Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WXYZ Detroit)   Michigan's first gay marriage happens today. On an Indian reservation. Under tribal law   (wxyz.com) divider line 119
    More: Interesting, Michigan, Petoskey, tribal law  
•       •       •

3834 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Mar 2013 at 3:43 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



119 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-15 09:55:32 PM  

A Shambling Mound: Everyone should send blankets.


I'm actually ashamed for not knowing this, but hey, I didn't grow up on the rez... but when I finally did move to the rez, I shiat you not, I got 2 blankets for Christmas and 3 for my birthday.  This in addition to the ones I already owned...well, I could probably double-insulate my trailer with blankets at this point.
 
2013-03-15 09:59:33 PM  

Mr. Shabooboo:  Remember way back when the first gay marriages happened? Remember how we were all told
that it was the end of us all?  Well...It has now been YEARS since then...The world is still turning..
the sun is still shining, and crazy is still crazy


...and last I heard some Multnomah County couple discovered that, in Oregon, divorce is between a man and a woman.
 
2013-03-15 10:00:15 PM  

ModernLuddite: What a gay Indian may look like:


Am I missing a key point that makes this funny?
 
2013-03-15 10:08:22 PM  

xaratherus: Just to crunch the numbers: In 2008 (when the study was concluded) the United States' population was 305 million. As a high-end estimate, it's thought that roughly 3% of the population is homosexual, so that would be just over 9 million; figure that about 60% of those are male, that's 5 million gay men. Let's say that  all of them have anal sex (which is inaccurate; not all gay men like anal).


You missed a 3.  Based on the people I know, regardless of location, the breakdown seems to be closer to equal distribution between gay, bi and straight.  And that's just if you break it down by three categories instead of viewing it as a spectrum (in which almost everyone is at least a little bit bi).

Everyone is entitled to try something once, to make a mistake.  It becomes inexcusable when unsanitary behavior becomes compulsive to the point of redefining marriage so as to include the abhorrent in a beautiful custom.

There's this new thing called condoms.  Maybe you've heard of them.  Also, when was the last time anyone traded three goats and a chicken for a wife?  Hey!  that's right, because we already redefined marriage because that practice was dehumanizing and stupid.
 
2013-03-15 10:10:18 PM  

Theaetetus: xaratherus: Feel free to read the source document. It goes on to state that somewhere around 10%+ of those heterosexual males engage in it on a 'regular basis'. Which is still more straight people having anal sex than there are even homosexuals that exist.

Given those statistics and population sizes, I wonder what the ratio of heterosexual men who engage in pegging to gay men is.


Unrealistically conservative numbers aside (given the taboo, there's bound to be a lot more who are into it than will admit it to someone they're not engaging in it with), that's piqued my interest, too.  Having taken it from both genders now, I gotta say...the women do it better.  Go figure.
 
2013-03-15 10:21:38 PM  

Lava_Backflips: I want to know their tribal Indian names for "He who pitches"and"He who catches".


Two spirit?
 
2013-03-15 10:30:56 PM  

Baloo Uriza: Lava_Backflips: I want to know their tribal Indian names for "He who pitches"and"He who catches".

Two spirit?


Indian givers and Indian takers
 
2013-03-15 10:54:10 PM  

hdhale: While you're downing Columbus, remember that Native American tribes engage in every single form of warfare and atrocity that the "round eyes" did, but to hear some people talk about it, every was just sunshine, unicorns, rainbows, and at night everyone laid around the camp fire together and thanked the land just for being itself up until 1492. a dental problem ended your life at age 32.


ftfy
 
2013-03-15 11:53:34 PM  

serial_crusher: MaliFinn: Theaetetus: Tribal law will keep their marriage safe from a 2004 Michigan constitutional amendment.

It's also safe from the federal Defense of Marriage Act which is in front of the U.S. Supreme Court and defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.


Not so. DoMA, Clause 2, which  isn't in front of SCOTUS at the moment:

No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.


That clause of DoMA specifically means that their marriage may be ignored by other states, regardless of their tribal law.

