May I suggest that gays, bis, (and sympathetic straights) engage in homosexual activity on the high speed trains from LA to San Francisco at every opportunity? It's not exactly my bent, but a just cause is worth a little shift in perspective.
On a not so unrelated note, will that GMILF Cindy McCain be purchasing tickets?
My question is does this initiative close the door on the possibility of civil unions or other legal recognitions? I'm not gay (not that there's anything wrong with that), but I wonder if it's all about semantics and not actual legal rights, maybe both sides need to step back and figure out a goddamn compromise. Gay couples can have all the legal rights of a straight married couple and come up with a different name for "marriage" so as not to offend the bigots and halfwits, and straights get to hold onto the sacred rite of "marriage" which will end in divorce over 50% of the time. That's the beauty of compromise. No one wins.
@Sasquatch: Logically, I guess I think civil unions are a great idea.
But personally and based on my principles, I'm just offended by the idea and refuse to let the government placate me with civil unions. Maybe we could compromise and have separate water fountains so kids don't catch the gay.
@Sasquatch: Sorry, but I don't buy it. The state has no problem potentially offending Catholics by saying people can be divorced. It should have no trouble offending other churches by saying people can be married. No religion's marriage practices should dictate what the state can recognize as a legally constituted marriage.
@Sasquatch: I'm not gay (not that there's anything wrong with that)
You know, I used to be inclined to give that same qualifier (including what you wrote in the parentheses), but I came to realize that it was very heterosexist of me to do that, particularly because it was virtually always the case that it was unnecessary to provide that information. Sorry, I don't want to reprimand you; I'm just giving you some food for thought.
@Victor Ward: See, and this is why this issue will never get resolved. The religious extremists think you're going to "infect" their children with "the gay," and the gays can't accept the EXACT SAME legal protections if it's not called marriage. Rather than making it into an argument where one side has to win, a compromise is absolutely necessary. And if a couple wants to refer to their union as a marriage, I'm sure there aren't going to be any thought police showing up to tell them they're not married, but civilly united. I'm on the anti-discrimination side here, but if all it takes to get the morons off the issue is to change one little word, I don't see how that's an unreasonable compromise to an issue about which a lot of dumb motherfuckers feel quite passionately. You can't change their minds overnight, so you might as well take the path that might do away with the legal discrimination if it means shutting these dumb fucks up. For you to be patronizing with your last remark to someone who is 100% on your side is not helping this discussion to progress.
@Sasquatch: But they aren't the exact same legal protections, just like "separate but equal" was bullshit for black people. It's a bad idea to be condescending when you don't actually know what you're talking about. Much less the fact that Florida just outlawed civil unions, so this argument doesn't make a heck of lot of sense.
Also, for you to be expecting love and tolerance from someone who just got the emotional equivalent of a boot to the chest is pretty thick, frankly. This outcome was devastating for a lot of people. Instead of patting people on the head and handing out simplistic non-solutions, try thinking about what they're feeling for a second. Or just being quiet. That works, too.
@MissNormaDesmond: I won't be quiet, and I don't believe I was patting anyone on the head. This is two patronizing responses to someone who is against Proposition 8. I'm on your fucking side, but rather than trying to frame this in simple black and white terms, I'm trying to give a little perspective and understanding to a perspective that I don't personally agree with. That's what people who are intellectually trying to wrap their heads around every side of an argument do. On a personal, emotional level, Prop 8 offends me deeply. I understand the wounds are still fresh from this awful blow to basic human rights, and that a lot of people were badly hurt by this, but I was not suggesting for a second that you or anyone else should give up the fight. What I am saying is that both sides are stuck. One side wants "marriage" the other side wants to keep "marriage" to themselves. To even try to equate this to the "separate but equal" doesn't make sense to me. I'm talking about the exact same legal protections under the law (hospital visits, power of attorney, etc), just give it a name that quiets the loonies. And Florida never even entered into my conversation. I started everything off ASKING if California made the exception for civil unions, and got shouted down for my genuine curiosity, and for a hypothetical based on that question.
I know exactly how devastating this is to a lot of people. While it doesn't affect me personally, the idea of banning two loving people from declaring a lifelong legal commitment to one another makes me sick. What I am trying to express (and maybe I'm doing a shitty job of it, and for that I'm genuinely sorry) is that tolerance means tolerating things you don't like. These religious assholes may naively think they can "cure" homosexuality, and they're just as wrong as you are for thinking you can cure them of their religious superstitions.
So, rather than telling me to be quiet, try to understand where I was coming from. I may not be parroting exactly the platform you want to hear, but I am trying really hard to find a way to end this amicably for everyone, and try to leave as few people as possible feeling the way 48% of Californians feel today.
