Politics, Marriage & the 21st Century

[LESjunkie]

So I'm posting this because we've had quite a few political and philisophical threads on this board...there are many intelligent and enlightening minds in this forum.  So let's talk about something that is augmenting more and more in the news....a civil rights movement persay...

Women's suffrage began this way.  

African American suffrage began this way.

In fact, almost all civil rights movements in this country had begun just like this one at hand...I predict that our country is going to have a major movement on its hands over the next, maybe 5-10 years?  I dont know the numbers, but the signs are all here...From Massachussetts to Ohio to San Francisco...to the white house to the constitution, marriage as we know it is going to be so very scrutinized...and im curious as to where everyone stands on this.  

The reason I am intrigued to post this was a recent episode of Real Time with Bill Maher, on HBO.  If you dont watch that show, I recommend you do....in my opinion, it's brilliant....sheer realism at its best...check it out.  I know his old show on ABC sucked....but his new -no holds barred-esque show on HBO is solid.

Anyway, I went and retreived the transcript of his Valentine's Day show, where he touched upon the subject of marriage.  Read this, and if you have the time, read it again and let it absorb...it was so intense the way he delivered these words....I wish I could post his voice orating, but this will have to suffice.  

------------------------February 14th, 2004-----------------

"And finally, New Rule, Special Valentine's Day Edition: You can't claim you're the party of smaller government and then make laws about love. On this occasion of this Valentine's Day, let's stop and ask ourselves what business is it of the state how consenting adults choose to pair off, share expenses and eventually stop having sex with each other. And why does the Bush Administration want a Constitutional amendment about weddings? Hey, why stop at weddings? Birthdays are important; let's put them in the great document. Let's make a law that gay people can have birthdays, but straight people get more cake. You know, to send the right message to kids.

Republicans are always saying we should privatize things like schools, prisons, Social Security. Hey, how about we privatize privacy? Because if the government forbids gay men from tying the knot, what is their alternative? They can't all marry Liza Minnelli.

You know, Republicans used to be the party that opposed social engineering. But now they push programs to outlaw marriage for some people and encourage it for others. If you're straight, there's a billion-five in the budget to promote marriage, but gay marriage is opposed because it threatens or mocks or does something to the "sanctity" of marriage, as if anything you can do in Vegas, drunk off your ass in front of an Elvis impersonator, could be considered sacred.

Half the people who pledge eternal love are doing it because one of them is either knocked up, rich or desperate. But in George Bush's mind, marriage is only a beautiful lifetime bond of love and sharing. Kind of like what his dad has with the Saudis. Please, I kid.

All right, but at least the right wing aren't hypocrites on this issue. They really believe that homosexuality is an abomination and a dysfunction that's curable. They believe that if a gay man just devotes his life to Jesus, he'll stop being gay, because that theory worked out so well with the Catholic priests.

But I have to tell you, the greater shame in this story goes to the Democrats, because they don't believe homosexuality is an abomination. And therefore, their refusal to endorse gay marriage is hypocrisy. Their position doesn't come from the Bible. It's ripped right from the latest poll, which says most Americans are against gay marriage.

Well, you know what? Sometimes most Americans are just wrong. And where is the Democrat who will stand up and go beyond the half measures of "civil union" and "hate the sin, love the sinner" and say loud and clear, "There is no sin; it's not an abomination and no one can control how cupid aims his arrows. And the ones who pretend they can usually turn out to be the biggest freaks."

The law in this country should reflect that some people are just born 100% outrageously, fabulously, undeniably, Fire Island gay! And they do not need reprogramming. They need a man with a slow hand!"

--------------------------------END------------------------------

Let's not just post our personal opinions here, but also share some predictions of progression.  I know this is a deep, touchy subject...dont participate if you dont feel like it....but I think we all can have an educated discussion without acting like breadbasket hicks or bible-belters here...we live in two (now three with Philly ) extremely cosmopolitan cities...

[Guest joeygk]

In my opinion the whole debate boils down to 'freedom to contract.' Marriage is a contract btwn two people that confers certain governmental benefits. So long as the couple have the intent & capacity (i.e. legal age) to enter into a contract the government should have no say in the matter. Unfortunately, our current administration is relying on outdated religious definitions of 'marriage' thus creating separate classes of people under the law and violating fundamental principles of equal protection. Then again, what do I know?

*I think Margaret Cho said it best: "any government that would deny a gay man the right to bridal registry is a Fascist State!"

