Spokane7
59°
January 4, 2012 in Region
Gov. Gregoire to support gay marriage bill
OLYMPIA — Washington must end discrimination against same-sex couples, an emotional Gov. Chris Gregoire said this morning. She urged the Legislature to pass a bill that would allow gay and lesbian couples to marry in the state without requiring churches to perform the service if their religious denomination objects.
Gregoire received extended applause from some 70 people crowded into the governor’s conference room as she called same-sex marriage rights a defining civil rights issue of the current generation. Younger citizens are ahead of her generation, she said, and the public is ahead of the Legislature on it, she insisted.
The arguments used for keeping the current system of domestic partnerships instead of marriage for same-sex couples are some of the same ones used to keep African-Americans in separate schools, housing and drinking fountains under the doctrine of “separate but equal,” she said. Although the experiences of racial minorities aren’t identical to those of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender citizens, the laws are “inherently unjust,” she said.
“It is now time for equality of our gay and lesbian citizens, and that means marriage,” Gregoire said. Six other states have legalized same-sex marriages: Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont and New York. Washington state has a domestic partnership law that was expanded several times, with the most recent version surviving an attempt by opponents to overturn it at the polls.
The call for a law allowing same-sex marriage is a significant departure for Gregoire, who for years has supported domestic partnerships and said she was concerned about the state telling churches who they could marry.
“It has been a battle for me, with my religion,” said Gregoire, who is Roman Catholic. “I was uncomfortable with the position I took publicly. I respect religious freedom, but the state cannot be in the business of discrimination.”
Legislators who attended the press conference said they believed they have the votes in the House to pass a bill Gregoire will endorse, but are “a few votes” short of a majority in the Senate.
But it is time for legislators to step up and take a tough vote on same-sex marriage, Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, said. He predicted he would get Republican votes for that measure, something he doubted he would get for a tax increase.
“Suddenly, passing gay marriage becomes easier than passing taxes,” Murray said.
Legislators said they intend to file bills that would not automatically put the change on the November ballot. But it wouldn’t have an emergency clause, which would give opponents time to try gathering signatures to force a public vote on it.
The last time the Legislature made changes to laws involving same-sex couples, when it expanded domestic partnership laws in 2009, opponents quickly gathered enough signatures to bring those changes before voters. That law was upheld by voters, 53 percent to 47 percent.
Even before Gregoire announced her support for the legislation, a new coalition was forming to oppose it. The Rev. Ken Hutcherson of the Antioch Baptist Church in Kirkland, said the group had not yet settled on a name but would “absolutely” fight it during the upcoming session.
“We’re looking extremely forward to it,” Hutcherson said. “We want to kill it in the Legislature” after getting members of both houses on the record voting for or against the bill. “We do not want to give the Democrats or the Republicans the opportunity to put it on the people.”
Hutcherson, an African-American who grew up in Alabama in the 1950s and 1960s, contended that Gregoire was paying back the political support she received from gays and lesbians over the years by backing a same-sex marriage bill.
“It’s an absolute insult, what she said, trying to compare homosexuals with what African-Americans went through in the South,” he added.
Sen. Dan Swecker of Rochester, a leading Republican opponent on the gay marriage issue, said he was surprised Gregoire brought up the contentious issue during a short session that has to deal with significant budget cuts.
“It will be a very divisive issue,” Swecker said. “She’s just kind of fanning the flames.”
The two parties have worked together on budget problems in recent years, and one of the reasons was gay marriage legislation was “taken off the table,” he said.
Gregoire said the state’s financial woes shouldn’t be an excuse for not taking up same-sex marriage: “We’re going to continue to discriminate because we have budget problems?”
Swecker called that a “facetious” argument: “It will be very much a part of the mix.”
The two candidates most likely to replace Gregoire when she leaves office next year were split on the issue.
Attorney General Rob McKenna, the leading Republican candidate for governor, supports the state’s current law on domestic partnerships.
“He does not support gay marriage as a matter of faith,” campaign spokesman Randy Pepples said. McKenna has not seen a draft of the bill Gregoire will back, but thinks if the law does change, it should go before the voters, not be handled solely by the Legislature.
U.S. Rep. Jay Inslee, the top Democrat in the race, supports same-sex marriage in Washington and backs Gregoire’s call for the change, spokeswoman Jaime Smith said. If the bill doesn’t make it through the Legislature this session, he’d support placing it on the ballot in November through the initiative process.
Judge rules against two-thirds tax law 
maestro64 on January 04 at 11:52 a.m.
Wow, what a load of bull. The gov wants to support marriage between non biologically compatible partners. Suppose her next step is to include dogs and pigs.
philipgregory on January 04 at 11:53 a.m.
Just when I thought she couldn’t do anymore harm to this state!
larry_b on January 04 at 11:57 a.m.
she is just pulling the same garbage that our ex-mayor and council did at the end of their time. vote for stuff that does’nt even matter to their re-election campaign ‘cuse they r done. it is funny how at the end of the year they cant find answers to debt crisis, but next week will sit down and put this crap on the table….!
