A (Bad) Marriage Made in Washington

By Doug Carlson
Dec 2, 2009

More than 400,000 residents of the nation’s capital are eligible to exercise their right to vote—but not on marriage. On that issue of far-reaching consequences, District of Columbia voters have been denied a voice, with a group of 11 officeholders taking authority into their own hands today to redefine marriage.

In an 11-2 vote, the D.C. City Council cast its enthusiastic support for legalizing same-sex “marriage” in the District, all but guaranteeing the council will easily approve the measure when the members must vote on it a second time in the coming weeks. That will put D.C. in company with five states—Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont—that have legalized same-sex “marriage.”

All six of these decisions on marriage share a common theme: Citizens have not been granted a say in the matter. Instead, courts and elected officials have effectively declared themselves first and final arbiters, imposing an expanded definition of marriage on millions of people and thereby hammering away at the very foundation of our society. Government, the people are told, knows best.

For months, the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission has joined forces with D.C. pastors and congregations of multiple denominations in marriage rallies and in testimony before the council and the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics with a simple message: “Let the people vote.” The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission was among numerous organizations that submitted testimony (PDF) to the D.C. Council and board in October, outlining how same-sex “marriage” “would damage families and communities.”

Such appeals have been quietly dismissed. On Nov. 17, the D.C. board ruled that a proposed ballot initiative stating that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in the District of Columbia” would violate the city’s Human Rights Act, calling the initiative discriminatory. Yet the board’s action itself violates D.C.’s charter, which guarantees citizens the right to vote. That decision is now under legal suit.

Recent history demonstrates that the American public, when given the chance to vote on marriage, overwhelmingly support the institution as only the union of one man and one woman. Traditional marriage is 31 for 31 when placed on the ballot. Thirty states have written the historic definition of marriage into their constitutions, and Maine voters last month overturned a same-sex “marriage” law approved by their legislature. Why not let D.C. voters also decide for themselves?

Still, same-sex “marriage” is not a done deal in the District. Should the D.C. Council cast, as expected, its second of two votes for same-sex “marriage” in two weeks, Congress would have 30 legislative days to overturn the ruling. The problem is that the congressional Democratic leadership, the drivers of the legislative agenda, have signaled no intention of challenging any such law. To their credit, nearly 60 congressmen, led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), are sponsoring the D.C. Defense of Marriage Act (H.R. 2608), which defines marriage in D.C. as “the union of one man and one woman.” But this, too, appears unlikely to receive a vote.

To disenfranchise 400,000 Washingtonians on an institution as fundamental and consequential as marriage is a brash show of disregard for the democratic process. Until the D.C. Council and Congress get the message, they need a continuous reminder: Let the people vote!

To view testimony submitted Oct. 26 by Dr. Richard Land, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, to the D.C. City Council and the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics, expressing opposition to the same-sex “marriage” bill and asking that District residents be given the opportunity to vote on marriage, click here (352 KB PDF).

Further Learning

Learn more about: Family, Marriage, Sexual Purity, Homosexuality, Citizenship, Legislation,

You May Also Like

Bioethics: 38 ways to make a baby

By Joe Carter - Oct 17, 2013

From the time of Adam and Eve until the late 1970s, there was—with one notable exception—only one way to make a baby: the sexual bonding of a man and a woman. The number of baby-making methods increased to two in 1978 after the birth of Louise Brown, the first “test tube baby.” Today, there are 38 ways to make a baby, almost all of which can be accomplished without sexual intercourse.…

Read More

VIDEO: The importance of Christ’s humanity

By Thomas Willis - Mar 21, 2014

Bruce Ware, professor of Christian Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, explains why Jesus being fully God and fully human is a central part of the Christian faith.

“Understanding Christ’s humanity is vital in how we relate to him,” said Ware.…

Read More

A dagger aimed at the heart of America’s charities

By Richard Land - Nov 29, 2012

If Americans are not vigilant, they may well wake up from their New Year’s celebrations to discover that while they were cleaning up from Thanksgiving and preparing for Christmas festivities their lame duck Congress combined with the Obama administration to fashion a draconian threat to the religious and non-religious charities they cherish.…

Read More
D.C. council votes to legalize ‘gay marriage’ HUNGER: Feeding ministries in Alabama