Morality is relative

Bildo: A lot of the problem is in the name. If you don't call it "marriage" then, even if they're given all of the rights of marriage, you've removed a pretty large barrier. The issue is that the militant part of the gay community refuses to settle for anything less than marriage, name and all.

If they would accept the name "civil unions" they would have already won.


This is actually incorrect, at least in one case. Here in Washington State, we just had a referendum on an "all but the word" bill. Outside of the Puget Sound area (Olympia, Tacoma, Seattle, Bellingham), a majority of the population actually voted against it.

The state law doesn't confer the word "marriage" on civil unions, it only offers people (gay and straight) in civil unions many of the same rights that married couples have.

People voted against it by large majorities in most of the state, east of the Cascades.

The people who voted against it are therefore obviously not in favor of "equality in all but name." They deliberately, knowingly, voted to take rights away from their fellow citizens. They voted for unequal treatment before the law of some citizens.

This worries me.

Fortunately, the majority of the population in the Puget Sound area out-voted the anti-equality voters elsewhere.

But the fact that the equality of our fellow Americans even comes up for a vote is pretty disturbing.

Somewhere around here in a farker that is in a civil union and he has said repeatedly there is still shiat he can't do that a married spouse would be able to do easily.

TheJoe03: Better than most countries I bet.

This is true.

It's also not enough.

Being denied equality but allowed to live is better than being executed by the state. But "Hey; we're better than Saudi Arabia" is still not much of an accomplishment.

We're America. We can and should do better for our people.

You know what, as long as they agree that people who are homosexual should be allowed to enter into civil unions then what farking business is it of yours if they are comfortable with homosexuality or not. They have made the decision that people should have the right to choice. Doesn't mean they have to agree with or like that choice.

Bildo: A lot of the problem is in the name. If you don't call it "marriage" then, even if they're given all of the rights of marriage, you've removed a pretty large barrier. The issue is that the militant part of the gay community refuses to settle for anything less than marriage, name and all.

If they would accept the name "civil unions" they would have already won.

So, separate but equal?

Only one way to stop homosexuality:

Ban heterosexual sex.

Bildo:

I didn't say they would be in favor of it. I said that gays would have won their battle by now.

Oh, and they currently have equal treatment under the law. A gay man has the right to marry a woman, just as a straight man does.


A straight man or woman has the right to marry the person s/he loves.
A gay man or woman doesn't. So nope, they don't have equal treatment.

And as I said, a very large number of people voted to repeal the Washington State Domestic Partnership Law, even though it does not grant the title of "marriage."

A similar bill actually lost in Maine this week. And I doubt I have to remind you of "liberal" California's Prop 8 from last year.

There are a lot of people who simply don't believe that gays should have the same rights as straight Americans.

It's not about "equality in all but name." It's about people who think their neighbors don't have the same rights as they do. Pure and simple. You either support full equality for all Americans or you don't.

FloydA: This is actually incorrect, at least in one case. Here in Washington State, we just had a referendum on an "all but the word" bill. Outside of the Puget Sound area (Olympia, Tacoma, Seattle, Bellingham), a majority of the population actually voted against it.

It didn't pass in Pierce County (Tacoma). Or over the mountains. So, yeah - my fellow citizens are all for patting me on the head and congratulating me for serving in the library and all the good work I do in in the community... but they voted to deny me equal treatment under the law should I want to marry.

Farkin' peckerwoods.

Thorak: TheJoe03: Take what you can get for now. Get civil unions now and wait a generation for marriage cause you sure as hell ain't gonna get it now. Pick your battles. Also, let's not act like this is as drastic as segregation, that's why you can afford to hold on for a second.

This is utter bullshiat.

You're asking people to forgo seeking equal treatment under the law because we have to allow bigots to retain their baseless prejudices. Allowing there to be "separate but equal" anything merely fosters and encourages the bigotry against them, by encoding their separation from "normal" into the code of law.


If you're going to do "civil unions", fine, there's a simple solution. There is no legal status called "marriage" any more, they're ALL civil unions. "Marriage" is now just a religious ceremony and has absolutely no legal meaning. Problem solved.

nice.

I'm pretty sure I could choose to be homosexual for Keira Knightley. Or Shakira. Or Angelina Jolie...

Thorak: If you're going to do "civil unions", fine, there's a simple solution. There is no legal status called "marriage" any more, they're ALL civil unions. "Marriage" is now just a religious ceremony and has absolutely no legal meaning. Problem solved.

I've said this for years. To me, it's a matter of the separation of church and state. The church does not have the right to tell the state what to recognize as a family. The state has no right to tell the church who they can and cannot bless.

Families should be allowed to legally incorporate no matter what their sexual relationship is - sisters, friends who want to be a family, civil unions... what the fark does it matter? Polygamists? Sure. Just stop it with the damn child bride stuff. Got a group of 5 that are all functioning as a family? Why not? Not my business.

Legal recognition as a family should be equally available to all. Whether your church blesses it is their business.

TheJoe03: It's not worse. When I start seeing gays being hosed down in the streets and being told they can't go into certain place then I will agree. Of course it's not right that they can't get married but you are pushing it to say that it's the same injustice that blacks and other minorities faced before the 70s. Please realize that I support gay marriage and I personally voted against Prop 8 but to say gays not being able to marry is just as bad is Jim Crow is insane. It sucks but have some perspective.

So how high does the bodycount have to be before you can say, "Oh... yeah, injustice there"?

TheJoe03: What are you gonna do about all the old people that don't want gay marriage? Be realistic dude.

What did they do with all the old people who didn't want women to vote? Didn't want prohibition repealed? Didn't want blacks to vote? Didn't want schools integrated? Didn't want interracial marriage?

Everyone already HAS the same human rights. It's just a matter of whether the state chooses to uphold them or not.

Be realistic dude.

TheJoe03: Take what you can get for now.

Damn right. They let you on the bus, darkie, don't you be gettin' all uppity and thinkin' you get to pick yo' seat.

/The margins become the center and push against the new margins.
//The hard core of money and power stays at the center and fights off all comers.
///The whole of human society is one giant game of King of the Hill.

TheJoe03: So the fact that they get all the same rights with Civil Unions

They do not. Separate but equal is demonstrably unequal, and has been affirmed as so by the Supreme Court. Period.

TheJoe03: The only LAW that is biased against gays is marriage.

DADT is codified into law. Try again.

So when my kids ask "Daddy. What's Gay marriage?"
I can tell them it's a Fairy Tale?

Benevolent Misanthrope:

It didn't pass in Pierce County (Tacoma).


It didn't? I just glanced at the distribution map in the Times today, but I was sure Tacoma went for the good guys.


/you work in T-town?

TheJoe03: The only LAW that is biased against gays is marriage. The body count has nothing to do with the law. Segregation has a lot to do with the body count. Totally different situations. People aren't dying on the streets right now for supporting gay rights.

Ummm... yes. They are. Matthew Shepard was only one of thousands. I was almost one, years ago.

And they're losing their jobs. And they're waiting in hospital waiting rooms, because the person they've spent the last 20 years with is dying and they aren't allowed to see them because they're not family. And they're being arrested for having sex and doing things that strate America thinks are as American as apple pie. And they're being told, every minute of every day, by every magazine, every billboard and every assumption, that they SHOULD BE strate. Teenagers commit suicide every day, because they realize they're gay and they can't deal with what society is going to do to them. Parents reject their children for being gay. Churches tell us we're going to hell for being gay.

Do we face the exact same rights violations as African-Americans? Not always. But they're equally bad. And they need to farking stop.