NationStates Jolt Archive

Washington D.C.'s council approved legislation saying that the city will recognize gay marriages performed in other states. This is important not just because it could eventually pave the way for the city to perform its own gay marriages, but because Congress has the ability to veto D.C.'s laws. Should the mayor sign the bill and Congress take no action, it will become law.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20090505/US.Gay.Marriage.Congress/

So it is law in DC. I highly doubt the current congress will veto the bill.

This is important not just because it could eventually pave the way for the city to perform its own gay marriages, but because Congress has the ability to veto D.C.'s laws. Should the mayor sign the bill and Congress take no action, it will become law.
Sorry, apart from the obvious step towards equality, what's particularly important about this?

Sorry, apart from the obvious step towards equality, what's particularly important about this?That it signifies the first step towards Congress overturning the Defense of Marriage Act.
Or at least that's what the article said.

Sorry, apart from the obvious step towards equality, what's particularly important about this?

Presumably, it implies that the current Congress is at least not totally opposed to gay marriage, even if they don't have huge support for it. Which is a good place to be in, that's for certain.

That it signifies the first step towards Congress overturning the Defense of Marriage Act.

Presumably, it implies that the current Congress is at least not totally opposed to gay marriage, even if they don't have huge support for it.
Ah, I sees.

No, what will happen is that the "Sanctity in Marriage" groups will be forced out of the city limits of D.C., making it that much harder for the majority of social conservatives to conduct the business of Congress. This is all a ploy to make the Capitol building anathema to Republicans. It's like the Justice League deciding to openly display Kryptonite all around the Watchtower.

No, what will happen is that the "Sanctity in Marriage" groups will be forced out of the city limits of D.C., making it that much harder for the majority of social conservatives to conduct the business of Congress. This is all a ploy to make the Capitol building anathema to Republicans.

With you, with you, with you...

It's like the Justice League deciding to openly display Kryptonite all around the Watchtower.

Lost.

That it signifies the first step towards Congress overturning the Defense of Marriage Act.
Or at least that's what the article said.

It doesn't signify anything of the sort. Letting DC recognize out-of-state marriages is not a perceptible step to granting federal rights to same-sex unions or stopping other states from not recognizing them.

It doesn't signify anything of the sort. Letting DC recognize out-of-state marriages is not a perceptible step to granting federal rights to same-sex unions or stopping other states from not recognizing them.From what the article said:

"The congressional review could be the new Congress' first opportunity to signal its appetite for re-examining the Defense of Marriage Act, which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages and allows states to do the same."

It stands to reason that Congress could feel that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If gay marriage is good for D.C., Congress may feel it's good for the country as well. On the other hand, Congress could just be too lazy or occupied with other things to do something about it.

Keep in mind that DC is NOT a bellwether for the nation -- in 2008, for eample, Obama got a whopping 92% of the vote there. Therefore, it's only natural that DC would pass laws that are too liberal for many states.

No, what will happen is that the "Sanctity in Marriage" groups will be forced out of the city limits of D.C., making it that much harder for the majority of social conservatives to conduct the business of Congress. This is all a ploy to make the Capitol building anathema to Republicans. It's like the Justice League deciding to openly display Kryptonite all around the Watchtower.
As somebody who has been living in Foggy Bottom for the last 5 years, I'd just like to say...

BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Dude, the population of DC is Democrat. Seriously, it's like 99% Blue up in this joint. The fact that most of the citizens who live here are deeply, profoundly, and emphatically anti-conservative is nothing remotely new, and laws reflecting the values of this city are no surprise at all.

In fact, the Republicans in DC absolutely love this climate. Remember, these are the people who make a living out of convincing white Christian heterosexuals to feel oppressed. They absolutely love and adore being able to whine about how hard it is to be a rich white man in this godless, liberal, disproportionately "ethnic" (gasp) city.

Keep in mind that DC is NOT a bellwether for the nation -- in 2008, for eample, Obama got a whopping 92% of the vote there. Therefore, it's only natural that DC would pass laws that are too liberal for many states.Certainly. It isn't that D.C. is passing these laws, it's that Congress has the opportunity to review them that could have relevance for the nation.