[LESjunkie]

religious definitions, yes...but also the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) of 1996. This is the Act which will be the focus of change for proponents of same-sex marriage, and there will need to be a supreme court case that sets NEW precedents that would override the two cases (used as the backbone for the DOMA). Here is a link to the Defense of Marriage Act.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/leg23.htm

[Guest joeygk]

The Supreme Court will have to weigh in eventually b/c of the full, faith & credit clause of article IV of the Constitution --- each state has to uphold the laws & statues of it's sister states --- therefore there will be tricky constitutional issues to tackle once states like Massachusetts legalize gay marriage. Under the Constitution the other states would have to recognize the marriages performed in Mass -- the Supreme Court has not yet ruled or even heard this case/controversy --- and that's why there is talk of a 'constitutional amendment’ b/c it will take the final decision out of the courts, who right now will be the final arbiter.

[Guest endymion]

A funeral is how you note the passing of a human life. Different cultures all over the world and through history have handled the specifics differently, but some note of a person's passing is common.

A marriage is another fundamental rite of humanity. The specifics of marriage are different from culture to culture but almost every culture has this concept.

A basic function of a human society is to provide a way for people to acknowledge these basic rites of humanity. In Soviet Russia the specifics of marriage involved a bunch of paperwork and rubber stamps, that was how their society implemented marriage. In New Guinea it might involve piercing something, I have no idea.

In the US, marriage is a legal process that involves asking permission from the government. That's our tradition. That's what our society does to acknowledge the process of two people committing their lives to each other.

Denying any two people access to the process that our society uses to acknowledge marriage has only one purpose. It classifies an entire group of people as less than human. It tells a specific group of people that they are not as good as the chosen group and that they are not entitled to even the most fundamental experiences of life as a human.

I do agree that what we are seeing is akin to the birth of the civil rights movement. I also know that the conservatives are correct when they fear that there are legions of other 'deviant' forms of marriage slouching in the closet just itching to come out.

[Guest JMT]

the way i see it, why not at least let gays get the legal and financial benefits associated and reserved for marriages, even if they cant be "allowed" to be literally married.

[LESjunkie]

id say that could maybe be a step but in the long run it is disgraceful.  Nowadays, we cant imagine women not being able to vote, and we surely cant imagine having "separate but equal" facilities for whites and blacks....

will there ever be a day when society will reflect, with comparable sentiment to suffrage, on American history and say, "oh my god, those idiots wouldnt let gays marry?"  ???

Educate to Tolerate...  

[ryan2772]

will there ever be a day when society will reflect, with comparable sentiment to suffrage, on American history and say, "oh my god, those idiots wouldnt let gays marry?"  ???

definitely.

[Guest ciaran_r]

i

will there ever be a day when society will reflect, with comparable sentiment to suffrage, on American history and say, "oh my god, those idiots wouldnt let gays marry?"  ???

For sure, sex before marriage was strict in the catholic religion and a lot of people probably couldnt imagine it happening.

No one really gives a 2 cent now ;D

[Guest web_norah]

gay people are humans, they pay taxes and if they choose to be married so be it....they are not harming anyone or whatever preference they choose, i am not anybody to judge ...

[Guest bcnjunkie]

the way I see it, this country is pushing the right extreme (borderline faschist). We live under the illusion that we're a "free people" but everytime some ridiculous "socially unacceptable" matter happens, it's blown out of proportion and the goverment feels it's their duty to intervine and impose what they consider proper behavior, WHY ?, they hide their selfish/power-hungry motives behind religion and more specifically christianity. I don't forsee an improvement but instead a momevent towards an intolerable goverment.

personally I don't like organized religions and try to keep my beliefs to myself. Religions, color, race, sexual orientation mean nothing to me. I believe it should be kept out completely out of our goverment !. I can't understand how an entity that doesn't pay tax (but it's allowed to make money and be exported out of the country, in case of the catholic church, and be deposited in the richest bank in the world... that of the Vatican), be allowed to lobby in Washington DC on moral issues, absolutely NOT. I was raised in a very catholic family and my first trip to Rome was enough for me to realize that it wasn't for me, or their hate-filled moral views.

Personally I can't understand the concept of marriage anyways. Most of the people that I see get married are in love with the idea of being in Love. Very few people don't realize that in a marriage you have to give 1/2 and 95% of people that I know get married aren't willing to do so. I work catering and we do loads of weddings, the drama is enough for a whole season of any daytime soap opera. It seems so fake, more trying to impress family and "friends".

