For reference, Wards 2, 4, and 8 Dems have already voted in support.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Ward 5 & 6 Dems Diverge on Marriage Equality
Ward 6 Dems voted 73 to 3 in support. The Ward 5 Dems vote was a different matter. The vote was 87 to 51 against. You can download the video of the event online. Based on the video (I was at the Florida Ave Market meeting) things got pretty heated. There was also some talk that not everyone who received a ballot was actually a Ward 5 Democratic. One thing is clear, Ward 5 Councilmember Harry Thomas is now being targeted as a potential no vote (he voted yes on recognizing same sex marriages conducted elsewhere).
For reference, Wards 2, 4, and 8 Dems have already voted in support.
For reference, Wards 2, 4, and 8 Dems have already voted in support.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
What does this vote signify, exactly? Is it a recommendation to the council? Or is it something more/different?
Liz,
it basically just works kind of like a poll (it's totally non-binding). I'm sure that the results from Ward 5 will be used to apply pressure to Harry Thomas by those who oppose same sex marriages in DC.
Wow, that video is incredible.
Hopefully we can push aside the voices of all the "community leaders" like Reverened "See What Had Happened Was My Momma Told Me Murrage Was a Man and Woman", and let the intelligent members of the community sort this issue out.
Thanks, but no thanks, Rev, we got this.
These ignorant, ill-informed, hateful, bigoted, Bible perverters, like the Reverand are just mean-spirited name callers. Can't we just all get along here? We're talking about love, for Jesus Christ's sake. I mean Jeeze.
Can you be opposed to Marriage Equality and at the same time be divorced?
Wow- the 2nd speaker talks about how he was raised in DC and attended DCPS. Unfortunately, he puts DCPS to shame.
His argument to keep things the way they've always been, since that's how he was taught by his mother and grandmother, is extremely ironic.
Ugg I had to turn him off when he started comparing marriage equality to going downtown to marry his sister.
I find it especially (and disgustingly) ironic that we have black leaders talking about how they oppose social change because it's just "they way they were brought up" and it's "been that way for hundreds of years" and it's "in the bible".
Really??? A BLACK person doesn't see the irony of such views????
Ok then, Rev, pass me over your voter's registration card, toss out all your slick suits and gator shoes and get your ass back on down to the plantation and get to pickin'....then we can ALL go back to being hampered by the brutal ignorance of our forefathers.
What fun!
Thank you Tommy Wells for supporting gay rights.
-Ward 6 resident
I am in support of gay marriage. I am a ward 5 dem and plan to organize other ward 5 residents to push our councilmember to support marriage equality. I am disturbed by the homophobia displayed at the Ward 5 Dems meeting.
However, I am also very disturbed by some of the comments here that are stereotyping and degrading African American clergy. Clergy and people of faith come with all different points of views. Not all are anti-gay. Not all are bigoted. There is a spectrum.
It is not helpful to the cause of marriage equality to stereotype people of faith, to stereotype clergy, to stereotype African Americans, etc.
Not only is it wrong, it is not helpful to your cause. Decry narrow points of view and specific people’s hateful views. Don’t stereotype wide swaths of people. It is ignorant and wrong.
- Ward 5 resident
Exactly what Ward 5 Resident said!
So we have a few posters pointing out--quite rightfully--that there's a lot of bigotry and intolerance on parade at the Ward 5 meeting.
For instance:
Hopefully we can push aside the voices of all the "community leaders" like Reverened "See What Had Happened Was My Momma Told Me Murrage Was a Man and Woman", and let the intelligent members of the community sort this issue out....and...
These ignorant, ill-informed, hateful, bigoted, Bible perverters, like the Reverand are just mean-spirited name callers. Can't we just all get along here? We're talking about love, for Jesus Christ's sake....and...
I find it especially (and disgustingly) ironic that we have black leaders talking about how they oppose social change because it's just "they way they were brought up" and it's "been that way for hundreds of years" and it's "in the bible".Which--amazingly--elicits the response:
I am also very disturbed by some of the comments here that are stereotyping and degrading African American clergy. Clergy and people of faith come with all different points of views. Not all are anti-gay. Not all are bigoted.You see this a lot: the idea that any attempt at calling out an individual "person of faith" on their intolerance and hypocrisy is somehow an attack on *all* religious people.
Look, there are individual clergymen who are being intolerant shitheels. The most high-profile examples are also black--which makes it that much more disgusting and hypocritical.
Clergy and people of faith come with all different points of views. Not all are anti-gay. Not all are bigoted. There is a spectrum.Point me to a single instance on this thread where anyone has suggested otherwise. Why the irrational defensiveness?
The Reverend in the video makes a good argument against DCPS.
Oboe-
What struck me as stereotyping and unnecessarily inflammatory and degrading was”
1) Making fun of someone’s accent and characterizing some ones accent as unintelligent – rather than focusing on the point of view itself as in this comment:
“Hopefully we can push aside the voices of all the "community leaders" like Reverened "
"What Had Happened Was My Momma Told Me Murrage Was a Man and Woman", and let the intelligent members of the community sort this issue out.”
I agree we should try to out organize ‘community leaders’ like the pastor who spoke against marriage equality. I just don’t think we should make fun of and overly stereotype they way he speaks.
2) There are less inflammatory ways to make the point about the irony of a discriminated against group putting forward discriminatory views than a comment that makes fun of and stereotypes how someone dresses and tells someone to go back to slavery. Yes perhaps it was exaggeration for humor, sarcasm, or effect. However, given how charged this issue is anyways- we are not going to win over any allies or keep some people who might be on the fence neutral in our favor by making comments such as these:
“Ok then, Rev, pass me over your voter's registration card, toss out all your slick suits and gator shoes and get your ass back on down to the plantation and get to pickin'....then we can ALL go back to being hampered by the brutal ignorance of our forefathers.”
There are many ways to criticize the homophobic points of view. I think doing it through racial stereotypes and stereotypes of clergy (allagator shoes, etc) is not helpful to our cause.
Rev Dennis and Christine Wiley of Covenant Baptist Church were some of the leaders of the successful vote for marriage equality at the ward 8 dems. She said it in a way that makes the point without telling people to go "back to cotton pickin" and to give back "their slick suit". As the Post said,
"Wiley invoked the words of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and used the civil rights movement to argue that black people should support gay marriage. "Historically, we ought to be the last people coming out to oppress anybody," he said."
Much more effective way to put the same point!
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8835710&postID=1267705370854342118&pli=1
- Ward 5 Resident
Ward 5 Res---
The hypocracy and irony of statements made by this reverend and other community leaders (like the Mayor For Life's statements about needing to be "moral leaders") frankly, really piss me off. Hence the vitriol and sarcastic stereotype references.
As an aside, I don't think such things are necessarily out of bounds if someone is putting themselves out there like the Rev and M.F.L. are doing. But I understand if that some people bristle at half-mocking stereotypical references.
Back to the larger point--If there are black community leaders that don't share their point of view (and I'm sure there are), then great! Hopefully, they are doing all they can to be a louder voice in the black community that people like the Rev and the M.F.L., who are honestly, giving credence to every negative stereotype you seem to take issue with.
Off topic, but some good press for Spoiled & Rotten:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/20/AR2009052001413.html
I acknowledge Ward 5's points which is why tge following comments by Marion Barry were so infuriating: "All hell is going to break loose. We may have a civil war. The black community is just adamantly against this." What gives him the right to make that generalization? I can say the same thing about the many anti-gay clergy members (such as the ones who stood on the steps of the Capitol). It was so great to listen to Kojo and hear from a clergy member who falls on the other side of the issue; I hope his community and more will continue to vocalize their views.
Would someone tell me why the word "marriage" matters so much to gay marriage proponents? Let's say we have a perfect civil union status, with all of the legal incidents of marriage. In that case what would be the reason for the redefinition of marriage? The only reason I can see is that it forces society to shift, and the culture to fully accept homosexual relationships. Under this scenario, there would be no legal difference whatsoever, so how could there be any other reason? So let's stop the B.S. about legal rights etc. This is about forcibly changing the culture by legislative action. It's legislating morality--in favor of societal support of gay relationships. I'm against the government legislating morality.
Kudos to Ward 5 Dems. Frankly, "this is the way we've always done it" is not overly sophisticated, but it certainly is something important to consider. It's a better line of reasoning than gay marriage proponents offer. The reason is that it offers a comment about what is better for society as a whole. I am not aware of any arguments in favor of gay marriage that focus on what is better for society as a whole.
On the idea of black "hypocrisy", such a statement is highly offensive to African Americans. To compare the comfortable (in some ways culturally privileged) contemporary status of homosexuals in America today to that of blacks during the civil rights era is just not reasonable.
The hate and vitriol on this board is really disgusting today. It's really annoying when people reject the possibility that reasonable people can disagree about this.
