iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Washington House Passes Gay Marriage Bill

Gay Marriage

RACHEL LA CORTE   02/ 8/12 11:10 PM ET  AP

OLYMPIA, Wash. — Washington state lawmakers voted to approve gay marriage Wednesday, setting the stage for the state to become the seventh in the nation to allow same-sex couples to wed.

The action comes a day after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on gay marriage unconstitutional, saying it was a violation of the civil rights of gay and lesbian couples.

The Washington House passed the bill on a 55-43 vote. Supporters in the public viewing galleries stood and cheered as many on the Democratic side of the House floor hugged after the vote.

The state Senate approved the measure last week, and the bill now goes to Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire, who is expected to sign it into law next week.

Gregoire watched the vote in the wings with the bill's sponsor, Sen. Ed Murray, who is gay and has sponsored gay rights legislation for years. Murray said the vote marked "a day that will be remembered in the history of this state."

Gregoire issued a statement after the vote, saying it was "a major step toward completing a long and important journey to end discrimination based on sexual orientation."

Democratic Rep. Jamie Pedersen, a gay lawmaker from Seattle who also has sponsored gay rights bills for several years, said that he and his partner have been grateful for the rights that exist under the state's domestic partnership laws but such protections are "a pale and inadequate substitute for marriage."

Pedersen, during his remarks on the House floor, read from Tuesday's ruling by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, citing a section that stated "marriage is the name that society gives to the relationship that matters most between two adults."

Several Republicans argued against the bill, saying that it goes against the tradition of marriage. Rep. Jay Rodne said the measure "severs the cultural, historical and legal underpinnings of the institution of marriage."

Despite the action, gay couples can't begin walking down the aisle just yet.

The proposal would take effect 90 days after the session ends next month but opponents have promised to fight gay marriage with a ballot measure that would allow voters to overturn the legislative approval.

If opponents gather enough signatures to take their fight to the ballot box, the law would be put on hold pending the outcome of a November election. Opponents must turn in more than 120,000 signatures by June 6 if they want to challenge the proposed law. Otherwise gay couples could wed starting in June.

Several Republican amendments were rejected, including one that would have added private businesses and individuals, such as bakers and photographers, to the exemption in the measure that doesn't require religious organizations or churches to perform marriages and doesn't subject them to penalties if they don't marry gay or lesbian couples. Another would have required a one-month residency requirement before people could get married in Washington.

Two Republicans – Reps. Glenn Anderson of Fall City and Maureen Walsh of College Place – crossed the aisle and voted in favor of the bill. Three Democrats voted against it: Reps. Chris Hurst of Enumclaw, Steve Kirby of Tacoma and Mark Miloscia of Federal Way. Democrats hold a 56-42 majority in the House.

Washington state has had domestic partnership laws since 2007, and more than a dozen other states have provisions, ranging from domestic partnerships to gay marriage, supporting same-sex couples.

Gay marriage is legal in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C.

Lawmakers in New Jersey are expected to vote on gay marriage next week, and Maine could see a gay marriage proposal on the November ballot.

Proposed amendments to ban gay marriage will be on the ballots in North Carolina in May and in Minnesota in November.

A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit ruled Tuesday against California's voter-approved same-sex marriage ban, known as Proposition 8.

The panel gave gay marriage opponents time to appeal the 2-1 decision before ordering the state to allow same-sex weddings to resume. The judges also said the decision only applies to California, even though the court has jurisdiction in nine western states.

Lawyers for the coalition of conservative religious groups that sponsored Proposition 8 said they have not decided if they will seek a new 9th Circuit hearing or file an appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Washington state's momentum for same-sex marriage has been building and the debate has changed significantly since 1998, when lawmakers passed Washington's Defense of Marriage Act banning gay marriage. The constitutionality of that law ultimately was upheld by the state Supreme Court in 2006. But earlier that year, a gay civil rights measure passed after nearly 30 years of failure, signaling a change in the Legislature.

The quick progression of domestic partnership laws in the state came soon after, with a domestic partnership law in 2007, and two years of expansion that culminated in 2009 with "everything but marriage" expansion that was upheld by voters.

In October, a University of Washington poll found that an increasing number of people in the state support same-sex marriage. About 43 percent of respondents said they support gay marriage, up from 30 percent in the same poll five years earlier. Another 22 percent said they support giving identical rights to gay couples, without calling the unions "marriage."

If a challenge to gay marriage law was on the ballot, 55 percent said they would vote to uphold the law. And 38 percent said they would vote to reject a gay marriage law.

Same-sex marriage also has the backing of several prominent Pacific Northwest businesses, including Microsoft Corp., Nike Inc. and Starbucks Corp.

___

The gay marriage bill is Senate Bill 6239.

