Senators Introduce Bill That Would Pu...

Senators Introduce Bill That Would Put DC Marriage Equality On Hold

There are 196 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Feb 3, 2010, titled Senators Introduce Bill That Would Put DC Marriage Equality On Hold. In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

Nine senators have agreed to introduce a bill, similar to one introduced last month in the House by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), which would forbid The District of Columbia from allowing same-sex marriages to be performed in the city until the issue is decided through a voter referendum or initiative.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

First Prev
of 10
Next Last

“STFU”

Since: May 07

Atlanta, GA

#1 Feb 3, 2010
yeah, the House and Senate have so little to do they can waste time on things like this.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#2 Feb 3, 2010
I guess these nine Senators don't believe in the States Rights issues that they have touted in the past. What hypocrits.
Get Real

Grand Rapids, MI

#3 Feb 3, 2010
Sounds logical to me, why should this go forward without a state vote.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#4 Feb 3, 2010
I guess more proof that Religious folks just really hate Gays and Lesbians.

I wonder if Judge Walker is getting this information and could it help overturn Prop 8.

JMHO
Frank Stanton

Saratoga Springs, NY

#5 Feb 3, 2010
RalphB wrote:
I guess these nine Senators don't believe in the States Rights issues that they have touted in the past. What hypocrits.
Hypocritical politicians ?! Oh my ! Who knew ?! Who could've guessed ?!

I'm SHOCKED, SHOCKED, that there's politics going on here !

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#6 Feb 3, 2010
Get Real wrote:
Sounds logical to me, why should this go forward without a state vote.
Must we go through this with you again.

You and those like you SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO VOTE ON ANOTHER PERSON'S RIGHT!!!!!

Just more reason's why the GLBTQI Community NEEDS to be seen as a SUSPECT CLASS

JMHO
Get Real

Grand Rapids, MI

#7 Feb 3, 2010
Rose T-H wrote:
I guess more proof that Religious folks just really hate Gays and Lesbians.
I wonder if Judge Walker is getting this information and could it help overturn Prop 8.
JMHO
Republicans don't hate gays and never have. The disagree with the act of homosexuality is all, and want the people to decide.
George

San Jose, CA

#8 Feb 3, 2010
Get Real wrote:
Sounds logical to me, why should this go forward without a state vote.
We shouldn't put civil rights to popular vote because it hurts our society. Civil rights should only be restricted for some compelling reason. There is no good reason to prohibit same sex adults from marrying.
Short Left Index Finger

Hamilton, Canada

#9 Feb 3, 2010
Just move to Canada.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#10 Feb 3, 2010
Get Real wrote:
Sounds logical to me, why should this go forward without a state vote.
First, the District of Columbia is not a State of the Union.

Second, the District of Columbia enacted a law (with full approval of Congress) that issues of civil rights may not be put to a popular vote, and once recognized may not be repealed or mitigated.
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#11 Feb 3, 2010
Even though I don't support gay mariage, the DC council did pass the legislation and it was signed by the mayor. I think it should stand.

The Senators that say they will introduce a bill to throw out this law under the congressional review process know they don't do not have the votes to succeed. They are just doing this for PR. What a waste of time and money.

Since: Apr 08

Burlington, Canada

#12 Feb 3, 2010
Short Left Index Finger wrote:
Just move to Canada.
Even better: perhaps those who can't abide living in an area where same-sex marriages are legal should move to someplace their views would be welcomed -- like in Taliban-controlled areas.
Get Real

Grand Rapids, MI

#13 Feb 3, 2010
George wrote:
<quoted text>
We shouldn't put civil rights to popular vote because it hurts our society. Civil rights should only be restricted for some compelling reason. There is no good reason to prohibit same sex adults from marrying.
I don't believe being gay is a civil right. It's not a skin color nor a gender, it's a behavior. And the american people had the right to vote on what behavior is acceptable or not in society.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#14 Feb 3, 2010
Get Real wrote:
Sounds logical to me, why should this go forward without a state vote.
Um, perhaps because a vote to deny rights to their fellow citizens has been ruled repeatedly to be a violation of the District's charter. Nothing like doublespeak from the Republican party, support state's rights when they are to the advantage of what they want and screw 'em when they aren't, like here... The vote that the people had on this issue was electing a solid 11 person majority to their Council in favor of same sex marriage in the District. Or are you so anti-American to oppose the representative form of government handed down by our founding fathers?

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#15 Feb 3, 2010
Get Real wrote:
<quoted text>
Republicans don't hate gays and never have. The disagree with the act of homosexuality is all, and want the people to decide.
You go ahead and keep telling yourself that lie.......I know you believe it to be true.
Raven

Irthlingborough, UK

#16 Feb 3, 2010
Get Real wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe being gay is a civil right. It's not a skin color nor a gender, it's a behavior. And the american people had the right to vote on what behavior is acceptable or not in society.
I was abused since I was 10 for being lesbian. I had no idea that what I was feeling was "different" or "wrong" until my christian classmates told me they wanted to kill me for liking my best friend. And you think I chose to be abused like that? You're an idiot.
Raven

Irthlingborough, UK

#17 Feb 3, 2010
Get Real wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe being gay is a civil right. It's not a skin color nor a gender, it's a behavior. And the american people had the right to vote on what behavior is acceptable or not in society.
oh and on the topic of gender. You are saying that because of a person's GENDER they cannot marry someone they love. All because of their physical gender. Superficial moron. You owned yourself before you even started.
Ego te absolvo

Buffalo, TX

#18 Feb 3, 2010
Concerning government, those lacking even rudimentary knowledge of how the nation's capital is governed want to think of D.C. as a State. Yeah, they sure know Constitutional issues!

Not.

Gays can't be trusted on any policy decision. It all becomes about them after they've distorted law, or civil rights. Depraved and proud of it!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#19 Feb 3, 2010
Get Real wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe being gay is a civil right. It's not a skin color nor a gender, it's a behavior. And the american people had the right to vote on what behavior is acceptable or not in society.
It is an intrisic quality of being that finds just one avenue of expression in erotic behavior. Of far greater importance are those behaviors that they share with their hetero brothers and sisters ... a unique and deeply held bond which, apart from sensitivities engendered by religious preferences, holds no substantive harm for others.

Opponents focus their objections upon the erotic behavioral expression of the essentially human and honorable trait of life-bonding to another.
Get Real

Grand Rapids, MI

#20 Feb 3, 2010
Raven wrote:
<quoted text>
I was abused since I was 10 for being lesbian. I had no idea that what I was feeling was "different" or "wrong" until my christian classmates told me they wanted to kill me for liking my best friend. And you think I chose to be abused like that? You're an idiot.
Not sure where that came from, outside of personal issues. I don't believe you chose any form of abuse, who would, but that doesn't make homosexuality right, or to somehow be included in the definition of marriage.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Senator Roger Wicker Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Mississippi holds on to state flag with Confede... 6 hr Birdzilla 48
News Prominent voices call for change to Mississippi... (Aug '15) Jul '17 UAW 8
News Our Opinion: Fate of Arc impacts communities ac... Apr '17 Growing Pains 5
News CVB exhibit honors Lane Chapel Quintet Apr '17 CVB 3
News Travels keep members of Congress out of state Mar '17 Rod Knox 12
News National, local leaders stand by Trump at rally (Oct '16) Oct '16 Together No Way 26
News Lisa Murkowski Cruises to Primary Victory (Aug '16) Aug '16 He Named Me Black... 2
More from around the web