In the end this is supposed to be a free country, and what it boils down to is whether homosexuality is acceptable. So far, homosexual people I've met (both male and female) are trying to acheive the same goal as everybody else, be happy. And if this means a same sex marriage, then so be it, If anyone argues this, than they should ask themselves, do we really live in a free country ?

[Guest pod]

Do we live in a free country? More free than most, but not as free as I would like it to be.

For one:

1. The government tells people what they can and cannot do to themselves.

2. The government seeks constantly to disarm the populace. An unarmed populace is ripe for the taking by tyrannical elements from within our own government.

3. The government demands a good percentage of our hard-earned money for useless social services and programs that we as a people have never okayed. Not to mention the infamous power of being able to vote themselves pay raises.

4. The government pretty much seeks to regulate too much of our lives.

I could go on forever...

You all know my viewpoints to an extent. I'm a hardcore libertarian. I believe that the government should exist only to maintain a military, a limited police force, provide basic access to education and healthcare, and maintain public works like transit, power, and environmental services.

Other than that, keep the hell out of my life. Should I be able to marry who I want? Sure! Should I be able to go on a ten day meth-fueled bender? Sure! As long as I don't harm others. Should I be able to have the right to wax your ass if you break into my apartment? Yep! Expect a double-tap in the head if you're trying to walk off with my PC.

Good government is less government. I swear, the Founding Fathers are spinning in their grave right now. Income taxes alone have them rocking like crazy.

[Guest web_norah]

Other than that, keep the hell out of my life. Should I be able to marry who I want? Sure! Should I be able to go on a ten day meth-fueled bender? Sure! As long as I don't harm others. Should I be able to have the right to wax your ass if you break into my apartment? Yep! Expect a double-tap in the head if you're trying to walk off with my PC.

Good government is less government. I swear, the Founding Fathers are spinning in their grave right now. Income taxes alone have them rocking like crazy.

Pod you should quit photography and run for president

[Guest pod]

I've been saying it already. in 2016, when I'm old enough, I'll run for the office.

I could probably take it by force in a bit less time though.

The tree of liberty requires occasional bloodshed to keep growing. (Ben Franklin)

[Guest bcnjunkie]

I've been saying it already. in 2016, when I'm old enough, I'll run for the office.

I could probably take it by force in a bit less time though.

The tree of liberty requires occasional bloodshed to keep growing. (Ben Franklin)

you got my vote !

[Guest fbarassi]

POD summed up my sentiments to a T.

The hard truth, I fear, based on Bush's support of a Constitutional Ammendment barring same-sex marriages (this is an election year after all) is that the vast majority of citizens are against this. When a politician like Bush backs something, its usually because he has his bases covered...

[Guest pod]

Time to impeach the bastard then, force him to resign. The thing that sucks is, Cheney's not much better.

Bloody Republicans and Democrats are ruining the nation.

[LESjunkie]

That speech yesterday.....I havent seen stared at a television screen and covered my mouth like that in shock since september 11th....

unreal! this is 60's style! Our country's politicians re spinning out of control? What's next, we will be told that the world actually IS flat, the KKK isnt bad after all, and ya know what, women should really not be voting...

when i initially made this thread, I didnt think that this would happen so fast....but now it is obviously clear and present---holy shit, man! we are going to see some crazy shit go down not in the next 5-10 years, but in the coming months! Wow...young people, this is our most relevant voting year EVER! I feel like this is one of the most historic elections...Im almost speechless at the words that were said by our prez yesterday----this is nuts....ny, dc, san fran....these cities are going to see some big protests and wild things are going to happen----

People,can Bush actually get re-elected after this? will our country truly support a man who wants to adjuts our constitution to discriminate and de-humanize human beings who cant help the fact that they are merely attracted to someone who is the same sex? oh my god it's dictatorial, incredibly supercilious that our disgusting insane president is not only trying to rule the world, but even love---im shaking my head and struggling to grasp the fact that our country, the united states----for everything we've ever stood for, fought for, been proud of-=---- right now this battle over gay marriage is just as pathetic and pitiful as when we condemn Muslims for forcing women to cover their faces....get the fuck outta here I will stand up for this til im blue in the face...and if mr/ bush comes to our city anytime soon I'll be the first person among, i would think hundreds of thousands who would line up for the opportunity to try to spit in his face...

??? ??? ???Let me ask you all this....can any of you, in light of this civil rights issue....can any of you still justify a vote for bush? I sincerely hope Florida doesnt fuck this up this year....this race is goin to be just as close as it was last year, i presume.....

[V. Barbarino]

Same sex marriages will loose and we can move on all the while protecting a very important instituion that has been around for 100's of years.

