? Thank God it was Adam and Eve, because if it was Adam and Frank we wouldn’t be having this conversation!
SA, not everyone in the gay community ‘misbehaves’ or acts out. Many, many people are perfectly sedate individuals with excellent decorum. Others, especially young people, act out. Think back to frat parties. Its the same kind of acting out.
I wouldn’t take my children to either when they were minors.
I think most of us have been taught that sexual behaviors should be performed in private. Some people never learn that, straight or gay. I don’t think we need to broadbrush all gays with the extreme behaviors seen at gay pride day or other gay celebrations any more than we should broadbrush heterosexuals with behaviors seen at Mardi Gras, some frat parties or other Bacchanalian type festivities.
SA, please show me where I “deny biology.” Sexuality in humans is not just for procreation, see above examples of older couples and infertile couples. If you think it is, then you are the one denying biology. You are also denying the prevalence of homosexuality in nature, both in and beyond the human species. I guess I wonder what you, SA, would say to a gay teenager, male or female. Would you insist that they ignore their orientation? Would you insist they be celibate for the rest of their lives? What exactly?
I don’t know what gay function you are referring to. If it is the drag queen race, it is at night and I doubt many kids are there. But there are probably some. It’s a Halloween thing. No big deal. Men in dresses once a year running in heels. How terrible. Luckily DC is a long way from you so you don’t need to worry.