That doesn't mean shiat.  The DoMA does not apply to Indian Nations because there are preexisting treaties respecting the Tribes' ability to self-govern, and subsequent Tribal constitutions having been recognized by the DoI granting them powers in scope that include governance on Tribal land over people in their own homes.  The Federal government may pass a law, but a Tribal law within this scope can supersede it, with all disputes being first judged in Tribal courts.

And if you're thinking to yourself "lol we have tanks and screw you indinz;" violating the treaties is an invitation to war, and nobody wants to go there, for a number of reasons.  One of the largest reasons is that there are 3,000,000 Native Americans, and 22% of them over 18 (men and women) are military veterans.

You saying the treaties would force the Feds to recognize the tribal gay marriage? Like, say allow them to file jointly on their federal income tax, extend benefits if one of them is a federal employee?

Sounds interesting. That's not how it works for marriages from other countries.


Thinking of Tribes as foreign countries is correct, they are sovereign nations.  The difference is that their treaties allow for disputes about domestic issues - issue about activity and conditions on trust land - are settled in Tribal court first.  It's a big minefield, and it's hard for anyone to challenge and overturn tribal law without stomping all over the tribe's sovereignty.  You might as well piss on their doorstep and kick their dog, dismissing the validity of tribal sovereignty is fightin' words.
 
2013-03-16 12:05:06 AM  

Theaetetus: MaliFinn: Theaetetus:


Respectfully, I believe you're misreading both DoMA and my earlier post. Allow me to try to be clearer:
1) DoMA says that no state is required to give effect to an act from an indian tribe regarding same sex marriage;
2) Therefore, "tribal law" doesn't keep their marriage safe from, for example, Michigan refusing to recognize it.

Your statement - that the tribes can  self-govern and that they have powers of governance  on Tribal land and can judge disputes  in Tribal courts - is true, but irrelevant to what  Michigan does with this couple's marriage. And Michigan doesn't have to let them file taxes jointly, for example.

Clearer now?


Actually, if you live and work on tribal land you can legally ignore state taxes altogether. 

States have jack shiat to say about Tribes.  That is, they have nothing legal to say about tribal activity on tribal land, provided you have the money to pay for the lawyers to defend your rights, and the people to roadblock the state patrol when they want to push you around.  Normally, activity that takes place on tribal land is regulated the same as state law unless the tribe has passed a tribal ordinance that more or less overrules it.

So they can honor NAC practices and legalize peyote, or legalize gambling and open a casino (the conditions of which are agreed to between the tribes and feds under IGRA), or, say, legalize gay marriage.
 
2013-03-16 12:10:42 AM  

ReverendJynxed: MaliFinn: Theaetetus: Tribal law will keep their marriage safe from a 2004 Michigan constitutional amendment.

It's also safe from the federal Defense of Marriage Act which is in front of the U.S. Supreme Court and defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.


Not so. DoMA, Clause 2, which  isn't in front of SCOTUS at the moment:

No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.


That clause of DoMA specifically means that their marriage may be ignored by other states, regardless of their tribal law.

That doesn't mean shiat.  The DoMA does not apply to Indian Nations because there are preexisting treaties respecting the Tribes' ability to self-govern, and subsequent Tribal constitutions having been recognized by the DoI granting them powers in scope that include governance on Tribal land over people in their own homes.  The Federal government may pass a law, but a Tribal law within this scope can supersede it, with all disputes being first judged in Tribal courts.

And if you're thinking to yourself "lol we have tanks and screw you indinz;" violating the treaties is an invitation to war, and nobody wants to go there, for a number of reasons.  One of the largest reasons is that there are 3,000,000 Native Americans, and 22% of them over 18 (men and women) are military veterans.

Their only defense is a lack of oil.


Funny.  Like all good humor, it's got a kernel of truth - you'd be surprised how heavily natives are recruited into the field of geological sciences.  Guess why?  The mining companies want to educate and hire indians to go back to their tribes and convince them to sell off the mining rights on reservation land.  They might not have oil, but in some cases they have rare metals like uranium.
 
