"Any adult should be able to obtain a marriage license from the courts regardless of their sexual preference."
Well, I guess that settles it! I guess bigfred77's statement above is what the founders had in mind when they talked about truths that are self-evident. Surely no reasonable person could disagree - which I suppose is why the DC city council feels no need for the matter to come to a vote.
See, the weird thing about democracies is that in order for your ideas to become the law of the land, you have to convince others to agree with them. I know it's easier just to skip this step and impose your enlightened worldview by fiat, but - call us old fashioned - Americans find fascism unpalatable.
That's kinda the whole...

The argument about the inevitability of gay marriage is just strange. Do you believe that future generations will be right about everything? Does the assumption that our grandchildren will embrace gay marriage prove that we are wrong to oppose it? Clearly not.

If future generations decide that societies should be fascist - will they be correct simply because they came later and must therefore be more enlightened than we are? Ridiculous.

At a young age I learned that what is popular is not always the same as what is right. Thus, the argument that gay marriage is "inevitable" adds nothing to the moral or legal argument for it. It is a vapid and childish argument.