|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
 Posted - 09/08/2005 : 23:24:41
|
Argh! Stupid, hypocritical, pathetic, sonuvabitch, tool!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/07/AR2005090702020.html
The onetime movie star's popularity has sagged to its lowest point since he rolled to power on the back of a recall vote in 2003.
GOOD!
I have yet to see ONE SINGLE SANE argument as to how gay marriage hurts American families. Just a fucking scapegoat for people who can't deal with the problems in their own marriages.
This was our chance, politically, to get gay marriage legitimized by a state government, rather than courts. It would have given so much credibility to the movement for legal gay marriage. Gah!
A poignant commentary from someone *a little bit* calmer than me: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/239934_californiaed.asp
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
Edited by - marfknox on 09/08/2005 23:28:42
|
|
|
CourseKnot
Skeptic Friend
USA
82 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 04:54:25 [Permalink]
|
Main Entry: mar·riage
Pronunciation: 'mer-ij, 'ma-rij
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual relationship.
To me this is marriage. To me this is also traditional. Marriage in this form has been going on for thousands of years.
I have no problem with same sex couples wanting to be recognized as leagaly and contractually bound with all the rights that married couples have.
Just don't call it marriage.
|
Just flying through space with the rest of you... |
 |
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 05:01:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by CourseKnot
I have no problem with same sex couples wanting to be recognized as leagaly and contractually bound with all the rights that married couples have.
Just don't call it marriage.
Would that cause you any problems?
In what way?
 |
|
|
|
Subjectmatter
Skeptic Friend
173 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 07:21:24 [Permalink]
|
The problem as I see it of religiously holding to the idea of marriage being the traditional union of two people of opposite gender is, among other things, that our idea of gender is changing. Not long ago the question of what gender you are did not arise. Now the concept of gender is much less clear. Is a transexual person a member of her original or her new gender? If she is legally a part of her new gender, then there are insurmountable problems with that definition of marriage since the gender of a married person can change and saying that she is legally not a part of her new gender would be to deny her the right of calling herself that; it would be an unsustainable illusion in any official situation.
Furthermore the title of married holds social respectability in many circles that, frankly, homosexual couples have a right to. This is not so much a problem in Sweden where couples under the 'sambolag' automatically attain some of the legal advantages of being married simply by virtue of having lived together for a sufficient period, as such it is not uncommon to find families here where the parents are not married even though they have been together for decades. No stigma is attached and most people will be unaware of their social status.
One has to ask why people are so defensive of a word? The function of marriage has changes its nature frequently over the years. Anyone who has read Jane Austen's 'Sense and Sensibility' or 'Emma' must see that marriage in her time was quite different to what it is now, so why insist on one characteristic of it, when many of the others are so very young?
Lastly, by insisting on this distinction between homo- and heterosexual couples we are working against the project of achieving a society free of prejudice against alternate, healthy ways of life. If you must be prejudiced, be prejudiced against lifestyles that are unhealthy such as smoking, obesity, fundamentalism, paedophilia and economics. God-damned economists! They will be the ruin of our modern society! |
Sibling Atom Bomb of Couteous Debate |
| Edited by - Subjectmatter on 09/09/2005 07:22:33 |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 07:37:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by CourseKnot
Main Entry: mar·riage
Pronunciation: 'mer-ij, 'ma-rij
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual relationship.
To me this is marriage. To me this is also traditional. Marriage in this form has been going on for thousands of years.
I have no problem with same sex couples wanting to be recognized as leagaly and contractually bound with all the rights that married couples have.
Just don't call it marriage.
As the law calls it a union between two people and recognizes them differently, why does it matter what it is called? They are asking for the civil marriage statutes to be applied equally under the law to same sex couples.
Religion, in particular radical fundamentalist evangelicals, hold that their religious interpretation of marriage must be the basis of law. Just having the law recognize it as such does not mean churches have to recognize the unions as valid. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 08:38:18 [Permalink]
|
"Marriage is an institution and love is blind; therefore, marriage is an institution for the blind." -- Mark Twain
Sooner or later, gay marrage, if that it be and I can't think of any other term for it, will be common. It will not be in my lifetime, but probably will in the days of some of the younger members here, and the religiously freaked-out of all stripes be condemned to the perdition they so richly deserve.
"All equal in the eyes of God," eh?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 09:04:28 [Permalink]
|
| "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 09:28:42 [Permalink]
|
| Call it whatever you want, as long as they get the full rights and privileges of other married couples. |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 13:46:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Call it whatever you want, as long as they get the full rights and privileges of other married couples.
Absolutely, I really don't get this psychotic fear of someone who is gay.
