The Supreme Court yesterday rejected an appeal from groups opposed to same-sex marriage who made a bid to have the District of Columbia’s gay marriage laws overturned.
The opponents were spearheaded by mainly church affiliated groups, particularly an unnamed Maryland pastor, and others who wanted to gain a foothold on the ballot which would in turn allow Washington citizens to vote on whether the city should define marriage as between a man and a woman or something other.
Bishop Harry Jackson was the driving force behind the lawsuit against the district’s Board of Elections and Ethics, disgruntled because the board refused to put that initiative on the ballot. The board ruled that by questioning the ballot they would be opening the doors to all manner of discrimination and subsequent abuse. Some commentators have described a reversion in the gay marriage law as akin to a new Apartheid, with one saying, “if you’re going to ban gay marriage we might as well go back to having seperate bathrooms for blacks and whites.”
Washington first recognized gay marriages being granted elsewhere in 2009, and last year they began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
This was Jackson’s third attempt to overturn the gay marriage bill, having been rejected previously by two other courts who told him that city officials had the authority to keep the measure off the ballot and by barring it they were acting appropriately and ethically.
Jackson seems to be on a mission against the gay community, hardly Christian behaviour in the “love thy neighbour” sense; and on Tuesday told the press that he and supporters knew that trying to persuade the Supreme Court to take the case would be a big fight, but he also added that their efforts were not thwarted yet.
[adsense]”The issue of the definition of marriage will have its day in the Supreme Court eventually,” Jackson said. “The essence of what we were after is still very much on the table.”
David Catania, a DC council member who introduced the bill to legalise same sex marriage in the District, and one of two openly gay council members wrote in a statement that he was “grateful to the court” for not taking the case.
“Today is a great day for human rights, and specifically marriage equality, in the District,” wrote Catania.
Do you think the gay marriage laws should be upheld, or are you against same sex marriage? Please let us know by leaving a comment.
images: mommylife.net, lgbtqnation.com