2013-03-16 12:30:27 AM  

Baloo Uriza: ModernLuddite: What a gay Indian may look like:

Am I missing a key point that makes this funny?


Freddie Mercury was ethnic Indian

.

ambercat: Why does anyone have a reason to think that Warren isn't part native american besides her not looking like it?

Also, on a related note, people do realize that when a native american and a white person have children, the kids don't all come out looking native, right? It's not like when dark black people and white people have children and the african traits are apparent in the appearance of their descendants through several generations even if those descendants keep marrying more white people. Someone who is 1/4 native american and 3/4ths white can have blond hair and blue eyes and look totally white, and in the days of tanning being fashionable, even someone who is 1/2 may look white or european to people.


One of my friends' youngest son is blond with blue eyes.  My three oldest kids (much farther removed from their Indian ancestors than my friend's kid) are as well.  My dad, who was 1/4 Indian, was often mistaken in this area for Mexican, and I still am sometimes, even though I'm really pale.  It's kinda dumb to go by looks in regards to ethnicity, especially given that most Americans have a rather stereotypical mental image of a "Native American", without any realization that a Cherokee, a Sioux, and a Dine don't really look that much alike.
 
2013-03-16 01:49:51 AM  
Meanwhile, in Topeka, the Phelps clan is busy fabricating "God hates aboriginals" signs.
 
2013-03-16 03:40:49 AM  

Grave_Girl: Baloo Uriza: ModernLuddite: What a gay Indian may look like:

Am I missing a key point that makes this funny?

Freddie Mercury was ethnic Indian

.ambercat: Why does anyone have a reason to think that Warren isn't part native american besides her not looking like it?

Also, on a related note, people do realize that when a native american and a white person have children, the kids don't all come out looking native, right? It's not like when dark black people and white people have children and the african traits are apparent in the appearance of their descendants through several generations even if those descendants keep marrying more white people. Someone who is 1/4 native american and 3/4ths white can have blond hair and blue eyes and look totally white, and in the days of tanning being fashionable, even someone who is 1/2 may look white or european to people.

One of my friends' youngest son is blond with blue eyes.  My three oldest kids (much farther removed from their Indian ancestors than my friend's kid) are as well.  My dad, who was 1/4 Indian, was often mistaken in this area for Mexican, and I still am sometimes, even though I'm really pale.  It's kinda dumb to go by looks in regards to ethnicity, especially given that most Americans have a rather stereotypical mental image of a "Native American", without any realization that a Cherokee, a Sioux, and a Dine don't really look that much alike.


Actually, now that I think about it, all of the native/part native people I know around here are pretty much always mistaken for either white or Mexican. Nobody ever looks at them and thinks 'aha! Native American!' But then, this is California, so none of them have distinctive accents like people in some other places do, aaaaand we have a bunch of Mexicans. So yeah, maybe that's why it seems dumb to me judge by looks. And also, to be fair, many of the Mexicans who immigrate here are Spanish + Native anyway, so yeah they actually do look pretty much like that.
 
2013-03-16 09:19:06 AM  

cman: I thought tribes were sovereign states.

Why would Michigan laws apply?


They don't, and that's the beauty of it.  Stickin' it to the white man's government is still their favorite past time, only now they do it constructively.
 
2013-03-16 11:35:35 AM  

MaliFinn: Theaetetus: MaliFinn: Theaetetus:

Respectfully, I believe you're misreading both DoMA and my earlier post. Allow me to try to be clearer:
1) DoMA says that no state is required to give effect to an act from an indian tribe regarding same sex marriage;
2) Therefore, "tribal law" doesn't keep their marriage safe from, for example, Michigan refusing to recognize it.

Your statement - that the tribes can  self-govern and that they have powers of governance  on Tribal land and can judge disputes  in Tribal courts - is true, but irrelevant to what  Michigan does with this couple's marriage. And Michigan doesn't have to let them file taxes jointly, for example.

Clearer now?

Actually, if you live and work on tribal land you can legally ignore state taxes altogether. 

