Forum    Search    FAQ

Board index » Chat Forums » General Chat




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ] 
 
Author Message
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 4:56 pm 
Evil Game Minister of DOOM!
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 3848
AOL: Draco+Ignifer
Location: Earth to earth. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Illusions to illusions. And dreams to dreams.
Honestly, I don't give a damn about gay marriage one way or another. Unlike a lot of people, I don't view it as an abomination, but I also don't view it as a right. As far as I'm concerned, it's one group's preferences against another's convenience. That said, as long as the process they use is right, I don't give a damn one way or another. No Constitutional Amendments, no courts - just let the legislatures handle it, and whichever one happens is OK. As such, California passing this law is fine, Schwarzenegger trying to veto it is fine, and California trying to overturn the veto (if they can, I dunno) is also fine. I'd be a hypocrite to feel any other way.

I would, however, challenge the assumption that this might prove gay marriage won't be the downfall of civilization. After all, it IS California that passed it - there's really no way to tell.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:09 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:30 am
Posts: 5173
AOL: EagleScout8414
Location: Underground, planning the revolution...
Sal: 1...2...3...HOORAY FOR APATHY!

Isn't that a wonderful part of this country? Sure we might need people who care about causes every now and then. But hooray for not giving a damn!

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:14 pm 
Evil Game Minister of DOOM!
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 3848
AOL: Draco+Ignifer
Location: Earth to earth. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Illusions to illusions. And dreams to dreams.
Oh, I care about some things. But as I said, I view this as neither an abomination nor as a right. It's a matter of convenience and personal preference, and I see no reason why the hell I should give a damn whether fundamentalists get made uncomfortable or whether gays have to go down to the Courthouse with lots and lots of forms instead of with a single one.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 6:20 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 3225
Website: http://www.backwaterplanet.com
AOL: TonySopranoRival
Location: Above a convinience store (backwaterplanet.com anyone?)
Sal has some very strong moral opinions. I think he just doesn't see why it's important for two people to officialize their relationship by getting a certificate with their names on it.

If that's where he's coming from, I can kind of see that. Just, I think the act of opposing gay marraige symbolizes cultural hatred for them. Like, by not allowing them to gain equal status, they are being told that their love is not equal to those of heterosexuals. Banning gay marraige seems to me like a symbol of cultural hostility toward gays.

If there weren't so many gay-hating people in the country, it wouldn't be as important an issue, I think.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:44 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 4258
AOL: kiroth6
Location: I'm following my fish!
Bobthespirit, frankly I have to say that republicans are as unilateral as a fruit cake, yeah there may be elements that bind them together, but its unfair insinuate that all republicans hate gay marriage. It's not a cookie cutter group is all I'm saying.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:48 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:00 am
Posts: 5215
Location: Awaiting the Waffle Signal
If it were just a piece of paper, this would be meaningless. But marriage is not just a piece of paper. Nor is it simply recognition by the church of your choice. Marriage is a legally recognized state that confers a pack of rights and responsibilities not easily acquired by any other means.

For example, last weekend, Mrs. Waffle had to go to the emergency room of the local hospital. As we didn't know how long she'd be (it was pretty late as it was) and we couldn't find a babysitter on five minutes notice, Waffle and Waffle Jr. had to stay home. The next day, when I called the hospital to check on her, I was met with an interesting question: "What is my relationship with the woman in question?"

I was able to answer "husband", which immediantly got me through. Had I answered "long time companion", I would have declared that I have no right to this woman's medical status and would have been disconnected.

That's just one of the rights being married confers. Mrs. Waffle and I can also co-own property and legal assets, mingle our tax status, automatically gain the ability to make medical decisions for each other and for our offspring, care for that offspring, etc.

What it means is that, as far as the law is concerned, we're more a single entity with two bodies than roommates. And that status, granted to us by some bored clerk in the JP office with no more background check than glancing at our driver's licenses to verify we were both over 18 (we are, and then some), is nigh impossible to get without being married.

