Same-sex marriage advocates, foes speak to panels

WASHINGTON — A D.C. City Council committee held its first hearing Monday on a bill that would allow same-sex marriage in the city, a hearing with a marathon list of witnesses and strong emotions on both sides of the issue.

The chairman of the committee said that the number of witnesses — including religious leaders, community activists and residents — who had signed up to speak may set a record.

The committee was scheduled to hear from 100 people who wanted to testify about the bill. A city official guessed it could last until after midnight. The hearing will be continued on Nov. 2 with more than 150 more people.

Committee chairman Phil Mendelson, a Democrat, said he believed that a majority of the city's voters support same-sex marriage. He said, however, that the measure should not be subject to a vote by the city's some 600,000 residents.

"I think we do represent the majority of voters," he said at the outset of the hearing. "We did not subject the $700 million baseball stadium to a referendum."

Councilman David Catania, who introduced the bill, agreed, saying a majority should not be allowed to take rights away from a minority.

The council could vote as early as December on the bill, which is expected to easily pass the council. Monday's hearing drew vocal opponents and supporters, and the hearing at times got rowdy, with the chairman having to remind people not to cheer or applaud.

Jeri Washington, 47, asked the council, "Who are you to redefine marriage?"

"Stop the wedding. Stop the wedding. Stop the wedding," she said to applause.

Other speakers, some teary, talked about wanting to marry a partner.

Sultan Shakir, who works for the Human Rights Campaign, which advocates for gay and lesbian rights, said the bill was about "the right to get down on one knee and marry someone I love."

The council also heard suggestions for altering the language of the bill. Supporters worry the bill's current language may prematurely end domestic partnerships in the city. And the archdiocese of Washington also planned to submit testimony saying that the current language was flawed. The language could affect church operations and services, including forcing the church to open its facilities for use for same-sex marriage if it lets other groups use them. It could also affect the archdiocese's ability to facilitate adoptions, the archdiocese planned to say in testimony.

The committee's hearing was one of two on same-sex marriages held Monday. Opponents of same-sex marriage also argued before D.C.'s Board of Elections that they should be able to try to put a measure on the city's 2010 ballot that would give voters the option of banning same-sex unions.

If the initiative goes on the ballot and is passed by voters it could strike down any law on same-sex marriage the council passes. It would also overturn a law the city passed earlier in the year recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states that allow them.

But the chairman of the two-member elections board suggested at the conclusion of the hearing that he might be reluctant to allow the initiative to go forward because it could conflict with a city Human Rights Act. The board does not have a deadline to rule on whether the initiative can go forward.

The leader of a group trying to get the initiative on the ballot, Bishop Harry Jackson, the pastor of a Maryland church, told the board that the definition of marriage is the "largest public policy issue of our time" and urged the board to "let the people vote" on the issue.