I was talking to a parent of a friend of my son's and he said something to the effect, "you wouldn't want one of them teaching your son in our school would you!!" I didn't have the heart (or the patience) to tell him I knew of at least 3 gay men that are teachers in our kids grade school.
Geez, with all the problems in the world why concentrate on this????
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 21:57:37 [Permalink]
|
Marriage in this form has been going on for thousands of years.
I truly do not mean to offend, but the above statement is made out of ignorance.
-the most common form of marriage in all of human history is polygamy between one man and numerous women. Other types of arrangements have also existed in various human societies.
-there are countries in Africa that now, and for thousands of years, have allowed homosexual marriage
-homosexuality has existed in all human societies in history
The current form of marriage is American society is NOT traditional. Traditional western marriages may have been between one man and one woman, but they were also arranged, often involving a dowry (that is why in our contemporary ceremonies that father gives the bride away) and the social status and role of the two sexes was completely separate. (that is why the women vowed to “obey”, but men didn't.)
Modern marriages are often referred to distinctly as “love marriages”, usually referring to an equal partnership based on their mutual consent based on their love for each other. It is THIS development that has opened the door for same-sex marriage because with men and women being equal partners, the concept of two men or two women in love being equal partners suddenly makes sense in the social framework.
We don't keep traditions for the sake of keeping traditions. When traditions are harmful, we get rid of them. Millions of homosexuals in this country want to live like anyone else in this culture. They do not want it to be called something else when they bind themselves in a lifelong partnership based on love. Some gays are religious and get married in churches and temples. And some are secular but have a symbolic wedding ceremony involving nonreligious rituals. Thousands are raising children as families right now. And these are not marriages?
The desire to call committed gay relationships something other than what we call the exact same type of relationship among heterosexuals is rooted in prejudice, plain and simple.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2005 : 22:02:06 [Permalink]
|
Filthy wrote: Sooner or later, gay marrage, if that it be and I can't think of any other term for it, will be common.
I'm not sure whatcha mean, exactly - if you include gays who have decided to live in committed relationships just like a married couple, it already is common. I know three married gay couples. And just look at the priests and other clergy in various Christian sects causing controversy for blessing gay unions. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 09/10/2005 00:03:43 |
|
|
|
Subjectmatter
Skeptic Friend
173 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2005 : 01:12:00 [Permalink]
|
| I say, well put! |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2005 : 02:01:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Filthy wrote: Sooner or later, gay marrage, if that it be and I can't think of any other term for it, will be common.
I'm not sure whatcha mean, exactly - if you include gays who have decided to live in committed relationships just like a married couple, it already is common. I know three married gay couples. And just look at the priests and other clergy in various Christian sects causing controversy for blessing gay unions.
In the sense that it will have the same legal status in the US as as any other.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2005 : 02:17:48 [Permalink]
|
Holly crap! I can't believe I remembered my password.
Ok, 1st of all. The State has no business messing in peoples business. Marriage or what ever you want to call it, is a contract between two people. Handing out licenses, er, I mean selling pieces of paper to prove you want to live with and share your life with someone is just a way for the government to drain the people dry. (LOL, reminds me of the Catholic church selling those papers so you could get into heaven)
Next, I still like Gov. Arnold. There's just a lot of propaganda against him now on many issues. I think he's doing the right thing for the most part. The government needs to stop spending and he's putting them on a diet.
About the veto of this gay bill, he wants the people to decide in a vote. Now, doesn't that sound more fair, the way government is supposed to be? One man, one vote. Instead of the crazy politicians telling you what to do.
Just because it's morally wrong to stop gays from marrying, it's the right of a community to decide what they want.
Norma |
|
|
|
Subjectmatter
Skeptic Friend
173 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2005 : 04:21:58 [Permalink]
|
Surely it's not morally wrong to stop Homosexual people from marrying according to their preference; rather it is ethically wrong...
But semantics aside, the US like most - if not all - modern democracies is a representative democracy. One does not generally vote on specific issues in such democracies because that kind of system is untenable in a society as complex as the contemporary one. The whole point is that politicians and the like decide matters of policy. A referendum may sometimes be called about a specific issue, but this generally is intended to guide the politicians, they do not and should not simply obey the whim of the majority in most such cases. |
Sibling Atom Bomb of Couteous Debate |
| Edited by - Subjectmatter on 09/10/2005 04:23:13 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2005 : 05:39:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
A referendum may sometimes be called about a specific issue, but this generally is intended to guide the politicians, they do not and should not simply obey the whim of the majority in most such cases.
Yep.
If we just put all issues on a ballot to be decided in the general melee of voting.... why the hell are we paying salaries to legislators?
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
