Former Blade Staffers Launch 'DC Agenda'
D.C. Insurance Dept. Denies Birth Control Coverage Meddling
Controversy Over Rhee Now to Include Sex, Congress
Report: CCDC Split From UDC Is "Critical To Success"
Same-Sex Marriage Foes Have Few Options on Hill
Local LGBT activists and District government insiders told the Washington Blade that same-sex marriages in the District may be approved by the D.C. Council as soon as next April.
The likelihood of this approval hinges on a couple of results this Election Day. First is the defeat of Proposition 8, an initiative that seeks to reverse the legalization of same-sex marriages in California. The state's Supreme Court struck down the ban on same-sex marriage on May 15 on the grounds that it was a violation of same-sex couples' civil rights.
The second is the expansion of the Democratic Party's majority in Congress. Even though the vast majority of the D.C. Council's members are committed to passing a same-sex marriage bill, there's still that pesky Congressional oversight to consider. A bigger Democratic majority would increase the bill's chances of survival. An anonymous D.C. government source told the Blade, "We are reasonably confident that enough fair-minded Democrats will win election to the House and Senate in November to give us the votes we need to block an attempt to overturn a marriage bill."
Sources close to the D.C. Council told the Blade that openly gay council members Jim Graham and David Catania may introduce a same-sex marriage bill in January, with about half of the remaining council members ready to sign on as co-sponsors. Neither Graham nor Catania have publicly said when they plan to introduce the bill, however.
In early May, the D.C. Council passed a significant expansion of the city's domestic partnership laws, creating de facto civil unions. Just before Pride weekend, Mayor Adrian Fenty ordered a review of the city's legal options regarding same-sex couples from D.C. who opted to marry in California.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
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.
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).
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?
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
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.
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.
does this mean that Linda Cropp and Marion Barry will finally be able to tie the knot?
Jeezis, is that a cake? I thought it was some kinda f***ed-up church hat.
hooray for equal rights. my fingers are crossed—hope this is reality in the new year.
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.
Doesn't anyone want to mention the giant phallic symbol in the photo?
Monkey? Anyone?
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.
Thank god!
If this passes, the first round is on me. Maybe!
Probably not, it would now appear.