December 15th, 2009
11:55 AM ET
9 months ago

DC same-sex marriage vote Tuesday

Washington (CNN) - The nation's capital city is expected to take a major step Tuesday towards legalizing same-sex marriage.

The District of Columbia's city council is scheduled to vote - and expected to pass - a measure that would recognize gay marriages as legal. The city council overwhelmingly passed the bill in a previous vote on December 1.

Tuesday's second vote is needed to send the measure to District Mayor Adrian Fenty, who has said he will sign the bill. Then the measure goes to Congress for a 30-day review period, but it's considered unlikely that the Democratic majority on Capitol Hill will block the bill. By law, Congress has the right to review and overturn laws created by the District's city council.

If the measure becomes law, the District would join Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont and Iowa in allowing legal same-sex marriages. A law legalizing gay marriage in New Hampshire takes effect on January 1.

Earlier this year, lawmakers in Maine approved a measure legalizing same-sex marriages, but voters in the state last month passed a referendum to overturn the new law. Last week, New York's state senate defeated a bill that would legalize gay marriages. A similar bill stalled last week in New Jersey's state senate.

–CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser contributed to this story


Filed under: Same-sex marriage
soundoff (166 Responses)
  1. Obama-Mama

    Whatever floats your boat

    December 15, 2009 12:32 pm at 12:32 pm |
  2. Janet

    To the person saying you should only be allowed to marry if you can create life, here is my question to you.

    My husband and I are 38 years old and have been married for 17 years...married in a church. We tried to have children for years but due to medical issues I ultimately had a hysterectomy.

    By your "logic" we should not be married. Didn't really think that through huh?

    Go Washington DC! Hope things go as expected.

    December 15, 2009 12:32 pm at 12:32 pm |
  3. patNY

    Those crying LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE need to read up on treatises on representative democracy, which is what we have. If they did, they would learn that the rights of the minority must be protected against the tyranny of the majority...meaning, YOU NEVER PUT MINORITY RIGHTS TO A PUBLIC VOTE...by definition, the rights would always be voted down.

    MARRIAGE EQUALITY NOW!!!!

    December 15, 2009 12:32 pm at 12:32 pm |
  4. Peter

    We should outlaw all heterosexual marriages if the couples will not "create life".

    We should also outlaw martial infidelity – something which demonstrably threatens the sacred institution of marriage.

    Think any of philanderering and/or sanctimonious politicianwould support such proposals.

    December 15, 2009 12:34 pm at 12:34 pm |
  5. Lou For President

    Can we stop playing games wih the issue. If the liberals call it a civil UNION between homosexual couples with all rights given to heterosexual couples have you would see states adopting it left and right with a lot of support from conservatives. The problem is that homosexuals want to force people to beleive that their lifestyle is correct by calling it a marriage (IE Religious Terminology)

    If you are truely concerned about equal treatment call it a civil union and stop trying to force you liberal views on us.

    I don't think the goverment should have anything to do with recognizing marraiges/unions in the first place.

    December 15, 2009 12:35 pm at 12:35 pm |
  6. Franky, Land of Lincoln

    This has a good chance to pass at the Nations capitol, it really has. Has some good chances and I bet that it...(to be continued).

    But a really, really good chance. I know my districts, areas and states, D.C ain't no exception.

    That's my opinion.

    December 15, 2009 12:37 pm at 12:37 pm |
  7. We are already equal.

    Marriage equality already exists. Special treatment /= equality.

    Civil unions are needed, not oxymoronic marriages.

    December 15, 2009 12:38 pm at 12:38 pm |
  8. Sniffit

    "Gay "marriage" – NO
    Gay "unions" – YES"

    Guess what? They are either the exact same thing under the law and cannot be called anything different due to the religious connotations you are attempting to add OR they cannot be in the law AT ALL. Check your 1st Amendment law.

    December 15, 2009 12:38 pm at 12:38 pm |
  9. Tania

    There are many heterosexual couples who can't or don't have children.

    Who said the Bible is the final authority on everything? have you read the Old Testament? Tried to sacrifice your first-born lately?

    December 15, 2009 12:39 pm at 12:39 pm |
  10. RCLGuard

    My rights are not up for any vote.

    You don't want higher taxes – FINE.
    You don't want Cap & Trade – FINE.
    You don't want Universal Healthcare – FINE.

    But stay out of my rights as an American. This is not up for discussion or religious views. THESE ARE HUMAN RIGHTS! End of argument.

    December 15, 2009 12:39 pm at 12:39 pm |
  11. Luc A

    Thank God I'm Canadian where gays are treated equally. The Government voted in favor of gay marriage and society did not fall.
    There is no gay agenda to destroy the social structures. We live within these structures ourselves, so why would we want to do that? Stop believing what your preachers tell you and think!
    As for people who believe that gay marriage goes against their religion, I respect that: don't marry gays in your church, we'll find one that does marry gays; don't attend gay marriages, and so on. That is your right. But leave us alone. Do not impose your views of God, religion and law upon us.
    Concerning the fact that marriage has always been between ONE man and ONE woman: that's not true. In many places it's between ONE man and MANY women.
    Laws should change according to the evolution of society, like allowing Blacks to marry Whites, allowing women to vote, etc.

