Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Newsjock

(11,733 posts)
Sun Jan 8, 2012, 10:51 PM Jan 2012

No same-sex marriage in Wash. state without public vote, senator (D) says

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2012/01/08/no-same-sex-marriage-without-vote-senator/

Same-sex marriage will not become law in Washington without voter approval, an influential state senator told a raucous Saturday town meeting on Whidbey Island packed with gay rights supporters.

“I will tell you they will not have the votes in the state Senate without a vote of the people,” said state Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano, a 20-year veteran of the Legislature’s upper chamber.

Haugen represents a Republican-leaning Island and Skagit County district that includes liberal pockets, notably South Whidbey, as well as very conservative Oak Harbor. She is usually its only Democratic legislator.

... “I must represent the entire 10th District and we have a lot of evangelicals . . .,” Haugen began.
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
No same-sex marriage in Wash. state without public vote, senator (D) says (Original Post) Newsjock Jan 2012 OP
I think it would be nice if she would represent the constituents William769 Jan 2012 #1
Yeah, that logic would have worked well for civil rights in the 60's. Put it to RKP5637 Jan 2012 #2
Civil rights should * NOT * be put up as a referendum. AtomicKitten Jan 2012 #3
I KNOW this person PearliePoo2 Jan 2012 #4
Thanks for that report! JNelson6563 Jan 2012 #6
Her term expires Jan. 2013 and that's a year too long. PearliePoo2 Jan 2012 #7
allowing religion to dictate civil law is unconstitutional Madame Haugen nt msongs Jan 2012 #5

William769

(55,144 posts)
1. I think it would be nice if she would represent the constituents
Sun Jan 8, 2012, 10:56 PM
Jan 2012

That don't have equal rights under the law. Wait whats wrong with that statement.

RKP5637

(67,088 posts)
2. Yeah, that logic would have worked well for civil rights in the 60's. Put it to
Sun Jan 8, 2012, 10:57 PM
Jan 2012

the majority to vote for civil rights for the minority. Yeah, that'll work really well. What a F'ed place this is ...

PearliePoo2

(7,768 posts)
4. I KNOW this person
Sun Jan 8, 2012, 11:00 PM
Jan 2012

and a Democrat she is NOT.
She regularly trashes Union labor every chance she gets.
She is rude, arrogant and basically a back-stabbing b***h. Your basic DINO on steroids.

JNelson6563

(28,151 posts)
6. Thanks for that report!
Sun Jan 8, 2012, 11:08 PM
Jan 2012

Always best to get such news from the neighborhood, as it were. Thanks for sharing the info.

Julie

PearliePoo2

(7,768 posts)
7. Her term expires Jan. 2013 and that's a year too long.
Sun Jan 8, 2012, 11:48 PM
Jan 2012

If she runs again, we hope to "primary" her ass. (she may hunker down though, since she has "domestic" problems with her husband and his history of a sexual harassment suit against him)
Her shenanigans run deep and are troubling. Actually, an audit should be done regarding her involvement with Washington State Ferries and Nichols Brothers Shipyard.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»No same-sex marriage in W...