____

Follow Rachel La Corte on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/RachelAPOly

___

Online:

http://www.leg.wa.gov

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
OLYMPIA, Wash. — Washington state lawmakers voted to approve gay marriage Wednesday, setting the stage for the state to become the seventh in the nation to allow same-sex couples to wed. The ac...
OLYMPIA, Wash. — Washington state lawmakers voted to approve gay marriage Wednesday, setting the stage for the state to become the seventh in the nation to allow same-sex couples to wed. The ac...
Filed by Paige Lavender  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4,481
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (58 total)
02:08 AM on 03/01/2012
www.Lesbianknot.com
Perky2Cents
"Putting it in, Even if you don't want it :)"
12:22 PM on 02/28/2012
Sure is nice to see some open minded unselfish people out in the world. Of course i live in texas and that will be when hell freezes over, that we will have same sex marriage legalized.
12:13 AM on 02/28/2012
I would like to congratulate all of the beautiful women who would like to meet and Marry a beautiful women
http://www.Lesbianknot.com
11:19 PM on 02/15/2012
Santorum must be homophobic, maybe he has some personal demons to exercise. This canidate proclaims to cherish State's rights, and believes in small government, one that stays out of people's lives. Yet here he is in Washington State, a citizen of another state, lecturing Washington on their state's choice to allow gay marriage.

This is the danger of a religous zealot in political office. These zealots will force their version of morality down the throats of a nation if elected. This should terrify the voting public. This country does not need to turn the clock back centuries when it comes to social issues and individual freedoms or rights.

As far as gay marriage, why do hetrosexual people get so worked up about it. These are people that have the same right to love and happiness as any other American. Gay individuals are not even asking you to understand them, just accept them. They may not understand Catholic beliefs, but they do not rally against Santorum's or anyone else's right to practice them.

We need to honor the Constitution in several ways; all people were created equal (Santorum has quoted it before) they have the right to persue life, liberty, happiness, etc... regardless of race, sex, creed etc.. Second, religion needs to be seperate from the state. This means government doesn't tell people how to worship or what church is cool, it also means religion doesn't medal in state affairs, period.
09:13 PM on 02/14/2012
Can someone please tell me why when two gay women get married as i saw tonight on TV , that one always looks and plays the role of a man? Also when two gay men get married i see the same ..one acts like a women and one a man.. ??? Thank you..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TedEjr
How can they be Right when they are wrong so much
07:18 PM on 02/13/2012
For all those who feel that this is a religious issue, view this link. It is from a Washington State Republican representative.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbmbdWK6338

Then after you do, come back and try, just try, to justify why this was not the human, right, course of action.
02:15 PM on 02/13/2012
The "Christians" do a lot of complaining when two ADULTS agree to get married but those same "Christians' were very silent when we learned about priests raping little boys. No outrage then. truly amazing.
09:15 PM on 02/14/2012
Your right ..Those men should be in jail for the rest of their lives and all actions should be known...
02:08 AM on 02/11/2012
Marriage is based on a sacred practice, a father selling his daughter. Still to this day the father "gives" his daughter away.

500 Camels, and 200 kilo's of gold and you get to marry the princess.

1 Donkey, and no gold, you get the fat ugly one.
06:01 PM on 02/10/2012
So if gay marriage isn't any different from a hetero, how come the gay's get upset when someone asks "who wears the pants"? Call it a union, and call it a day. Look in the mirror. YOUR DIFFERENT
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Erin84
08:08 PM on 02/10/2012
"Look in the mirror. YOUR DIFFERENT" So? What's your point? And maybe it's not your business "Who wears the pants." Maybe we don't look at it that way because we're past stupid gender rules. Plenty of straight couples I know don't live up to those standards anymore, so why should you expect gays want to? Who cares? I personally don't get upset because it's a stupid question, and I simply realize the person asking it simply doesn't realize how stupid a question it is, if you must know. But if this is your complaint about equal access to Civil marriage for gays, and the same legal title for gays, then I guess you really don't have any good argument against it. How about you call straight couple's marriages "unions" instead? How would you like that demotion? No? Then don't expect us to settle for inferiority.
photo
caution50
atheist, geologist, humanist
08:44 PM on 02/10/2012
Of course same-sex dynamics are different than opposite sex. But so are interracial marriages. And whomever "wears the pants" is a variable present in any type of marriage. Look in the mirror: YOU'RE DIFFERENT, TOO.
photo
YouAreJokingRight
Taking you less seriously than you take yourself.
02:42 PM on 02/10/2012
Funny how people who argue "leave up to the states" still manage to freak out and come up with another objection when states follow the legal process to legalize equal marriage.
photo
caution50
atheist, geologist, humanist
08:46 PM on 02/10/2012
That's because they feel secure in the outcome of the referendum. If the referendum process begins to fail, they will run shrieking back to the courts and legislators. Soon, there will be nowhere to run to, and they'll find themselves left behind in the dustbin of recent history with the rest of the empty-headed bigots.
03:16 PM on 02/13/2012
People should have a say in this...no state has EVER passed gay marriage when people had a right to vote....
photo
YouAreJokingRight
Taking you less seriously than you take yourself.
04:21 PM on 02/13/2012
If the people have a say in whether or not homosexual couples can get a marriage license with the state, that means the people have a say in whether heterosexual couples can get a marriage license with the state. This means you accept, without any argument whatsoever, that if the majority of people vote to end all heterosexual marriages, it shall be done because that is the will of the people/
09:20 PM on 02/14/2012
Thank you... I'm glad we agree...
11:02 AM on 02/10/2012
“If homosexuality is about sexual orientation, then why are there sex changes?
Thats been fake. No need to bring God into this, it's obviously wrong. If you were 'born that way' then why are women trying to like men? Or men trying to act like women?
That's obviously a behavior learned from watching the opposite sex. And if anyone decides to answer this in a civilized manner, don't change the words of the question around to fit your argument.