BlondeSquawker on January 04 at 12:01 p.m.
So what if they can’t breed. There’s too many people on this planet anyway.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 12:05 p.m.
As I have said before, if you’re against gay marriage, THEN DON’T HAVE A GAY MARRIAGE, that way it will NEVER affect you.
Why does it concern you who loves who? If your religion is against gay marriage, fantastic, because the governor said churches are not required to preform gay marriages.
Worry about your own life, stay out of others.
swell_swell on January 04 at 12:12 p.m.
Yay! It’s about time we stop being treated as second-class citizens and receive the same rights and privileges as everyone else. All I want to be able to do is marry the person I love and give this person the legal protection any spouse would have if I were to fall ill or be injured and die. As it stands right now, my biological family could try to challenge my partner for my assets after my death even though we are registered domestic partners (because they live in Pennsylvania where our relationship isn’t recognized).
In addition, there have been multiple cases of hospitals and other institutions not recognizing the rights of registered domestic partners to make decisions for one another, to visit one another, etc. So we clearly don’t have all the rights that heterosexual married couples have despite the law. As history has shown us, “separate but equal” isn’t.
BlondeSquawker on January 04 at 12:13 p.m.
Well said, Liberal.
detroitdude on January 04 at 12:19 p.m.
OK, now that the predictable and homophobic comments are out of the way…
This is a good thing, gay people have just as much a right to marry the person they love as straight people. If you don’t support gay marriage, don’t marry a gay person. Otherwise, quit worrying about other peoples business.
JayNW on January 04 at 12:24 p.m.
how about nobody gets a legal marriage. Just keep the government out of the marriage business altogether? I know people on both sides of the argument that support this. If you want to get married, go to the church of your choice, or have a ceremony that you want and then you can be married.
Problem is the money- the money generated from marriage liceneses, fees and of course how much does it cost to get a divorce? How many attorneys wuold be out of business if we didn’t have legal marriages? How much money would we save if this wasn’t even an argument anymore?
misjustice on January 04 at 12:31 p.m.
Gay marriage is great for the economy; all of those ceremonies generate lots of bidness. Go for it, Governor! Washington State, a great place to be gay AND married!
; )
jddavis on January 04 at 12:31 p.m.
Interesting take JayNW…
We’ll see what the voters say.
32Ford on January 04 at 12:44 p.m.
Another nail in the coffin of my dear country!!!!! Slowly our great country will be destroyed!!!
Bruce (aka thatoneguy) on January 04 at 12:49 p.m.
In my relatively small circle of friends, I know 3 couples who have gotten married exclusively for the insurance benefits. They were happy just living together until a medical issue came up. Now they are all happily married, with benefits. BTW none of them have or want children.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 12:49 p.m.
32Ford on January 04 at 12:44 p.m.
Another nail in the coffin of my dear country!!!!! Slowly our great country will be destroyed!!!
No one’s keeping you here. In fact we don’t like your ignorant kind. Leave this great country at your earliest convenience. Thanks in advance, bigot. They kill gays in Iran, suggest you move there.
Scoutster on January 04 at 12:54 p.m.
I believe in a Biblical perspective: Marriage is between one man and as many women as he can buy with his asses.
Diana on January 04 at 12:55 p.m.
Same sex marriage is no threat to the institution of marriage and no one who has ever claimed it is has ever provided a shred of evidence. Such claims come from fear and hate.
Know what is a threat to marriage and children? Unemployment and financial insecurity are real threats to marriage and children. Extended tours of duty overseas to engage in pointless military adventurism is a real threat to marriage and family. Pumping toxins that cause illness and birth defects into the environment is a threat to marriage and family. If you want to protect marriage and family, start addressing those issues seriously.
mkries2 on January 04 at 1:02 p.m.
That’s a pretty lame analogy, Maestro. Last I checked, straight dogs are not allowed to marry straight dogs of the opposite sex, much less a pig of the same sex. Granted, a ceremony of a dog and a pig getting married would be kinda cute, but I don’t know of anyone who has actually had one.
In fact, if anyone puts on a dog or pig wedding, I would love an invitation.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 1:04 p.m.
To the people who love the qouting the bible against gay marriage, stop picking and choosing what bible verses you want to follow - either follow them all or follow none.
So with that, I hope you took this passage from the bible into account when you got married.
A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin she shall be executed.
-Deuteronomy 22:13-21
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 1:07 p.m.
Once AGAIN, for the ignoramuses.
UUber-Conservative Theodore Olson, GWB’s Solicitor General. Mr. Olson’s wife perished in the 9/11 attacks.
A recap of Mr. Olson’s WINNING argument in Federal Court.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/01/08/the-conservative-case-for-gay-marriage.html
EthicsinLE on January 04 at 1:11 p.m.
How about our governor stop worrying about gay marriage and other trivial issues and focus on jobs, our state economy and getting people back to work? Seems her priorities are messed up. All other trivail issues can wait till the real problems are fixed.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 1:17 p.m.
jddavis on January 04 at 12:31 p.m.
Interesting take JayNW…
We’ll see what the voters say.
The voters have already spoken.