States have jack shiat to say about Tribes. That is, they have nothing legal to say about tribal activity on tribal land, provided you have the money to pay for the lawyers to defend your rights, and the people to roadblock the state patrol when they want to push you around.  Normally, activity that takes place on tribal land is regulated the same as state law unless the tribe has passed a tribal ordinance that more or less overrules it.

So they can honor NAC practices and legalize peyote, or legalize gambling and open a casino (the conditions of which are agreed to between the tribes and feds under IGRA), or, say, legalize gay marriage.


OMG... Seriously, I feel like you look at the words I post and then just shrug and reply without actually reading them. I'm going to try once more, and I'm really not trying to be insulting by dumbing this down, I just think that otherwise, you're never going to understand.

1. Couple gets married in PLACE A.
2. Couple goes to STATE B.
3. Under DoMA, STATE B does not have to recognize same sex marriage from PLACE A.

Got it? PLACE A can be another state, like Massachusetts. STATE B, say, Mississippi, doesn't have to recognize Massachusetts' marriages.

With me?

Good. Now, and here's the part that you keep skipping over, PLACE A can be a tribal reservation. Mississippi does not have to recognize marriages performed there. It doesn't matter that the tribe is a sovereign state. Under DoMA, Mississippi does not have to recognize gay marriages from there any more than they have to recognize gay marriages performed in Massachusetts, or those performed in France.

All of your talk about treaties and gambling and casinos is IRRELEVANT to what a state like Mississippi has or doesn't have to do under DoMA.
 
2013-03-16 03:55:59 PM  

MaliFinn: ReverendJynxed: MaliFinn: Theaetetus: Tribal law will keep their marriage safe from a 2004 Michigan constitutional amendment.

It's also safe from the federal Defense of Marriage Act which is in front of the U.S. Supreme Court and defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.


Not so. DoMA, Clause 2, which  isn't in front of SCOTUS at the moment:

No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.


That clause of DoMA specifically means that their marriage may be ignored by other states, regardless of their tribal law.

That doesn't mean shiat.  The DoMA does not apply to Indian Nations because there are preexisting treaties respecting the Tribes' ability to self-govern, and subsequent Tribal constitutions having been recognized by the DoI granting them powers in scope that include governance on Tribal land over people in their own homes.  The Federal government may pass a law, but a Tribal law within this scope can supersede it, with all disputes being first judged in Tribal courts.

And if you're thinking to yourself "lol we have tanks and screw you indinz;" violating the treaties is an invitation to war, and nobody wants to go there, for a number of reasons.  One of the largest reasons is that there are 3,000,000 Native Americans, and 22% of them over 18 (men and women) are military veterans.

Their only defense is a lack of oil.

Funny.  Like all good humor, it's got a kernel of truth - you'd be surprised how heavily natives are recruited into the field of geological sciences.  Guess why?  The mining companies want to educate and hire indians to go back to their tribes and convince them to s ...


And if the tribe owns it's own industries, like mine does, that shiat goes to export at a serious premium compared to what in-tribe businesses get.
 
2013-03-16 04:02:54 PM  

Grave_Girl: Baloo Uriza: ModernLuddite: What a gay Indian may look like:

Am I missing a key point that makes this funny?

Freddie Mercury was ethnic Indian


OK, so the dot-or-feather premise of that joke failed me.

One of my friends' youngest son is blond with blue eyes.  My three oldest kids (much farther removed from their Indian ancestors than my friend's kid) are as well.  My dad, who was 1/4 Indian, was often mistaken in this area for Mexican, and I still am sometimes, even though I'm really pale.  It's kinda dumb to go by looks in regards to ethnicity, especially given that most Americans have a rather stereotypical mental image of a "Native American", without any realization that a Cherokee, a Sioux, and a Dine don't really look that much alike.

Then there's folks like me...if I get a hair cut and stay someplace that doesn't get much sunlight, I start looking more Scottish than Cherokee after a few weeks.
 
2013-03-17 02:04:04 AM  

biglot: Gay braves. I mean, is there anything left under the sun to hear about now?


What about gay braves eating pudding?
 
Displayed 19 of 119 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report