@Sasquatch: Why am I suddenly reminded of Elizabeth Hasselbeck telling Whoopi Goldberg about how she understands the black experience?
No one shouted you down, they disagreed with you. This is something that often happens when you express opinions about controversial issues. If you can't deal with being disagreed with and have to get pettish about it, then posting on a public forum may be a bad pastime for you.
In turn, I expressed my impatience with your self-absorbed "Oh poor me and my widdle feelings" response. It's hard to give a crap where you're coming from, because you've demonstrated very little ability to see outside your own bubble, or to own the tremendous condescension you're showing toward people who are actually suffering right now. You wrote me a nice note, but this comment is diametrically opposed to it. You'd have done better to write publicly what you wrote privately.
@MissNormaDesmond: I tend to be a moderate, and try sometimes too hard to see every side of the issue. After letting this whole thing marinade in my head overnight, well... I feel like a dick. For some reason, I was giving way too much leeway and understanding to the bigots and the religious extremists. I kept focusing on the semantics of the argument, and I guess I placed far too little attention on the real people being hurt by this. I still don't even know why I was standing up for the wrong side of the argument. I really genuinely wasn't trying to stand up for the pro-Prop 8 people. I was just trying harder to understand it, even though it pretty much revolts me personally. I guess I was thinking out loud in a forum where I probably should have formulated my real stance before running my mouth (or in this case, keyboard).
While the tone here got harsh, I want to thank you for helping me come to a much greater understanding of this complex issue, and for genuinely helping me to soldify my stance. I kind of take gay marriage for granted living in Massachusetts, and I guess I do have the feeling that in the end, justice will prevail. As I said in my private message, I am your ally in this fight. I'm done staying in the middle on this. Thanks for pulling me away from the center and into the real substance of this discussion.
@Sasquatch: Good for you. I'm glad you understand what I was trying to get at. When you've just been hit by a truck, it's too much for people to ask to expect you to think about how the driver feels.
@Aatom: Yes and no. It was out of state Mormon money that did us in, more than anything else. We have to take a leaf from Obama's book and organize better and smarter.
What angers me possibly most is people leaving the polls, saying they voted for Prop 8, and then saying it's not out of hate or prejudice, just that they want to protect marriage.
Fuck you. Fuck you. It is about hate and marriage. Apparently, you can take away basic civil rights from people like you, but fuck you if you think I'll let you feel good about it.
It is hateful. It is hurtful. It is wrong. And anyone who voted "yes" on Prop 8 should be fucking ashamed.
I also hate them so much that I wrote that hastily enough to make a bunch of mistakes. Such as:
It is about hate and marriage. Should have said, "It is about hate and prejudice."
And Apparently, you can take away basic civil rights from people like you... Should have said, "Apparently, you can take away basic civil rights from people like me...
Yo, dude? That bracelet you're wearing? WWJD? It doesn't stand for 'What would a jag-off do?' Now, get rid of that sign, call your mother and apologize for being such an embarrassment. Oh, and get a job, wouldya?
with over half of all marriages failing, the idea that gay marriage will RUIN hetero marriage is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Heteros ruined marriage all by themselves. And they get into it and out of it without a fucking clue or a thought even to what it MEANS. What the fuck are they preserving and HOW are they preserving it? By not appreciating it? By not knowing a fucking thing about how to pick a decent mate or make a marriage work?
But the legal rights for those few who actually make it work or are too enmeshed and/or dysfunctional to leave, is still coveted by a population who might just put "success" into the idea (and ideal) of marriage.
But sorry geighs, we don't want you sharing in our dysfunction...we want this unhappy horseshit all to ourselves. And the fact that you might have more stable unions than we have just burns our ass, so no legal rights for you.
What's insane to me is that Californians can haul off and amend their state's constitution any time with just a simple majority. That's idiotic, above and beyond how much Prop. 8 sucks.
Massachusetts welcomes all of you pot-smoking, gay-marriage-loving, godless heathens. We're like California, only with cripplingly cold winters, a stupid sounding accent, and a frighteningly loyal sports fan base. Just don't drive our rents up too high, please.
So I can toke-up in some states, but can't foster a kid in Arkansas if I'm a straight widow? The homophobia is rampant enough to take out straight unmarried folks, too, like Angelina and Brad, who couldn't adopt in Little Rock?
Lawyerly types, can't this be struck down as unconstitutional under equal protection laws?
@SlickaNicka: I believe single gays or single straights can still adopt. They just didn't want the homosexual heathens having butt secks in front of the poor innocent childrens.
Me and my boyfriend of 3 years got hitched in CA 2 weeks ago. As happy as I was with Obama gettin' in and all that good jazz, I hate to admit I cried this morning when I read about prop 8. It was nice while it lasted and noone can take away that marriage certificate that hangs in our home.