The most recent vote on the general matter, Initiative R-71, was passed by a majority of the voters of the state on Nov. 3rd, 2009.
It’s only ancillary data as to the law, but they have spoken.
paulti on January 04 at 1:19 p.m.
The “church will be forced to marry gays” argument which you will hear a lot doesn’t wash. For example, if you’re a baptist you are not allowed to get married in the Catholic church. Same will hold true for gay folks. I think we should do what most civilized countries do and go to the courthouse or city hall first for the legal stuff and then to a church if you want a religious ceremony. By the way there are many religions that will be happy to marry gay couples.
paulti on January 04 at 1:38 p.m.
@Ethic-politicians run on fiscal and social issues all the time. I think during a legislative session there is plenty of time to discuss both types of issues. This issue will go to a vote of the people in the form of a referendum (if the opporents get the signatures)so instead of fighting it just pass it and then lets vote.
Local on January 04 at 1:49 p.m.
She just lost my vote, and before you judge me you don’t know my demographics.
william1977 on January 04 at 1:54 p.m.
It won’t pass. Not a chance.
Normal people are not in favor of this. Marriage is between ONE Man and ONE Woman. That is it. It’s in the Bible- everyone knows it as the moral standard.
Shut it down now, once and for all. Don’t recognize it, legalize it or make it ok. Because it isn’t.
Bruce (aka thatoneguy) on January 04 at 1:58 p.m.
^ LOL, Local
Bruce (aka thatoneguy) on January 04 at 1:59 p.m.
Also ^ LOL William
detroitdude on January 04 at 2:02 p.m.
@william1977: Before you make blanket statements like that, you ought to be prepared to provide evidence.
First of all, what is “normal” as you put it? Second, again, WHY do you care about other peoples business? Please present your evidence that “normal” people are not in favor of this. I’m a heterosexual male and I support gay marriage, does that somehow make me not normal?
“It’s in the Bible- everyone knows it as the moral standard.”
Ignorance and fear is all that is. Who in the hell are you to tell anyone that the Bible is the end all be all of truth? I hope someone has a gay wedding next door to you, and then I hope they raise a family, and I hope it boils your blood :)
You see, this type of thing only becomes an issue when people like YOU make it an issue. Now carry on and get back to The 700 Club :)
andrew5 on January 04 at 2:04 p.m.
And of course…the hate rants are running rampant. Its the same mindset that did not want women to have the right to vote, or black people to have any kind of civil rights. Why are some people so scared of this?
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 2:05 p.m.
william1977 - see my post above about the bible.
Also, how did Referendum 71 do legalizing domestic partnerships in 2009? Oh yeah it passed, fairly easy also. All polls since then have just shown an increase of people in favor of gay marriage. So yeah, sorry, this isn’t Idaho, this is Washington, this will pass because we are tolerant of others and believe in equal rights for everyone here.
Local, I hope you are being sarcastic, otherwise your post is kinda irrelevant since the governor Gregoire is not running for another office again.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 2:09 p.m.
The people against gay marriage were the same people against civil rights and interracial marriage. Today we look back at those racists in disgust and they are remember as some of the worst people in this countries history.
You bigots fighting to deny equal rights for people will be given this same distinction in 20-30 years….enjoy.
WHS on January 04 at 2:17 p.m.
Hey gang, there is no reasoning with the closed minded. Their small and confused brains are made up and that’s that. Fortunately, hypocrites and bigots are becoming the minority…
WHS
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 2:17 p.m.
Local on January 04 at 1:49 p.m.
She just lost my vote, and before you judge me you don’t know my demographics.
She’s not running for anything.
What do your dreams tell you she’s running for?
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 2:21 p.m.
You know, none of this would be a problem if heterosexual couples would quit breeding gay and lesbian children
Just sayin…
misjustice on January 04 at 2:23 p.m.
Yeah!
Let gay people marry; they have the right to be just as miserable as straight folks do, trapped in marriage.
Plus, it makes the haters spit; gotta love that!
; )
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 2:27 p.m.
greenlibertarian, so true.
Of course, now you’re opening up the whole “its a choice” thing with these people.
Let me put that one to rest now, if it was a choice, please tell me when you sat down and decided to be straight and not gay, when did you decide this?
Local on January 04 at 2:29 p.m.
Why does it concern you who loves who?
Worry about your own life, stay out of others
Voters are asked for their opinion when selecting candidates and on issues. It’s called voting. When I am asked to choose between candidates or on issues it becomes my concern. Furthermore, if I don’t like something I can be proactive and create an initiative to change it. So really any issue I so choose is my concern. So in that light, your question/comment really doesn’t make a great deal of sense.
william1977 on January 04 at 2:30 p.m.
detroitdude says..
Who in the hell are you to tell anyone that the Bible is the end all be all of truth? I hope someone has a gay wedding next door to you, and then I hope they raise a family, and I hope it boils your blood :)….
first- i do believe the Bible is the end all be all of truth. Guess you will find out in the end- right? Big chance to take on being wrong..but you have free will. Enjoy.
second- i live in an area with like minded people. to each his own i suppose. It’s wrong in my eye and that of God. But you go ahead…
huskerinwa on January 04 at 2:34 p.m.
What does breeding have to do with marriage?? Gay people don’t produce gay babies, straight people do!
If, Kim Kardashian, Newt Gingrich, etc. don’t prove that there is no “sanctity of marriage” then show me one!
50% divorce rate w/o gays means that it doesn’t matter homophobe!
& what’s with the bestiality fascination that you Christians hold on to?? Me thinks you protest too much!
People tend to change their views when they have a gay child. 55-60% of Americans favor gay marriage.
@local I’m sure she’s sad she lost your vote LOL
detroitdude on January 04 at 2:38 p.m.
Furthermore, why would anyone “choose” to be gay and have to deal with all the bigotry and homophobia on display in this very thread? I don’t remember “choosing” to be straight.
Local on January 04 at 2:47 p.m.
Hey Detroitdude, can one person love another person but not like their actions or is anything less than full admiration of all their actions homophobic and bigotry?
32Ford on January 04 at 2:49 p.m.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 12:49 p.m.
“No one’s keeping you here. In fact we don’t like your ignorant kind. Leave this great country at your earliest convenience. Thanks in advance, bigot. They kill gays in Iran, suggest you move there.”
What a totally ignorant and stupid thing to say. Just goes to show the direction this country is heading.
Shadedmuse on January 04 at 2:59 p.m.
Gay marrage will be more biz for divource lawyers solicters and barristers and wedding planner who are all gay.
Coffee on January 04 at 3:00 p.m.
Will a bisexual have the right to be married to a man and a women at the same time?
Diana on January 04 at 3:03 p.m.
B-b-but, it’s in the bible!
You mean like that prophet Solomon, who had 700 wives and 300 concubines?
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 3:24 p.m.
Coffee on January 04 at 3:00 p.m.
Will a bisexual have the right to be married to a man and a women at the same time?
I didn’t know you were bisexual, Coffee, but that’s a good question!
Sorry, no, marriage will be continue to be defined as it has been in the modern age as existing between 2, that’s two, as in 1…2…, loving and consenting adults. Oh, in case you were wondering. Adult HUMANS! Some people like Man on Dog Google Santorum get all confused about that part.
Glad I could help!
WHS on January 04 at 3:38 p.m.
32Ford on January 04 at 2:49 p.m.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 12:49 p.m.
“No one’s keeping you here. In fact we don’t like your ignorant kind. Leave this great country at your earliest convenience. Thanks in advance, bigot. They kill gays in Iran, suggest you move there.”
What a totally ignorant and stupid thing to say. Just goes to show the direction this country is heading.
This is too funny… 32Ford is getting all righteous about being called ignorant, so he calls somebody ignorant.
WHS
RedCedar on January 04 at 3:46 p.m.
My goodness. 46 comments on what would be a complete non-issue if we were facing any serious problems.
This is an easy political point for Gov Gregoire. There is nobody in the state who was prepared to vote for her, but changed their mind after hearing this announcements. The only people who are upset by it would never have thought about voting for her anyway. The political calculation is no doubt that a fair number of fiscally-conservative gay people who might have been considering McKenna will swing to the Gregoire side. I’m not sure those people are so gullible as to be pandered to on a single issue, but I’ll let the pollsters sort that out next fall.
Meanwhile, she’s right about one thing — the tide of public opinion has rightly turned in favor of gay marriage, just as it’s turned in favor of birth control and against gun control. The more of these artificially-divisive hot-button issues we can check off the list and put behind us, the better our politics will become.
In the short term, legalizing gay marriage may indeed be a small boon for the Democrats. In the long run, I think it will do the Republicans more good because once it’s settled law, Republican candidates will no longer feel compelled to rail against it and leave themselves open to charges of being intolerant religious nuts.
paulti on January 04 at 3:49 p.m.
Since Massachusetts legalized gay marriage the divorce rate has gone down(in that state)…just sayin!
Spokalou on January 04 at 3:58 p.m.
Marriage for gays and lesbians? Dear god haven’t they suffered enough?!? (from a New Yorker cartoon - I couldn’t resist :-)
But seriously… “traditional marriage” was a property exchange between two men. A few cows or goats traded for a man’s daughter. And a biblical defense? Puleeeze! polygamy, concubines, and stoning for non-virgins. The social traditions of 2,000 years ago are not relevant to our world today.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 4:06 p.m.
RedCedar, what “side” are you talking about re: McKenna vis-a-vis Gregoire?
Diana on January 04 at 4:28 p.m.
@Coffee: “Will a bisexual have the right to be married to a man and a women at the same time?”
Absolutely. And then they can marry their dogs and pigs. It’s quite a slippery slope. Better go hide under the bed until further notice.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 5:05 p.m.
Stay classy Coffee.
detroitdude on January 04 at 5:06 p.m.
“Hey Detroitdude, can one person love another person but not like their actions or is anything less than full admiration of all their actions homophobic and bigotry?”