I'm sure this argument has been brought up before, but I can't watch this dismissed as 'a matter of convienence and personal preference'. It is not. It is damned near impossible to aquire the same set of rights without being married.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:59 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 365
Location: Yeah, I'm kinda back. Although I never really left. And no one noticed me when I was here...
I have a different sort of apathy, "Why not?" Give me one non-religious reason why not. As for religion, Science has been arguing with religion for thousands of years, I'm not going to join in the fray.Yet

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:13 pm 
Evil Game Minister of DOOM!
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 3848
AOL: Draco+Ignifer
Location: Earth to earth. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Illusions to illusions. And dreams to dreams.
If States didn't have provisions which allowed one to effectively "roll your own" marriage, I'd have a very different feeling on this matter. They do, however. I've read the laws, I've asked friends who do this stuff professionally, and it takes a lot of time and effort, but you can get almost all of the same rights without marriage. For your emergency room situation above, for example, you can give your lover medical power of attorney. Tell them that, and watch them let you through. In fact, the only things you really can't do contractually are things like get your social security benefits passed along to your lover... And I've got issues about our current Social Security system, to say the least, so you'll hardly get me caring because of THAT.

And because of that, I don't give a damn about gay marriage. If you love each other, and the state won't let you get married, flip them off, go fill out a lot of paperwork, flip off the fundamentalists, and call yourself husband and husband, or wife and wife.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:00 pm 
Moderator of DOOM!
Moderator of DOOM!
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 15851
Location: Yes.
Y'know, this is really a POOP thread, trying to pass...

Sal, none of those laws matter. Sure, they may be on the books; but in the real world no receptionist will ever lose a job for flouting them. You'll be forced to sue almost every institution you ever deal with to get the same treatment that you would be granted by right if you could say `spouse'; and it will almost always be way too late by the time you win.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:01 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 12:00 am
Posts: 2
whymy wrote:
A "direct vote of the people" led to the banning of Gay Marriage five years ago. But a lot has changed in the last five years, and gay marriage has been gaining support at a rapid rates since then.


Ta-daa. I was living in California when that happened, it was proposition 21 that year, I think. Defeated close to 70-30. I'm surprised there hasn't been more commentary about that.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 1:53 am 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 3225
Website: http://www.backwaterplanet.com
AOL: TonySopranoRival
Location: Above a convinience store (backwaterplanet.com anyone?)
Kiroth 6 wrote:
Bobthespirit, frankly I have to say that republicans are as unilateral as a fruit cake, yeah there may be elements that bind them together, but its unfair insinuate that all republicans hate gay marriage. It's not a cookie cutter group is all I'm saying.


Not all republicans...just the ones in office. :) (Or, a majority of them. You could probably name all the exceptions off the top of your head if you thought hard enough)

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 7:14 am 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Tue May 21, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 12406
Location: The things, they hurt
On the bright side, Canada and Spain legalized gay marriage lately. I'm surprised Americans don't hate Canada more. But that's probably because they don't realize it's there.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:22 am 
Evil Game Minister of DOOM!
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:00 am
Posts: 16202
ICQ: 6954605
Website: http://krellen.net
Yahoo Messenger: shinarimaia
AOL: TamirDM
Location: The City in New Mexico
The US hates France because it's on the UN Security council, not for any other reasons. The US, frankly, couldn't care less about countries that have no direct affect on it, such as Spain and Canada.

The California referendum was held before the hullabaloo and before anyone started really making a national case out of gay marriage. The State legislator has changed (twice, I assume?) since then, and claiming the legislature is not the "Will of the People" is silly - especially considering that we're not a Democracy, but a Republic. As far as the laws of the land are concerned, "the people" are the legislature.

Top 
   
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2005 2:51 pm 
Offline
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:56 pm
Posts: 313
Yahoo Messenger: SCfreek232
AOL: bunbunismygod
Yay for California!

Top 
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ] 

Board index » Chat Forums » General Chat


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: