Dear Friends of Marriage,
Earlier this afternoon, the DC City Council voted 11 to 2 in favor of same-sex marriage, sending the bill to Mayor Adrian Fenty who has promised to sign it.
The media would have you believe this fight is over.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
As I told the press a few minutes ago:
"The people of D.C. have a right, guaranteed by the charter, which is D.C.'s constitution, to vote to protect marriage. Politicians on the city council are acting as if they have the right through legislation to deprive citizens of D.C. of their core civil right to vote, but we will not let them get away with it."
"We have one message for David Catania and the rest of these politicians today: this fight is not over. We will go to Congress, we will go to the courts, we will fight for the people's right to vote and we will win!"
Working closely with Stand4Marriage DC, we are committed to protecting the rights of DC voters who are being disenfranchised by their own government.
The arrogance shown by DC Councilmembers has been simply outrageous. Eleven of the Council's 13 members are determined to force same-sex marriage on the District, even if that means trampling the DC City Charter and depriving District residents of the right to vote.
The DC Charter guarantees its citizens the right to put an initiative on the ballot for a District-wide vote, but earlier this month, the Board of Elections rejected a measure that would state: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in the District of Columbia."
The proposed initiative simply restated current DC law on marriage. Still, the 2-member board found no difficulty ruling the initiative invalid as a violation of the Human Rights Act.
It's time for Congress to step up and restore the rule of law in the District of Columbia. If the DC Government is going to trample the rights of their citizens, Congress must intervene, invalidating the same-sex marriage bill unless or until the Council agrees to respect the rights of DC voters to bring an initiative petition.
If Congress refuses to block the same-sex marriage bill, the DC Council will simply continue to ignore the rights of DC voters.
Congressional leadership would like nothing more than to have this issue go quietly away.
It's up to you and me to force Congress to deal with the issue! Send your message to Congress today!
And please forward this message to at least five friends right now. Send it all across the nation.
Every member of Congress needs to hear from his or her own constituents that this is an urgent civil rights violation taking place in the District of Columbia that requires Congressional attention!
Time is short. Please contact your elected officials right now.
Faithfully,Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org
27 Comments
Not going to happen.
Go NOM! and Go People of D.C.! Stand up for your right to speak on your laws. The disenfranchising of the entire D.C. population is a travesty. The city council ought to be ashamed of themselves. The people have a right to vote!
Gay marriage is not a right. Thats what the judges will determine. The peoples vote have won in many states and by constitutinal amendments. If the DC courts deny the people their right to vote, it will set a precedent.
Take your bigotry out of our city. The residents of DC are firmly behind allowing gay marriage, and nothing you right-wing cranks can do will stop us. Get used to it!
Josh,
If there is nothing the people can do about it, it is only because the city council denied us the opportunity to have that voice. You claim that the residents of D.C. would have supported the issue. How convenient for you and the city council that because of your fear of the people, we may never have the chance to know.
"The residents of DC are firmly behind allowing gay marriage"
If true, I'll accept their decision. But lets hear from the people themselves.
Dear Brian and Maggie, STFU, you're hate mongering is killing us. You deserve to be put before a court and convicted of aiding and abetting the radical fundamentalists christians who drag us behind their trucks on dirt roads for fun.
Mykel B,
Huh? What are you talking about?? Last I checked this was still America, a free nation. Since when is having a point of view that's different from yours "hate mongering"? Isn't that just codespeak for silencing the opposition? Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini anyone?
Marty, Reba et al:
You've already heard from the people. We, the Washingtonians, elected our City Council to enact laws on our behalf. There will be no referendum and NOM can go to the Judiciary and use those activists judges that you harp about to try and overturn our legislation, but good luck.
What I really find ultimately ironic, is that here you are worried about DC Residents' right to vote on an issue, when we haven't had voting rights for 200 years.
So how about a deal, if we allow a vote on Same Sex Marriage (which incidently is supported by the DC populace) will you work to ensure that we get Voting rights in the House and Senate?
I didn't think so, because you aren't concerned at all about DC Residents, only repressing your fellow citizens.
We know it, you know it, so why can't we just be open and honest about it? NOM are you listening? We will respect you much more if you admit that you are actively campaigning against gays and lesbians, not protecting marriage.
Scott,
Forgive me if I doubt the omniscience of your space-time mind probes. My thoughts and intents, my concerns are for my family, my society and my nation. I do not approve of what the council has done with regard to ostracizing Catholic Charities and people of faith. That group has done more for this city than any other independent charity I know of. For the council members to belittle that work, and those beliefs speaks of an intolerance that I was quite honestly, shocked to see. This is my city too. Secularists and Believers share the same air, we live in the same space. Your flippant dismissal of any opinion but your own is exactly the brand of intolerance we're getting from our brave leaders, leaders so omniscient themselves that they can stick their fingers in the wind and figure out what the people want. Did they bother to ask the homeless? The countless needy and poor who have been helped by the same faith groups they now seek to ostracize? No! Did they ask the taxpayers who are now going to be footing the bill for their arrogance? No! Did they ask the families who will be explaining to their children why their teachers are pushing same-sex relationships in the classroom? This is wrong! This is not representative democracy, it's a farce, and the council's decision was born of arrogance and disregard for the people. It's not tolerant, and it's not right. Let the people speak!
Scott,
I agree that DC has long been given the shaft wrt representative democracy, and this should be rectified asap.
However my personal opinion is that DC residents should be annexed by neighboring states, rather than become a 51st state. Rhode Island should also be abolished and absorbed by Massachusetts.
Anyway you KNOW that if it came to a public referendum of DC residents, SSM would fall and fall hard. So I don't blame you for not wanting to allow the people to vote on the matter.
Have a Merry Christmas everyone!
Reba,
As a fellow DC resident, I feel that referendums are only necessary for laws that directly affect the populace, like raising taxes. In the case of same-sex marriage, only 7-13% of the city's population will be affected by the extension of the "positive liberty" to marry the consenting, non-related adult of their choice.
It's been proven time and time again that the bill contains no measures requiring the teaching of marriage (of any sort) in schools. I personally feel that a comprehensive sex education should cover all (legal) aspects of human sexuality but that's another story entirely.
With regards to the Catholic Church, the bill includes an exemption for religious institutions that don't want to perform same sex marriages. But the Catholic Church wants more. It wants to violate both a contract with the city and our Human Rights Act by refusing to extend benefits to all qualified employees. This reeks of political philandering. After all, the Church had no problem with continuing charity services in the other states that have marriage equality. Why should they get a free pass to mess with legislative action in this instance?
The crux of the matter is this: when the law passes, somebody you don't know will be marrying someone else you don't know. Big whoop.
Reba, you said: "This is my city too. Secularists and Believers share the same air, we live in the same space."
Well, I'm going to change that a bit to say: This is my city too. Gays and straights share the same air, we live in the same space. How you can justify denying me, a taxpaying citizen, the same treatment as you, is beyond me. But I'm glad that the city knows how to respect the 14th Amendment and the Human Rights Act. I don't want issues that will radically change aspects of *my* life, as in things that affect me personally, to be nothing more than a line of text on a ballot for some random person to decide. *That* is not representative democracy. *That* is arrogance and a complete disregard for those who share this city with you.
[Josh
Posted December 16, 2009 at 7:00 pm | Permalink
Take your bigotry out of our city. The residents of DC are firmly behind allowing gay marriage, and nothing you right-wing cranks can do will stop us. Get used to it!]
Funny, you sound like a lynch-happy Klansman who argued that "Black people are HAPPY not having voting rights and free speech."
If the analogy sounds harsh, consider the following:
*DC is a mostly Black town.
*The denial of the citizens to vote on SSM is pushed by homosexual activists who overwhelming look like White Klansman,
*Like Klansmen, homosexual activists whine "I'm the victim" while ruthlessly stripping away Black people's constitutional rights.
So, don't even play the "bigotry" card in a mostly Black city like DC.
[Marty
Posted December 17, 2009 at 11:10 am | Permalink
“The residents of DC are firmly behind allowing gay marriage”
If true, I’ll accept their decision. But lets hear from the people themselves.]
Exactly.
If Josh were THAT confident that most DC residents like myself were "pro-SSM," he would gladly support a vote on this issue. The fact he doesn't indicates that he has more in common with America's various enemies (Nazis, KKK, al Qaeda, etc.) than freedom-loving American citizens.
Yes Virginia, and to the remaining non-SSM states "There is indeed a Santa Claus"
Fred2, how does the will of the people through the democratic voting process address liberty, justice, fairness and equality? We have a democracy combined with a judicial branch of government. The democratic process needs checks and balances to make sure the rights of ALL americans, not only the majority are protected.
The result of the democratic voting process, needs to survive judicial review.
Otherwise we would have a society where two wolves and lamb are allowed majority vote on what to have for lunch. Just because you want to walk away with a fat belly, does not make it just or fair..
I suggest this is an great opportunity for NOM, to challenge this in court. Will this action by the council and mayor unfairly or unjustly harm gay and lesbian families?
"Washington, D.C., mayor Adrian Fenty signed the marriage equality bill into law Friday morning at the All Souls Church at a special ceremony."
SSMers like to hide behind the banner of tolerance and democracy so long as that only means for them. For citizens who only want to have a say on what goes on in their communities, no.
"and nothing you right-wing cranks can do will stop us. Get used to it!" Where have we heard that before, A yes,"whether you like it or not", San Francisco. The people got their say there though. Like the people in Maine did recently, but Washington D.C , they're not allowed to.
It's painfully obvious to all that there's a different parameter being used in Washington D.C due to the demographic composition of the city. SSMers can deny it all they want but their actions speak louder, and the residents know it.
It would be very sad to watch Catholic Charities in D.C. not be able to continue their good work because it conflicts with gay rights legislation. I'm not sure people understand how efficiently they work: using some government money but also many donations and volunteer hours. What a huge loss that would be for the D.C. area.
Jennifer,
I agree, but am thankful for the clarity this provides. We'll wait and see if the gay community and/or the "progressive religious" step up to fill the void, or whether it will be filled by further demands on the taxpayer.
I doubt we'll have to wait very long either.
So they want to hurt the church, the homeless,the sick, the poor, the downtrodden because of selfish carnal desires?
Maggie openly discussed her past -- long before "recently".
Those who'd SSM are not those who'd marry.
Glass houses?
The SSM merger is an attempt to assert the supremacy of gay identity politics; that is closely analogous with the assertion of supremacy via racialist identity politics as per the dismantled anti-miscegenation system.
Marriage eligibility is neutral regarding identity politics and neutral regarding sexual orientation. The SSM campaign seeks to inject both into the law.
Why do SSMers smash their own arguments? I dunno. It may have something to do with misplaced priorities.
Fenty is a moron and I hope someone can be beat him next year. Funny he is ready to sign in SSM and yet he does nothing about the crime problems in that city. I remember just last year a moron ran people over at a festival. This idiot wants to push gay agendas.
Your side lost. Deal.
I love how you people pretend that the C. Church simply CAN'T continue because of SSM. BS. If they discontinue services that is THEIR choice...and a very sad one at that...for everyone.
Perform all the mental gymnastics you want...demonize us if you need to....fact remains, we won in DC...and we're moving forward.
!
If, John, for SSM to win, marriage must lose, and for SSM to win, religious liberty and freedom of consicence must lose, then, the contortions of the SSM campaign mean you are not moving forward but backward. To a time prior to the preferential status of marriage and prior to religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
The SSM campaign is a throwback to the racialist-like identity politics of the anti-miscegenation system. That system, did what an SSM-merger would do: selectively segregate the sexes and deeply undermine responsible procreation via the filter of an identity group.
Meanwhile, you shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. We'll see what happens next.
This just in....
1 dead after early-morning triple shooting in DC
December 25, 2009 11:59 EST
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Three people have been shot -- including one fatally -- during a Christmas morning altercation.
.Please explain why Fenty has time and focuses on pushing gay agendas SSM. When there is so much violence going on in DC. He is a far left zealot.
I find it unsurprising though disturbing that those supporting same-sex marriage (SSM) would frame the struggle as one for "marriage equality." Since marriage to the opposite sex is the only type consistent with the fundamental procreative function of marriage, and thus the only type that makes sense, "marriage equality" should mean the right of every adult individual, no matter the individual's gender, race, nationality, age, physical condition, economic or social status, past marital situation, criminal history, education, or job situation, to marry another adult individual of the opposite sex as long as neither individual is already married. And we do have that so we already have "marriage equality." What the SSM proponents really support is "behavior equality." They believe that two different behaviors should be treated equally, even if a majority holds, and experience shows, that one behavior is constructive and the other behavior is destructive. This belief goes beyond problematic as it leads to increasing social chaos and poses a threat to, and could become a serious contributing factor toward, the collapse of a civilization.