No one said you have to admire anybody or what they do. But when your long held ideals impede others from their pursuit of happiness it becomes an issue. It is only an issue because of the few backwards folks who get up in arms over it. Gay couples should have the right to marry for love and all the right reasons and also to marry for all the wrong reasons like some heterosexual couples do. If you aren’t worried what others are doing it automatically becomes a non-issue, and should be supported.
“first- i do believe the Bible is the end all be all of truth. Guess you will find out in the end- right? Big chance to take on being wrong..but you have free will. Enjoy.”
You assume that what YOU believe in is correct and what I believe in is incorrect, that is the initial fault in your argument. It is your truth or no truth, that does not constitute a fair debate from the get go.I am willing to concede that neither of us probably has the “real truth”, or are even capable of comprehending it.
“second- i live in an area with like minded people. to each his own i suppose. It’s wrong in my eye and that of God. But you go ahead…”
You assume that YOU are speaking for God, lol. How arrogant that you know what He wants. You admit you live in an area with like minded people such as yourself, that just reinforces my initial point of–why do you care one way or another? You aren’t privy to it, it isn’t a common thing where you live, so tell me why you care what gay people do? What is your beef with their pursuit of happiness, or misery for that matter?
pmbrown49 on January 04 at 5:18 p.m.
Next thing you know, it will be legal for Montanans to marry sheep!
Oh well…
liveinfearoftheSPD on January 04 at 5:19 p.m.
@Coffee
Only if they are Mormons.
basscaster on January 04 at 5:24 p.m.
In the New Testament it’s called perversion! Romans 1:26 and 27. Spin it all you want, it is what it is.
jddavis on January 04 at 5:27 p.m.
@Green—The vote wasn’t about “gay marraige”, it was about domestic partnerships….right?
Local on January 04 at 5:37 p.m.
“Hey Detroitdude, can one person love another person but not like their actions or is anything less than full admiration of all their actions homophobic and bigotry?”
“No one said you have to admire anybody or what they do. But when your long held ideals impede others from their pursuit of happiness it becomes an issue.”…
.
.
.
.
But how does that make me a homophob or bigot? I wish you would be more careful in using those terms because your casual use of throwing them around really does a disservice when they really do apply.
.
.
……………….
.
.
“Gay couples should have the right to marry for love and all the right reasons and also to marry for all the wrong reasons like some heterosexual couples do. If you aren’t worried what others are doing it automatically becomes a non-issue, and should be supported.”
These are your opinions. Mine differ.
??Riddler?? on January 04 at 5:50 p.m.
?? Homo - Phobes ??
?? Don’t believe in Gay Marriage…Shouldn’t Gays be as miserable as us straight folks ??
detroitdude on January 04 at 5:51 p.m.
“But how does that make me a homophob or bigot?”
I never called you a homophobe, or a bigot. I was speaking in general to the prevalent intolerance displayed towards gay people.
Local on January 04 at 6:01 p.m.
Ok. Thank you for allowing me to love a person that is gay but not support their actions without fear of being called a homophobe or bigot.
woamike on January 04 at 6:07 p.m.
“The people against gay marriage were the same people against civil rights and interracial marriage. Today we look back at those racists in disgust and they are remember as some of the worst people in this countries history.”
Nice talking point, but not so. Not even close.
BTW, those racists you deride were virtually all southern DEMOCRATS.
“As I have said before, if you’re against gay marriage, THEN DON’T HAVE A GAY MARRIAGE, that way it will NEVER affect you.”
This is called grade-school “logic” and is no more “convincing” than someone saying:
“As I have said before, if you’re against murder, THEN DON’T KILL ANYONE, that way it will NEVER affect you.”
Note: I’m not trying to make an equivalence between gay “marriage” and murder, just trying to point out the ridiculousness of that kind of reasoning whether it be to argue a liberal, conservative or any other point of view.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 6:07 p.m.
jddavis on January 04 at 5:27 p.m.
@Green—The vote wasn’t about “gay marraige”, it was about domestic partnerships….right?
Why yes, check out the big brain on jddavis.
And all the terrible things that the anti-gay, anti-domestic partnership bigots said would happen if the law remained in place, HAVEN’T HAPPENED!
In Canada, there have been no negative consequences from gay marriage.
In these states that have decided to allow marriage equality, there have been no negative consequences.
The voting public of WA knows this.
Put Marriage Equality on the ballot. In a fair fight, the people will vote for it, but so what?
It is the LAW of the LAND (defined equal civil right) (or will be) that is not subject to plebiscite!
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 6:09 p.m.
So tell us, woam, how will the State of WA having marriage equality affect you in any fashion?
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 6:17 p.m.
A same sex couple can adopt children, birdog, under the same conditions as opposite-sex couples can adopt.
Do you think that’s wrong? Why?
What are you going to do about it?
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 6:23 p.m.
Birdog, yeah straight people are doing a good enough job producing and breeding gay people for us!
Also, the only other things that have sex with each other is EVERYTHING!
Diana on January 04 at 6:24 p.m.
Yes, indeed, wormlike was trying to create a false equivalence between gay marriages and murder.