Same answer from everyone:

Freddie27

There is a difference between sexual orientation and gender identity. Being gay means being attracted to a person of the same sex. If you are having a sex change, then you are transgende¬r ie you were born into the wrong sex.

HaroldHeckubah
There are 2 orientations. What gender you are attracted to and what gender you self-identify as are two different things. You can be a man who self-identifies as a man is attracted to men. You can be a man who self-identifies as a woman, and is attracted to men. (commonly referred to as being "trapped" in the wrong body) There is nothing "obviously wrong" with it. It is recognized by the individual early on in either case. And if your premise is flawed don't expect me to warp my words to fit what you will accept as an explanation.

My question is:
By changing your sex, does that mean you are now straight because you were born in the wrong body?
photo
LintLass
"When you can balance a tackhammer on your head...
12:54 PM on 02/10/2012
Actually, transsexuals come in all sexual orientations. But in the case of straight-identified trans people, pretty much, though that won't stop people saying there's something 'queer' about it.

Straight transwomen before transition, for instance, aren't interested in *gay* sex, cause that's not how they see themselves, even if they're attracted to men in general (And gay men really are interested in *men,* generally. so it's really different. There's more to gender and sexuality than what genitalia one wants to have sex with. )

Transgender people are often openly bi: as with anyone else, not everyone's at one end or another of the Kinsey scale, I think more people are bi than ever really come to terms with that, or get around to doing so, even: but trans people have generally grown up being pressured to be attracted to the 'opposite' sex, so if they can be, then there's no particular reason for that to go away after transition. Or for them to worry too much about stigma attached to bisexuality: it's kind of moot for trans people.

Too many cisgendered people seem to take for granted some notion that sexuality is 'supposed' to come with one proper way for two binary sexes, and that these things come direct from chromosomes or some other thing like that.

It's not the case. Innate variations in sexuality and sex/gender characteristics seem to largely come about in utero and develop differently as those systems mature. Hence.... Variation.
photo
LintLass
"When you can balance a tackhammer on your head...
12:57 PM on 02/10/2012
In terms of marriage law, of course, straight transsexuals may often be able to get married as their own heterosexual selves, but because of the homophobia and transphobia out there, those marriage rights are often a lot less secure depending on variations in state laws or under legal challenges: they still can have to defend themselves as say, not being 'really' husband or wife cause someone ties it up in court claiming 'This is 'really' a gay marriage.'

One more reason for equality for all.
09:59 AM on 02/10/2012
It is an irony that when laws are promulgated legislatively, that they must have enactment dates well into the future, so that referenda and other oppositional actions, can change or revoke the outcome.
If they are promulgated judicially, there is often immediate relief, unless an injunction is imposed.

I have seen this movie before. ME passed a similar law, and a governor signed it into law. A referendum revoked the law before one ME same-sex couple could marry. Now, the legislature is GOP, as is the governor.

So, Governor Gregoire, a champion from DP's to CM, has no legal power to enact the law a day before Valentine Day, allowing the November ballot to determine its outcome. No civil rights or minority rights legislation passes over the will of the majority in the ballot box. That is why the Courts, an equal branch of government, must protect majority tyranny over the minority citizens oppressed by them.
photo
LintLass
"When you can balance a tackhammer on your head...
01:14 PM on 02/10/2012
Yeah, the judiciary continuing to put in more delays for political activities against the very civil rights they rule for doesn't sit well with me. Especially since it's not Constitutional to vote away civil rights from a minority in the *first* place.
paul87920
Don't tread on you? Quit stomping on everyone else
04:24 AM on 02/10/2012
It's really sad to see that Huffington Post buried such an important article under Dog the Bounty Hunter's Prop 8 article and LA's first same-sex divorce.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:21 AM on 02/10/2012
OK baggers, fess up. How many marriages in Teabaggistan lost their meaning completely now that some homosexuals can get married?

Have your spouses left you yet, because your union no longer has any meaning?
02:21 PM on 02/13/2012
great question.
02:34 PM on 02/13/2012
I'm sure lots of wives left their husbands when they realized their husbands were actually gay. Who wants to sleep with somebody that really wants something else? Teabags? Not so straight as they think.
photo
phal4875
The world is run by cats; we just feed them.
06:28 PM on 02/09/2012
I live in one of the first states to enable gay marriages, Massachusetts. So far, the creek did not rise, the horses were not frightened, and my wife and I are still married. It has been far less of an issue than mandatory health care, a requirement by a Governor Romney.