It stands to reason that Congress could feel that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If gay marriage is good for D.C., Congress may feel it's good for the country as well. On the other hand, Congress could just be too lazy or occupied with other things to do something about it.

No Democrat wants a congressional debate about same-sex marriage right now. If there's a political battle at all, some of the Republicans will grandstand, some of the Democrats who must politically will as well, and the majority will argue that it's a matter for DC to decide on its own and leave it alone; they won't say "let's expand equal marriage across the nation", they'll try to avoid making that the issue.

Keep in mind that DC is NOT a bellwether for the nation -- in 2008, for eample, Obama got a whopping 92% of the vote there. Therefore, it's only natural that DC would pass laws that are too liberal for many states.

I remember seeing that Kerry got 93% of the DC vote in 2004, and wondering if Bush was playing really loud music at night or something.

Hmm. Come to think of it, he did get 1% more than Obama did. Maybe that 1% block prefers Republicans in office, but simply couldn't stand Bush as a neighbor.

The Nuclear Families in DC are screwed, :(

There'll be nothing stopping the gays from....from......Well, you all know what it is they do, itll be all downhill from here...


Congrats, lol

No Democrat wants a congressional debate about same-sex marriage right now. If there's a political battle at all, some of the Republicans will grandstand, some of the Democrats who must politically will as well, and the majority will argue that it's a matter for DC to decide on its own and leave it alone; they won't say "let's expand equal marriage across the nation", they'll try to avoid making that the issue.Right now? Certainly, there are other things to consider.
A year or two from now, though, is another issue.

No Democrat wants a congressional debate about same-sex marriage right now. If there's a political battle at all, some of the Republicans will grandstand, some of the Democrats who must politically will as well, and the majority will argue that it's a matter for DC to decide on its own and leave it alone; they won't say "let's expand equal marriage across the nation", they'll try to avoid making that the issue.
Which, frankly, is a shame.

The single biggest failing of the Democratic party over the last 20 years or so has been the complete and utter failure to cultivate a solid base of support. The Democrats are always selling themselves as Republican Lite, and it's increasingly stupid as we see them win more elections when they manage to field candidates who are explicitly ANTI-Republican.

Gay marriage is increasingly popular. It's only going to become more popular. If the Democrats were good politicians (never mind decent human beings) they'd back equal rights for gay citizens openly and loudly, and dare the Republicans to stand against them. And every time the Republicans stand against them, just replay all the footage and photos from Segregation and Jim Crow, and remind the country exactly how history will regard bigots.

I honestly think it's a complete fabrication to claim that the country will rise up against gay rights. I think it's a myth that Democrats should shy away from this subject. It's just like the myth that we all have to pretend to think contraception and sex are bad things for some reason, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the country fucks and uses contraception. Democrats need to stop listening to conservative concern trolls and start just standing up for the positions that are popular, and right now progressive values are extremely popular.

Which, frankly, is a shame.

The single biggest failing of the Democratic party over the last 20 years or so has been the complete and utter failure to cultivate a solid base of support. The Democrats are always selling themselves as Republican Lite, and it's increasingly stupid as we see them win more elections when they manage to field candidates who are explicitly ANTI-Republican.

Gay marriage is increasingly popular. It's only going to become more popular. If the Democrats were good politicians (never mind decent human beings) they'd back equal rights for gay citizens openly and loudly, and dare the Republicans to stand against them. And every time the Republicans stand against them, just replay all the footage and photos from Segregation and Jim Crow, and remind the country exactly how history will regard bigots.

I honestly think it's a complete fabrication to claim that the country will rise up against gay rights. I think it's a myth that Democrats should shy away from this subject. It's just like the myth that we all have to pretend to think contraception and sex are bad things for some reason, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the country fucks and uses contraception. Democrats need to stop listening to conservative concern trolls and start just standing up for the positions that are popular, and right now progressive values are extremely popular.

Soooooo Bottle, when you gonna get your feet planted in the politcal arena huh, damn it woman, I'd vote for ya.

Which, frankly, is a shame.

The single biggest failing of the Democratic party over the last 20 years or so has been the complete and utter failure to cultivate a solid base of support. The Democrats are always selling themselves as Republican Lite, and it's increasingly stupid as we see them win more elections when they manage to field candidates who are explicitly ANTI-Republican.