Ridiculous. As Chef Gus would say, what are you afraid of, big boy?
jddavis on January 04 at 6:30 p.m.
“The voters have already spoken.
The most recent vote on the general matter, Initiative R-71, was passed by a majority of the voters of the state on Nov. 3rd, 2009.
It’s only ancillary data as to the law, but they have spoken.”
Gee Green, when responding to your comment above, you become insulting. Maybe you can explain to us common folk why the Governor would have to address this issue if the voters already spoken, and how a law is “only ancillary”.
What’s the matter Green, your mom not hug you enough when you were a kid?
WillyPeter on January 04 at 6:33 p.m.
Still waiting for an explanation:
If we now want to allow one to marry whomever one wants, and changed the fundamental definition of marriage, in the sense of fairness, justice, and equal rights, why shouldn’t I be allowed to marry three people? (they’ve already agreed to marry me… as soon as the governor says it’s O.K., of course)….:-)
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 6:41 p.m.
Do you have a point, jddavis?
Civil rights shouldn’t be up for a vote, but since the rapture-ready crowd decided to get the thing on the ballot, R-71, we had to have a vote.
It passed, voters supported the strongest domestic partnership law in the country.
If the fundamentalist bible-thumping anti-marriage equality folks put up an initiative to overturn the legislature’s expected passage of a full marriage equality bill, the people will vote, again, and as I said, given a fair campaign, the voters of the state of WA will follow in their 2009 footsteps and approve marriage equality.
By the time that happens, the matter may be moot, due to federal court decisions.
dougf on January 04 at 6:44 p.m.
Two reactions to comments posted earlier:
1: If same-sex marriage is a prelude to inter-species marriage, why didn’t the same thing happen when voting was extended beyond property-owning white males? Or maybe it did, which would explain how Rick Santorum was elected to the Senate.
2. Many of the same people who fret over the chance that foreign laws might weigh into U.S. Supreme Court rulings also insist that a book written by unelected Middle Easterners many centuries ago should be the guiding law in the United States today.
jddavis on January 04 at 6:50 p.m.
My point is simple Green, the voters will decided the gay marraige issue. Domestic Partnership (R-71) and gay marraige (initiative) are similar, but separate/different issues.
When you claim an initiative is a civil rights issue, and put it up against religious conviction(s) of the voters, nothing is a given. While those who supported or were indifferent about R-71, they may be firmly against gay marraige. I suspect there will be some pushback from a block of voters who supported R-71.
Personally, I don’t care one way or the other.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 6:51 p.m.
WillyPeter on January 04 at 6:33 p.m.
Still waiting for an explanation:
If we now want to allow one to marry whomever one wants, and changed the fundamental definition of marriage, in the sense of fairness, justice, and equal rights, why shouldn’t I be allowed to marry three people? (they’ve already agreed to marry me… as soon as the governor says it’s O.K., of course)….:-)
A friend of mine, John Peckerhead, had a burning desire to marry two wenches, whom had agreed to such. John asked me if I knew anyplace where he could get married in such a way. I told him not anywhere that I was aware of in the US and its territories.
I suggested that if he wanted to do such a thing, he should contact his state representative and state senator, and see if they would like to sponsor legislation that would allow for such a 3 way (or more) marriage.
As it stands, as I told some deeply disappointed folks upthread, the marriage equality bill continues the current practice of marriage being between 2, and only 2, that’s T.W.O, (two) consenting adults.
Sorry freaks, you’ll have to get your freak on someway else besides a State of WA marriage certificate. May I suggest Barbados? Or the DR, of course. El Rushbo highly recommends the DR.
woamike on January 04 at 6:54 p.m.
greenlib,
Ask any HONEST gay and they’ll tell you at its core, the gay “rights” movement has never been and is not now about “rights”. Rather, it’s always been about a burning desire to be considered “normal” by the public at large. Go ahead and castigate me all you want - in private, in your dark closet you know I’m right.
“Rights” plays well in Peoria and that’s why they’ve taken that road. No one wants to be accused of not supporting someone’s “rights”. It was and continues to be a brilliant political move. I applaud them for their savvy. They’re very close to achieving their goal of being considered “normal” by a majority of people in this country. How ironic considering using even the most dispationate definition of the word “normal” homosexual attraction is anything but.
As to your question “how will the state of WA having marriage equality affect you in any fashion?” Answer: in my opinion, it cheapens the institution of marriage which I consider to be a bedrock of civil society.
BTW, I know you really couldn’t give a rat’s about what I think in the least and were only fishing for something else you could accuse me of, but I thought I’d humor you anyway. . .
woamike on January 04 at 7:00 p.m.
@ Diana,
Woman, are you that dense??
When I specifically said I WASN’T making an equivalency argument, did you think I was trying to use reverse psychology on you or something? You crack me up.
Diana on January 04 at 7:07 p.m.
@wormlike, I know what you said and I know what you were trying to do.
No, I’m not that dense. Are you?
woamike on January 04 at 7:26 p.m.
Well Di,
All I can say is this: If I were to make an equivalency between murder and something else, it wouldn’t be gay “marriage”. Rather, it would be between murder and what appears to be your life’s obsession. You know, that “choice” thingy.
