US Congress to vote on gay marriage

[Bovril]

Due to a legal peculiarity, congress could be forced to debate the issue of gay marriage. The Washington DC city council has voted to recognise same sex marriages conducted in other states. However, Washington DC is not its self a state, and this legislation must go through congress to become law, though congress can decide not to take action on it. Consequently we may be left with a rather interesting vote by a national legislature on a local issue, but one that is national in importance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8034601.stm

http://"http://www.foxnews.com/polit...es-performed/"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30582120/

I'm looking forward to seeing congressmen being forced into taking a stand on an issue I'm sure many of them would rather stay well away from.

[Barry Goldwater]

Interesting.

Personally, I don't really care for gay marriage either way, but I would rather see the individual states decide (especially social) issues for themselves.

[Kiljan Arslan]

if Washington wants to do it they can.

[Kogen]

What is so hard about giving them an alternative legal form of marriage instead of concerning the Church?

[Kiljan Arslan]

kogen this makes marriage legally recognized by the district, this in no way actually forces the churches to recognize them.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

Oh God, I hope not. The last thing we need is the Feds overturning State constitutions' provisions (like mine) that marriage is only between 1 man and 1 woman. Tenth Amendment time, anyone?

[Kiljan Arslan]

Oh God, I hope not. The last thing we need is the Feds overturning State constitutions' provisions (like mine) that marriage is only between 1 man and 1 woman. Tenth Amendment time, anyone?

notice how this is approving DCs provision to allow gay marriage in their own local?

[PointOfViewGun]

I don't really see why two people need to get permission to marry. Is there a law that gives permission to opposite sex couples to marry?

[lordoftheT]

I don't really see why two people need to get permission to marry. Is there a law that gives permission to opposite sex couples to marry?

I think its in order to get tax benefits.

[Admiral Piett]

Personally I don't even think states should tell anyone who can and can't get married.

[Sidmen]

Oh God, I hope not. The last thing we need is the Feds overturning State constitutions' provisions (like mine) that marriage is only between 1 man and 1 woman. Tenth Amendment time, anyone?

The district of Colombia has voted to accept it, now Congress needs to approve it. Nothing more nothing less. It won't affect any other state, just allow the city's decision to stand.

I don't really see why two people need to get permission to marry. Is there a law that gives permission to opposite sex couples to marry?

Technically, in my state at least, you 'ARE' married if you say you are and live together for a certain number of months. Common law is great.

But some people (almost all religious) want to bar same sex marriages. Essentially forcing their views of marriage on others.

[Stavroforos]

I was hoping this would be voting on the Federal level, but it's not. =( Then maybe we could have seen every citizen in the United States have full rights, such as marriage.

[Erik]

Why don't they just give D.C. state-like rights when it comes to local issues?
It must be really annoying living in Washington and having the entire nation poking their noses into your affairs every time.

Or is there really some big paranoia about D.C. becoming too powerful?

[Martin N]

But i dont see what the hell the point in gay marriage is, homosexuality is against religion supposedly, and marriage is a religious ceremony, because your saying your vows supposedly infront of god, so what the hell ? cant you guys just have a civil ceremony in front of your family, and just say your married ?

[Bovril]

marriage is a religious ceremony

If this is true, then should states be giving it special status. Surely no secular government should treat people differently based on which religious ceremonies they have or have not undergone.

Of course, marriage is actually a multi-velent term which can have both religious and secular connotations. But secular states must put the religious to one side, and simply deal with what marriage represents on a socio-political level. That's not an argument for gay marriage, but an argument against including religious mores in the discussion on how states deal with sanctioning marriage.

arent there more important things we should taking care of??!!
ing hell, and ppl wonder why the economy went to the crapper.....

There may be more important things. But this is far from an unimportant issue. Many, many people are directly affected, and many more have strong opinions. Spending some time on the issue is hardly reckless.

[Exarch]

There may be more important things. But this is far from an unimportant issue. Many, many people are directly affected, and many more have strong opinions. Spending some time on the issue is hardly reckless.

i understand some states acknowledge gay marriages
some of these gay couples could take the initiative and simply move to a place that accepts them. why would anyone want to live ina place that doesnt accept thme?

[Bovril]

i understand some states acknowledge gay marriages
some of these gay couples could take the initiative and simply move to a place that accepts them. why would anyone want to live ina place that doesnt accept thme?

People have jobs, families, friends, houses and so on. It's not so simple to simply move however many hundreds of miles. If recognising gay marriage is the right thing to do, then the fact some states have done it does not make it ok for others to not do so, just as the absense of Jim Crow laws in the north didn't make it ok for the Southern states to keep them.

[Exarch]

People have jobs, families, friends, houses and so on. It's not so simple to simply move however many hundreds of miles. If recognising gay marriage is the right thing to do, then the fact some states have done it does not make it ok for others to not do so, just as the absense of Jim Crow laws in the north didn't make it ok for the Southern states to keep them.

if gays want gay marriage to be recognized they have to reason how it's going to benefit the government and/or soviety.

as it is, it is against gov. interests to have gay couples since married couples do get a tax break in some states; it's all in the $$
it is also against societal prejudices, whether justified or not.

for myself, i really dont care if 2 gays want to get married so long as they contribute to society.

[Exarch]

arent there more important things we should taking care of??!!
ing hell, and ppl wonder why the economy went to the crapper.....

[War&Politics]

And DC can't decide for themselves? But they can't vote for congressmen either? And they call it a democracy.