DCist: Could D.C. See Marriage Equality in '09?

Blackcloud

Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:16:11 -0500

Probably not, it would now appear.

300_sq_ft

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:55:55 -0500

Thank god! If this passes, the first round is on me. Maybe!

stmove

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:52:59 -0500

The two trees at the base do resemble a hairy sack a tiny bit... Hate Politics 101, exactly, 1) Do not try to grant people rights before an election cycle.

Hillman

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:38:25 -0500

Doesn't anyone want to mention the giant phallic symbol in the photo? Monkey? Anyone?

Hillman

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:30:19 -0500

I'm all for gays getting hitched, especially now that I can give the lucky couple matching guns as a wedding present. But it's really, really stupid to make this an issue before November. Did these guys fail Hate Politics 101? And they better make damn sure they really do have their ducks in a row on this before they do anything. Congress may very well void the marriage bill and undo existing gay rights bills.

IMGoph

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:05:47 -0500

hooray for equal rights. my fingers are crossed—hope this is reality in the new year.

monkeyrotica

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:56:32 -0500

Jeezis, is that a cake? I thought it was some kinda f***ed-up church hat.

McGillicuddy

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:42:23 -0500

does this mean that Linda Cropp and Marion Barry will finally be able to tie the knot?

common_tater

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:37:37 -0500

I'm sure some lawmaker from the great heartland has already aligned his/her favorite neocon family PAC with K St in order to outrrun home rule on this one, too. Then again, maybe it will become easier to get a semi-automatic in these parts, so that some trigger-happy vigilante can pick off the hypocritical brethren of the Log Cabin as they line up for licenses.

stmove

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:37:34 -0500

I agree with Cranky, and I think this will be a fun one to watch with Congress. Let the bells of freedom ring from every tower, which will all be filled with bored guests and slightly naughty cake toppers. Speaking of cake toppers, is the one in the photo specifically designed for an interracial foursome? Now that is a new institution DC should get behind.

Nate

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:26:29 -0500

I can understand why the number of Democrats in Congress is a relevant variable, but why should it matter whether or not California passes a referendum overturning that state's supreme court decision? Obviously if the referendum wins it's a major blow to the national campaign around marriage equality, but I don't see why state level decisions focused on a particular state constitution should have a substantive influence on the actions of the DC Council

OldPosterKnownAsCranky

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:25:29 -0500

Wouldn't it be smarter to keep this quiet until after the November elections? How easy will it be for Republicans to demagogue this issue in their podunk counties?

boondoggle

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:25:17 -0500

While I'm normally in favor of same sex marriages the interracial polygamous union as shown in the photo above may just be a bridge too far. At the very least I'd like to know (in the Biblical sense of the term) more about this particular union before I get behind it (so to speak).

monkeyrotica

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:09:06 -0500

Well, it's about freaking time. Now here's a lawsuit worth paying for! It's not enough that gays should be allowed to kill people during wartime. I won't rest until my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters are given the chance to be as miserable and unfulfilled as their straight counterparts.