Thanks for playing anyway.
Say “hi” to your dog for me.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 7:26 p.m.
woamike,
As an openly gay male, I can say 110% you’re totally false and full of poop.
Don’t talk about things you know nothing about and gay issues/rights is one of them…..unless your a gay male also and know some information I didn’t receive at the last Homosexual Meeting.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 7:29 p.m.
woamike,
when did you decide to be straight? Was that a hard choice you had to make? How old were you when you decided to sleep with women and not other guys?
And that whole murder and choice thing is purely disgusting and bigoted hate.
Choice my a**
JBlim on January 04 at 7:36 p.m.
Those of you worried about man/dog marriage would do well to remember that a dog cannot consent to sex or marriage. So relax, not gonna happen.
Dazzeetrader11 on January 04 at 7:40 p.m.
Won’t pass.
woamike on January 04 at 7:44 p.m.
Lib,
Take a breath and unscrew yourself from the ceiling.
You asked, I’ll answer:
I didn’t. I was born “normal”. When I say “normal”, I use the word “normal” with neither passion nor prejudice. In other words, without a “good” nor “bad” connotation. In other words, no need to get exercised or emotional about it.
N/A
N/A
“purely disgusting and bigoted hate”?
Tell that to the once developing humans who were chilling in their mother’s wombs before their hearts were stopped by a “doctor” and they were summarily sucked out and disposed of like trash because their presence was inconvenient for their “mother”.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 04 at 7:51 p.m.
Awesome, realizes he can’t win this argument so he tries to bring up abortion.
Thread over.
soccermomsusie on January 04 at 7:55 p.m.
I agree with a lot being said on this forum.
1. Gregoire should solve all of our other problems first. After discovering the cure for cancer, the next day she can declare Washington a limp-wristed Glee Wheeeee zone. PRIORITIES!
2. We should do what Jesus says regarding homosexuality. True, when it comes to marriage, the only thing He did condemn was divorce. But, Pat Robertson went into a Chunky Monkey trance and channeled Our Lord. Jesus passed along His condemnation and some nifty predictions to Rev Pat.
3. I smell a trap. My Libertard nephew says if you want to kill “Gay” Marriage, kill the reason Nonheterosexuals get married - the need for spousal medical insurance benefits. In other words, IMPLEMENT 100% MEDICAL COVERAGE OF THE NATION THROUGH SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!! OMG, is this their plan?!?! Which would be worse? A nation chock full of Miss Piggy - Kermit couplings or a NATION OF CANADIANS?!? YUCK.
I will make a prediction. NO ONE IS GOING TO VOTE FOR GREGOIRE FOR GOVERNOR THIS NEXT ELECTION!!!
HEAR OUR VOICE!!!
Rod_Foss on January 04 at 8:05 p.m.
Again…
All religion is now worthless and empty. With the death of Jesus on the cross and His resurrection from the dead, the only religion God ever acknowledged – The Law He gave to Moses (“Judaism,” euphemistically) – was set aside. It’s Jesus as Savior, or you can try to please God on your own. You could also try crossing the Grand Canyon in a single running jump…you got about the same odds.
Solomon’s wives and concubines? (Hey, don’t forget his dad, David…did the same.) Yup. God didn’t say those men could do that. The Bible reports the deeds of lotsa people who did things wrong. How does the objective reporting of a fact in the Bible equal endorsement?
Christians can’t “follow everything in the Bible” because not everything in the Bible is to Christians. Just like I have no right or duty to read correspondence you write to someone else. Jesus is the fulfillment of that religious law. His righteousness is imputed to Christians (Romans throughout, look at chapters 4 and 10 specifically).
Rod_Foss on January 04 at 8:06 p.m.
Here’s something Jesus said you should know. He said it first to all His disciples within the context of not hindering children who want to come to Him; there was a direct statement about Judas, at the Last Supper: “Woe unto the world because of offenses! for it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh!” (Matthew 18:7). And per Judas, “The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if had not been born.” Matthew 26:24. God has said unequivocally that homosexual behavior is evil, like all sin, yet He pretty much doesn’t stop wickedness. He lets it come to its full and then He renders judgment (Gen. 15:16). Sodom and Gomorrah is a case in point. God was determined to destroy it for homosexuality, even though His own law against it, in Leviticus, was still 400 years away. Abraham talked God into mercy if 10 righteous people could be found. God said yes. But 10 weren’t found (evil to the full), so judgment fell. “…account that the longsuffering of the Lord is salvation.” 2 Peter 3:15. The time God gives for evil to come to its full is also time gives a nation to repent and come Him. In these New Testament times, Him is Jesus.
Homosexual marriage will one day be in every state. All Gregoire and the legislature will do is add Washington state’s share of evil to America’s “cup.” One day it will be full.
You have won the culture war. Your “messiah” will be reelected; no Republican can beat him. Christians cannot and will not stop you or regain our country. All we can do is warn.