Gay marriage is increasingly popular. It's only going to become more popular. If the Democrats were good politicians (never mind decent human beings) they'd back equal rights for gay citizens openly and loudly, and dare the Republicans to stand against them. And every time the Republicans stand against them, just replay all the footage and photos from Segregation and Jim Crow, and remind the country exactly how history will regard bigots.

I honestly think it's a complete fabrication to claim that the country will rise up against gay rights. I think it's a myth that Democrats should shy away from this subject. It's just like the myth that we all have to pretend to think contraception and sex are bad things for some reason, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the country fucks and uses contraception. Democrats need to stop listening to conservative concern trolls and start just standing up for the positions that are popular, and right now progressive values are extremely popular.

Seconded.

I remember seeing that Kerry got 93% of the DC vote in 2004, and wondering if Bush was playing really loud music at night or something.

Hmm. Come to think of it, he did get 1% more than Obama did. Maybe that 1% block prefers Republicans in office, but simply couldn't stand Bush as a neighbor.

That's actually typical of large, majority-black cities. Here in Detroit neither Bush nor McCain was ever a threat to break out of single digits (in 2000 Bush barely edged out Nader), and in Philadelphia there were precincts with not a single Republican, which some thought suspicious but I don't.

Gay marriage is increasingly popular.

Good.

It's only going to become more popular.

Even better.

If the Democrats were good politicians (never mind decent human beings) they'd back equal rights for gay citizens openly and loudly, and dare the Republicans to stand against them.

Amen.

It's just like the myth that we all have to pretend to think contraception and sex are bad things for some reason, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the country fucks and uses contraception.

Source? (I'm not disputing it, just asking.)

I think the myth Bottle refers to is coming up to a big fat reality check. Egalitarianism is apparently on the march. The Dems are going to have to look sharp, or they'll be caught trying to catch up to the country -- again.

A year or two from now, though, is another issue.

I wouldn't expect action on DOMA until after the 2010 midterm elections... maybe not even until Obama's second term. The Democrats don't want this issue dominating elections the way it did in 2004.

Gay marriage is increasingly popular. It's only going to become more popular.

The trend is not the issue; the Democrats can and have changed with the trend. The issue is political attitudes now. The Democrats won in 2006 on Iraq and in 2008 on the economy, they know they've successfully portrayed the Republicans as incompetent and destructive, but if they're smart (and in this respect it seems they are) they know also that their victories do not indicate a groundswell of support for social liberalism. They're playing it safe, and they're probably right to do so: a national fight on same-sex marriage that for the time being will probably be lost (even though the eventual victory is unquestionable) is not a worthwhile expenditure of political capital that would go to better effect elsewhere.

Even strongly Democratic states like California still have majority opposition to same-sex marriage. At this point, it's not something winnable. (Note also that the geographic divide here is even more prominent than the political one: lots of New England Republicans will vote for same-sex marriage, lots of Democrats from more conservative states will vote against it. Making it a national issue risks weakening the Democratic national coalition just as social issues have in the past.)

And every time the Republicans stand against them, just replay all the footage and photos from Segregation and Jim Crow, and remind the country exactly how history will regard bigots.

Nobody buys this comparison except the people already inclined to support same-sex marriage, and only some of them: it only makes sense if you believe (rightly, but that's beside the point) that opposing equal marriage rights is just as arbitrarily discriminatory as segregation, but if you believe that you're already a supporter. The comparison does, however, tend to enrage opponents, which is not a smart way to run a political campaign, as the people behind Prop. 8 are learning.

Appeal to people's hearts: show them loving same-sex couples, remind them that these are their colleagues, their neighbors, their friends, their relatives. That kind of argument (like changing people's minds about anything that they have deep, not very rational convictions about) takes time, though; it works best where the gay rights movement is already strong, and that means focusing on the more liberal states first.

I honestly think it's a complete fabrication to claim that the country will rise up against gay rights.

The country, no. Certain segments of it, yes. That is enough in close elections, of which we have had plenty recently.

It's just like the myth that we all have to pretend to think contraception and sex are bad things for some reason, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the country fucks and uses contraception.

Yeah, lots of conservative-minded people use pornography, too, and have gay sex.

But they tend to vote according to their professed moral values, not their behavior.