DC Council Votes 12 to 1 to Honor Other States' Same-Sex Unions

[4PointOh]

It was 13 to 0 at first, but crackhead Marion Barry didn't realize what he was voting for and asked for a motion to reconsider so that he could change his vote.

Whitney Houston. Amy Winehouse. Marion Barry. Crackheads are so damn funny.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/05/AR2009050501618.html

[Sean Walsh]

Wait, I thought Marion Berry was a beloved public figure for being a crackhead....

[TCJohnson]

Cool.

I will get more excited if it passes Congress, but I am not hopeful. Congress has to approve all legislation for DC and DC residents don't have any representatives in Congress.

[KevinTBrown]

One down, about 47 more to go.........

[Solaris]

Cool.

I will get more excited if it passes Congress, but I am not hopeful. Congress has to approve all legislation for DC and DC residents don't have any representatives in Congress.


That goes for me, too. If it passes Congress, I think I'll fall over in a dead faint. But there's always hope, and regardless, it's still a wonderful move by the DC Council.

[Matt Algren]

I don't want to start another thread, but the Maine House of Representatives approved their marriage equality bill (http://blog.mattalgren.com/2009/05/maine-house-of-representatives-votes-yes-on-marriage-equality/) a few minutes ago. There are recent indications that the governor has changed his mind and may sign the bill.

[Spackling Compound]

It was 13 to 0 at first, but crackhead Marion Barry didn't realize what he was voting for and asked for a motion to reconsider so that he could change his vote.

Whitney Houston. Amy Winehouse. Marion Barry. Crackheads are so damn funny.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/05/AR2009050501618.html

Sigh...Marion. He's still on the pipe? And he went against the bill? Must be the Mormons.

[KevinTBrown]

Sigh...Marion. He's still on the pipe? And he went against the bill? Must be the Morons.

There, fixed it for ya!


:biggrin:

[king mob]

It was 13 to 0 at first, but crackhead Marion Barry didn't realize what he was voting for and asked for a motion to reconsider so that he could change his vote.

Whitney Houston. Amy Winehouse. Marion Barry. Crackheads are so damn funny.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/05/AR2009050501618.html

Amy's off the crack. It's just coke, booze and skunk for her these days.

[MartinRedmond]

It's been a while since I heard of Amy, I wonder if she's still a fashion industry darling.

[king mob]

It's been a while since I heard of Amy, I wonder if she's still a fashion industry darling.


She's still around. She's actually recording a third album now she's comparatively straight.

[Charles RB]

I don't want to start another thread, but the Maine House of Representatives approved their marriage equality bill (http://blog.mattalgren.com/2009/05/maine-house-of-representatives-votes-yes-on-marriage-equality/) a few minutes ago. There are recent indications that the governor has changed his mind and may sign the bill.

And the link mentions New Hampshire's thinking about it too! Fuck, it's all go these days, isn't it?

[MartinRedmond]

No, I mean, the last time I checked european magazines, 3 fashion houses were releasing Amy Crackhouse themed collections.

[Matt Algren]

And the link mentions New Hampshire's thinking about it too! Fuck, it's all go these days, isn't it?
I wouldn't count on New Hampshire. The governor's made it pretty clear that he'll veto, and they're nowhere near veto-proof.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

It's good to hear Dan Didio was open-minded enough to grant such a poll.

[Nick Soapdish]

I wouldn't count on New Hampshire. The governor's made it pretty clear that he'll veto, and they're nowhere near veto-proof.

I wouldn't either, but I think that someone (maybe you?) was saying before that legislators might flip their votes out of irritation with the governor.

[Charles RB]

I wouldn't count on New Hampshire. The governor's made it pretty clear that he'll veto, and they're nowhere near veto-proof.

Drat.

Still, the fact it's happening at all - and so close to three states having successful votes, plus stuff like DC - is remarkable. Either they're all getting some really good graft or something's set everyone off.

[Matt Algren]

I wouldn't either, but I think that someone (maybe you?) was saying before that legislators might flip their votes out of irritation with the governor.That was Vermont, and the circumstances were a bit different. The governor announced before the debate had even started that he would veto it, which ticked the legislature off. In the end, there were only one or two who changed their vote. (One decided to stay home.)

It's worth noting, though, that in Vermont they were theoretically veto-proof before it went to the governor. IIRC, in the New Hampshire Senate it barely got over 50%, and that only on a second vote.

[4PointOh]

Amy's off the crack. It's just coke, booze and skunk for her these days.

Once a crackhead....

[the4thpip]

She's still around. She's actually recording a third album now she's comparatively straight.

She was hospitalized again a few days ago and her producer Mark Ronson says she is in no shape to record music.

[the4thpip]

WASHINGTON -- Some threats, apparently, are grave enough to justify throwing any principle out the window.

No, this isn't another post about Dick Cheney's justification for torture. A group of conservative House members who believe in limiting federal involvement in local affairs introduced legislation Thursday that would block Washington, D.C., from recognizing gay marriages performed in other states. The bill would overturn local legislation the D.C. Council passed last month. The nearly three dozen small-government conservatives who sponsored the House bill evidently decided the risk of letting gays and lesbians marry was far more dangerous than whatever evil might come from letting the federal government muck around with local business.

"The family is truly the foundational institution of our nation, and marriage is its cornerstone," Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, who co-sponsored the "D.C. Defense of Marriage Act" with Rep. Dan Boren, an Oklahoma Democrat (yes, you read that right), said in a statement. "I look forward to working with the D.C. community, a majority of who -- like a majority of Americans -- support traditional marriage. This is a fight we cannot shy away from, and it is a fight we have to win."
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/feature/2009/05/21/dc_marriage/index.html

:mad:

[Reverend Smooth]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30854453/

Somebody wrote an article about how, at least in DC, a sizeable portion of blacks did come forward to support marriage for homosexuals. It might not be a national trend, but at least in DC there seems to be progressiveness starting to creep in.

[Free-Man]

This news makes me happy! Small steps people, small steps!
No H8!
http://www.noh8campaign.com/

[Charles RB]

A group of conservative House members who believe in limiting federal involvement in local affairs introduced legislation Thursday that would block Washington, D.C., from recognizing gay marriages performed in other states. The bill would overturn local legislation the D.C. Council passed last month. The nearly three dozen small-government conservatives who sponsored the House bill evidently decided the risk of letting gays and lesbians marry was far more dangerous than whatever evil might come from letting the federal government muck around with local business.

Oh lovely.

[TCJohnson]

Yeah, I could see this one coming from a long way off. Why I had trouble getting excited about the DC Council's bill.

Still, I say it has a 50% chance of making it through.

[CaptainCanada]

This could easily be predicted; Congress routinely meddles when DC's city government does something controversial.

Them doing this in a separate bill is probably for the better, actually, since it doesn't have to be disentangled from something else. This would go to the House Committee on Oversight, chaired by Ed Towns (http://www.ontheissues.org/NY/Ed_Towns.htm#Civil_Rights). There are 40 people on that committee (24 Democrats, 16 Republicans); assuming all Republicans vote for it (safe bet), preventing passage would require at least 20 Democrats to vote against.