“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man (for example, homosexual marriage); but the end thereof are the ways of death.” Proverbs 14:12. Not just homosexual marriage, for sure, but the happy toleration of all sin will one day kill our country. God’s patience is not eternal. So while you will get literally anything you want, more and more, on national, state and local levels, it won’t last. Some day God will say “enough.”
Everybody needs Jesus as Savior, and His offer is open to everyone, including homosexuals.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 8:07 p.m.
Go ahead and castigate me all you want - in private, in your dark closet you know I’m right.
-woam
That’s just pervy. Ewwww. Ick.
Figured you had no real reason. “Cheapens” marriage, eh? Explain yourself, or pipe down.
How about Newt having three “until death do us part” marriages, does that cheapen marriage?
My answer, yes.
Anyway don’t care much more arguing with you ignoramuses, you can’t come up with even one credible argument.
As conservative Ted Olson said, in his WINNING argument in FEDERAL court:
There is no conservative case against marriage equality, there is only the bigoted, ignorant case, and it’s vapid, empty, hollow.
The_Seer on January 04 at 8:16 p.m.
My business In One Eye and Out the Other productions provides a variety of wedding services and I know many other related businesses who welcome this long needed shift.
Visit the Facebook page gay engaged couples, we are a rainbow friendly business!
Pigrobin on January 04 at 8:19 p.m.
Gay marriage ranks in importance to me as much as the over-hyped, non-impacting global warming ruse. Neither is of significance unless you make it something it isn’t. Move on, there’s nothing to see here folks.
D Statler on January 04 at 8:23 p.m.
I am very sorry that these people were not fortunate enough to have a solid Dad and Mom to grow up with in a loving family. I was and personally feel that any children exposed to these same sex marriages and unions will be deprived from the benefits of having a parent of both sexes. Things are hard enough for children now days without trying to figure out who they are and what is right. I understand that both same sex partners may still love their kids just the same. It is the example set at the young age that will influence decisions made the rest of their lifes.Two conscenting adults ? How many innocent kids?
Now back to our Governor. I too believe she would never have brought this up if she was looking at re-election. I think that there is more important things to focus on in Washington State right now.Our leadership should be looking at ways to cut un-needed programs and balance our budget before it worsens.
nwse on January 04 at 8:25 p.m.
A minor point… Iowa was left out of the list of states which have same-sex marriages now.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 8:31 p.m.
woam, Rod Foss, Rev. Phelps, and all these ilk will be in for one big surprise come Judgment Day. Absent sincere repentance and contrition, and receiving the Father’s forgiveness, they will be burning in hell forever, for their bigotry. They can’t recognize it, but we have pointed out the log, and still, not unlike these who justified UNSPEAKABLE violence, brutal rape, and murder against God’s people of color.
The doom of Ham has been branded on the form and features of his African descendants. The hand of fate has united his color and destiny. Man cannot separate what God hath joined.” United States Senator James Henry Hammond [ See note 2. ]
“[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God… it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation… it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts.” –Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America.
Who Would Jesus Discriminate Against?
http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.com/?page_id=8
Gay people were made by God too, they are His children. He doesn’t make mistakes.
greenlibertarian on January 04 at 8:43 p.m.
Pigrobin on January 04 at 8:19 p.m.
Gay marriage ranks in importance to me as much as the over-hyped, non-impacting global warming ruse. Neither is of significance unless you make it something it isn’t. Move on, there’s nothing to see here folks.
-pigrobin
(the second human-animal hybrid to chime in on this thread)
Of course you don’t give a damn. You don’t have a loved one, a good friend, a brother, a son, a daughter, or apparently anybody you care about who is gay or lesbian that wants to celebrate their same-sex relationship with all the same 100’s and 100’s of rights and privileges that opposite sex married couples have automatically.
Doesn’t concern somebody you give a damn about, too damn bad for anybody else.
Appreciate the honesty.
Pigrobin on January 04 at 9:04 p.m.
Hey AngryLibertarian, you misread me. I don’t care if two people of the same sex who love each other get married. It’s a non event to most people. Get over yourself and your personal angst. Go ahead, hate me too… you have everybody else frying in hell, I suppose I’ll see you there. KYS.
Bruce (aka thatoneguy) on January 05 at 12:25 a.m.
Yay! This is fun!
WillyPeter on January 05 at 6:17 a.m.
…poor GreenLib. Can’t give me a ratiional answer to my question….so says, “Sorry, no, marriage will be continue to be defined as it has been in the modern age….”. Oh, really? Am I allowed to tease with a “liar,liar, pants on fire” here?
And “freaks!” are those of us with disparate opinions?
So muddy the water….’cause you still haven’t seriously, or fairly, answered my interrogatory of Jan 4, 6:33 p.m. We’re talking about what’s “fair?”? What’s “right?” So why can’t I marry whomever I want?….but you can??
BlondeSquawker on January 05 at 9:30 a.m.
Gay stuff in your drinking water? It’s more likely than you think. Be afraid, W. Peter, be very afraid.
bleckb on January 05 at 9:19 p.m.
Equal protection under the law. Gotta love the Constitution for that. Same-sex marriage is just one more step to realizing the ideals of our Constitution.