    December 15, 2009 12:41 pm at 12:41 pm |
  12. Diana Greenville SC

    If divorce is legal so should gay marriage. God HATES divorce! He loves people, no matter who we are sexually attracted to. I have Christian same sex couples, who have adopted very difficult children and have given these children a loving family and hope for a bright future. I also go to church with people who cheat on there spouses, neglect their children or have been divorced and remarried more than once and have totally screwed up the kids God has given the. Our fine Govenor is a pure example of this.

    December 15, 2009 12:42 pm at 12:42 pm |
  13. james

    I hope this passes and I hope homosexuals show you many public displays of affection.

    December 15, 2009 12:42 pm at 12:42 pm |
  14. kyle

    I have to smile when I read the idiot arguments against gay marriage that were discredited long ago. The people who are new to this subject should have been paying attention years ago. The reproduction argument was one of the first arguments to be slashed within minutes as being nonsensical. Your eleventh hour interest in this story is proof that you have no interest in spreading the joys of life to others who have been less fortunate in receiving all of the rights that you yourself enjoy and take for granted. Exclusion never looks good and smells even worse. I can smell you from Texas.

    December 15, 2009 12:43 pm at 12:43 pm |
  15. Silence Dogoode

    Can we refrain from using the term gay? It is wrong to refer to homosexuals as gay.... so it really should be same sex marriage....

    after reading these posts I don't see many "gay" homosexuals....strident, and argumentative..but not gay

    ever since the basic family unit has been under attack: woman, man and children we have seen a skyrocket in violence and illegitamte births, child abuse, and poverty...that is why people are trying to protect marriage...

    I say if same sex marriage becomes "legal" then so should polygamy.

    December 15, 2009 12:43 pm at 12:43 pm |
  16. Brandon

    Contrary to what most people say, I have a feeling that if this was a vote for same sex "Unions", most people would still be up in arms about it as they would claim "This is just a feeble attempt to get gays closer to marriage! NEVER!"

    December 15, 2009 12:45 pm at 12:45 pm |
  17. Jeff - Sarasota, FL

    Who cares... This is such a stupid thing and a waste of taxpayers money... You see gay people and couples all the time when you are out and about and the majority of people think nothing of them a few minutes after they are out of site, so why care if they are married or not, not letting them get married isn't going to make them straight and it is a waste of taxpayer money that could be used better places... Why we waste so much taxpayer money for so many trivial thigs amazes me... it is easier for the government to stir up the prople over gay marrage than to fix the economy and health care issues that matter, and the fact that people are seem to make it such a bigger deal than the economy and health care shows how easily lead the sheep really are...

    December 15, 2009 12:45 pm at 12:45 pm |
  18. rita

    Traditional marriage is traditional because holy rollers have traditionally stomped all over the rights of minorities and then stomped on over to their mistresses house for solace and ...

    December 15, 2009 12:47 pm at 12:47 pm |
  19. AO

    If the whole world was homosexual a hundred years ago, how many people would be here?? Morals laws cannot be changed regardless of how deparete we as humans become in trying to do so. This is not about hate or trying to push my views on others...homosexuality just does not work. Two men cannot produce and two women cannot produce, but a man and a woman can. Science has already proven that. Again morals and science cannot be changed reguardless of how much we want to change it.

    December 15, 2009 12:47 pm at 12:47 pm |
  20. Melissa

    Religious people need to learn that their religion only applies to themselves and butt the heck out of other peoples business. This is a human rights issue.

    December 15, 2009 12:48 pm at 12:48 pm |
  21. olivia galloway

    I feel that same-sex should be apoved cause thay have just as much rights as us.The lord say he come as you are and that`s what he mean.

    December 15, 2009 12:49 pm at 12:49 pm |
  22. JWK

    While I personally don't believe in same-sex marriage based on religious grounds, I can think of no good secular reason to oppose it. Therefore, I support it. Heterosexuals have done a great job destroying in institution of marriage so that argument doesn't work.

    As a Libertarian I hope DC ok's same-sex marriage.

    December 15, 2009 12:49 pm at 12:49 pm |
  23. margie

    Sad this issue even needs to be fought for – I was under the assumption we were all created equal.

    December 15, 2009 12:52 pm at 12:52 pm |
  24. Cybersport

    A gay or lesbian couple should have the same legal protection and legal rights as a heterosexual couple. That includes the right to be on the same medical plan, inherit each other's estates, etc.

    Not being legally permitted to marry means many of those economiv safeguards are not in place.

    I'm a heterosexual male, but I see no validity in the view that gays and lesbians should be considered second-class citizens.

    And for those who claim the majority of Americans don't want this.. If the majority rules concept were applied..

    Women would not have received the right to vote in 1920
    The American South would still be segregated.
    George Busch the younger would not have been elected President

    December 15, 2009 12:52 pm at 12:52 pm |
  25. Danny

    People need to remember that in the past a majority of people thought is was OK to have black people as slaves, and to treat women as second class citizens, and that the world was flat. The majority wasn't necessarily right then either.

    December 15, 2009 12:54 pm at 12:54 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7