@everfade: Oh, I'm so sorry! We will get it back. God damn it, we will get it back. What petitions and a simple majority can do, they can undo, too. I'm not done fighting.
I, for one, wish we could uncouple (heh) the civil unions issue from the gay marriage issue. In my preferred universe, we could all marry, but you'd actually have to marry in order to get the pros (and the cons) of being married. Feh on civil unions.
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
On a not so unrelated note, will that GMILF Cindy McCain be purchasing tickets?
11/05/08
11/05/08
But personally and based on my principles, I'm just offended by the idea and refuse to let the government placate me with civil unions. Maybe we could compromise and have separate water fountains so kids don't catch the gay.
Bah
11/05/08
11/05/08
You know, I used to be inclined to give that same qualifier (including what you wrote in the parentheses), but I came to realize that it was very heterosexist of me to do that, particularly because it was virtually always the case that it was unnecessary to provide that information. Sorry, I don't want to reprimand you; I'm just giving you some food for thought.
11/05/08
11/05/08
Also, for you to be expecting love and tolerance from someone who just got the emotional equivalent of a boot to the chest is pretty thick, frankly. This outcome was devastating for a lot of people. Instead of patting people on the head and handing out simplistic non-solutions, try thinking about what they're feeling for a second. Or just being quiet. That works, too.
11/05/08
I know exactly how devastating this is to a lot of people. While it doesn't affect me personally, the idea of banning two loving people from declaring a lifelong legal commitment to one another makes me sick. What I am trying to express (and maybe I'm doing a shitty job of it, and for that I'm genuinely sorry) is that tolerance means tolerating things you don't like. These religious assholes may naively think they can "cure" homosexuality, and they're just as wrong as you are for thinking you can cure them of their religious superstitions.
So, rather than telling me to be quiet, try to understand where I was coming from. I may not be parroting exactly the platform you want to hear, but I am trying really hard to find a way to end this amicably for everyone, and try to leave as few people as possible feeling the way 48% of Californians feel today.
11/05/08
No one shouted you down, they disagreed with you. This is something that often happens when you express opinions about controversial issues. If you can't deal with being disagreed with and have to get pettish about it, then posting on a public forum may be a bad pastime for you.
In turn, I expressed my impatience with your self-absorbed "Oh poor me and my widdle feelings" response. It's hard to give a crap where you're coming from, because you've demonstrated very little ability to see outside your own bubble, or to own the tremendous condescension you're showing toward people who are actually suffering right now. You wrote me a nice note, but this comment is diametrically opposed to it. You'd have done better to write publicly what you wrote privately.
11/06/08
While the tone here got harsh, I want to thank you for helping me come to a much greater understanding of this complex issue, and for genuinely helping me to soldify my stance. I kind of take gay marriage for granted living in Massachusetts, and I guess I do have the feeling that in the end, justice will prevail. As I said in my private message, I am your ally in this fight. I'm done staying in the middle on this. Thanks for pulling me away from the center and into the real substance of this discussion.
11/06/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
You're in CA? I feel better.
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
Fuck you. Fuck you. It is about hate and marriage. Apparently, you can take away basic civil rights from people like you, but fuck you if you think I'll let you feel good about it.
It is hateful. It is hurtful. It is wrong. And anyone who voted "yes" on Prop 8 should be fucking ashamed.
11/05/08
11/05/08
I also hate them so much that I wrote that hastily enough to make a bunch of mistakes. Such as:
It is about hate and marriage.
Should have said, "It is about hate and prejudice."
And
Apparently, you can take away basic civil rights from people like you...
Should have said, "Apparently, you can take away basic civil rights from people like me...
I should never write a comment while shaking.
11/05/08
11/05/08
Yo, dude? That bracelet you're wearing? WWJD? It doesn't stand for 'What would a jag-off do?' Now, get rid of that sign, call your mother and apologize for being such an embarrassment. Oh, and get a job, wouldya?
11/05/08
But the legal rights for those few who actually make it work or are too enmeshed and/or dysfunctional to leave, is still coveted by a population who might just put "success" into the idea (and ideal) of marriage.
But sorry geighs, we don't want you sharing in our dysfunction...we want this unhappy horseshit all to ourselves. And the fact that you might have more stable unions than we have just burns our ass, so no legal rights for you.
Homophobes of the world: go fuck yourselves.
11/05/08
And children can't be raised by gays (unless they're closeted and in a loveless straight marriage).
Fuckers.
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
Lawyerly types, can't this be struck down as unconstitutional under equal protection laws?
11/05/08
God, I hate the South.
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08
11/05/08