Anon 8:07:
Sorry, but your reasoning against gay marriage isn't exactly "reasonable" so you can't say that it's up for reasonable debate unless you offer a reasonable rationale. Here's why your argument is shite:
1) You argue against legislating morality, yet, your justification against gay marriage is that it seeks to switch cultural norms to "accept" gay lifestyles...um, isn't intolerance of gay lifestyles a "moral" issue? You just prefer one morality to the other.
2) There is simply no argument against allowing gays to "marry" that doesn't come down to "well, my religion or my upbringing tell me its wrong". These are not valid legal arguments against denying gays equal protection. This is how interracial marriages were eventially legalized (first laws against sex fell, then the marriage) and this is how the laws against gay marriage will fall.
3) Calling it a "civil union" is an unecessary half-measure designged to ease people like you out of your ignorance. "oh, it's not a MARRIAGE, like MY marriage is a marriage so it makes me feel safe still!" Why should gays have to accept anything less than equality? Advocating civil unions over marriages is the gay equivalent of "Separate but Equal" and we all know what a great idea that was.
Finally--you are right. It would force a cultural shift to accept gay relationships. Welcome to America. We are tolerant, educated people here. We are SUPPOSED to undergo changes that make us more accepting and bring us out of ignorant backward thinking and that challenge unfair societal norms.
It's called progress.
Anon 8:07, would you be willing for the government to get out of ALL "marriages" and provide "civil unions" equally to all? Maybe marriages should be left up to religious institutions and the government desolves ALL marriages, including yours (if you're married) and your mother & father's marriage. Would that be more fair and equal to you?
So the fight against same sex marriage in D.C. is being led by a pastor whose church is in Maryland and by a four-time married ex-con, tax-evading crack addict who portrays himself as a moral authority.
Anon 9:06-- doing nothing is not "legislating morality".
Civil unions are not a "half way" measure if they include 100% of the legal incidences of marriage. It's not a question of feeling safe. It's just not the government's job to decide that marriage is now something new. Equal rights under the law doesn't include the government rearranging the culture to suit your needs. That's not the government's job. Don't you realize how this is just as bad as attempts by social conservatives to impose their morality on everyone else?
Anon 8:07-- sure. Why should the government decide who is married and who is not? Should the government decide who is in love too? How about which movies are good to watch, etc. Makes no sense to me. I found it insulting that a gum-chewing 16 year old girl (bureaucrat) gave me "permission" to get married. I'd think such feeling would be universal.
Well a push to redefine all 'unions' as just that, and leave 'marriage' to the churches, I think would be acceptable to all involved.
It's the idea that gays "need" to accept some alternative, even if its legally equal (which in some cases, it is NOT proposed as such), which is somewhat off-putting. I don't think that offending the sensibilities of a segment of the population is a reason to deny equal protection under the law.
As your attempt to split hairs over "not doing anything" not being "legislating morality", let's not pretend you don't understand the point. A decision to act or not to act IS an affirmative decision. Acts and omissions are on equal footing when it comes to legal decisions like this.
This is not to mention the fact that many anit-gay marriage goups ARE pushing for legislation "defining" marriage "once and for all" as a man and a woman. If you don't see that as legislating morality, I don't know what to tell you.
Whether you make them all unions, or all marriages, the RIGHT thing to do is to apply the law equally.
Finally, you eariler asked what society gains by allowing gay marriage.
Even if that's the appropriate question to ask (which I say it's not)for one, we provide recognition and equal rights to a segment of the population that has been oppressed (or ignored) on either a religious or ignorant basis for years.
We pave the way for gay couples to adopt kids and start stable families and contribute to society all the good things that stable families bring.
And we strengthen the notion that we are a free and accepting people that are dedicated to overcoming the fears and irrational beliefs of our past, and we move in a more progressive direction in general.
Now, I would actually turn the question around on you and say what HARM does it do to society to allow gays to marry? That's the real argumenet here in my mind because no one who is against gay marriage has any position on it that's more developed than "god says its bad", "eww, it's gross", or "that's not what my dictionary says".
And I'll preempt your "it's gonna cost small business owners' money" with a simple "tough sh!t".
James - if you're going to post with such assumed authority on frozentropics (and I happen to agree with what you're saying), you should come out of hiding and claim an identity. ie - stop posting as "anonymous" you chicken.
Love your loving fiance.
Haha - duly noted.
Now, give me back the ring.
--James
No doubt the people arguing against this are a demographic of uneducated people
Nice story as for me. It would be great to read more about this topic. Thank you for sharing that data.
Sexy Lady
Female escort
Post a Comment