I am 100% against any civil union or same sex marriage. Slavery and womens rights, were baisc human rights, marriage is not.

For the gays, answer me this

1. is being gay go against all religion and nature?

2. does the gay pride parage where gays fuck each other in leather hurt or help your cause?

3. will same sex marriages lead to marriages between wacky couples, like brothers and sisters? Dogs and cats?

mutiple wives?

4. why does being gay, involve acting like a fucking girl? Why do some gays act normal, and others don't?

[Guest endymion]

EV, the longer you live in a place like the East Village or South Beach, the easier it is to forget that the rest of this country is not full of intelligent, progressive people.

Every year around the holidays I take part in a big reunion where my entire extended family comes from all over the world back to my grandparents' house in south Louisiana. It's like that Fox show "The Simple Life" with Paris Hilton for me. I spend a week, sometimes two, fully immersed in a little town of 2000 people on the Texas/Louisiana border.

In place like Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Missisipi, even North Florida, President Bush is seen as a fearless leader who protects decent, hardworking people from exactly the likes of us. Uneducated people in the deep south are very susceptible to attractive and charming men in expensive suits who distract them from their economic woes by touching moralistic nerves.

Bush doesn't want to talk about the war. He doesn't want to talk about the economy. He doesn't want to talk about his failure to create jobs. That leaves him trying as hard as he can to distract Americans into talking about something else. He milked the Janet Jackson tit controversy for as long as he could manage. He tried to get us upset about athletes using steroids. "What this country really needs to get it back on its feet is a 20-year mission to Mars!!" Now he's trying to use peoples' homophobia to get them to talk about gay marriage around the watercooler instead of the abysmal consumer confidence numbers that are causing the markets to slip.

So far it seems to be working.

[Guest endymion]

Saleen, was that last message a parody of a post from a narrowminded bigot who can't type, or were you being serious?

[V. Barbarino]

Saleen, was that last message a parody of a post from a narrowminded bigot who can't type, or were you being serious?

narrow minded?

Bill Oreilly asked the same questions, but tough questions are sometimes not answered by those who have no answer except the usual, you are a bigot/ ignorant person.. which shows lack of intelligence.

if you can't answer them, then you must live in the "east village" the crackhead capital of NYC. News for ya, the village is a wanna be Berkley with cheap rent. Gays think they are right since all they do is assimulate with other gays. News for you, middle american doesn't agree with yous.

if you don't answer those questions, which are legit questions, then please dont' respond to anything I write, because you simply would be like the rest of minority which claims their rights are being taking way, well what about the rights of the over 60% in this country that voted against same sex marriage? Should we toss out the "will of the people" so gays can have an even bigger parade this year and show the kids of nyc that fucking in leather on 5ave is perfectly fine?

[Guest endymion]

Don't try to pretend that #4 wasn't one of your standard inflammatory flamebaits, it insults our intelligence for you to throw that out and then backpedal and pretend that you're discussing the issue intelligently. You're testing the fence to see if I will delete your posts just because I disagree with them. I won't, give it up and act like an adult.

There is indeed a decline in taste going on in this country. Nelly grabbing his crotch, Janet Jackson showing her tit, leathermen in gay pride parades (and Howard Stern) showing their pasty white asses are all examples of that. How is poor taste an argument against gay marriage?

I submit that straight people should not be allowed to marry each other. Have you seen what these breeders are doing to undermine the honorable institution of marriage these days? Some straight midget's hand in marriage is the grand prize in a game show right now. That circus undermines the institution of marriage more than two men marrying ever could.

[Guest JMT]

There is indeed a decline in taste going on in this country.  Nelly grabbing his crotch, Janet Jackson showing her tit, leathermen in gay pride parades (and Howard Stern) showing their pasty white asses are all examples of that.  

so lets abolish all references of religion in public places, that will help boost morals.

[V. Barbarino]

I submit that straight people should not be allowed to marry each other.  Have you seen what these breeders are doing to undermine the honorable institution of marriage these days?  Some straight midget's hand in marriage is the grand prize in a game show right now.  That circus undermines the institution of marriage more than two men marrying ever could.

so little people with genetic disorders can't marry a normal size girl? what planet do you live on ? And yes I want to know why some gays act like chicks.. I just don't get it, sexual preference doesn't determine how a person acts. btw you didn't answer any of those questions...

this is the no spin zone..

so lets add one..

#5, if the majority in this conutry voted to block gay marriages then wouldn't breaking the law in san fran be not only breaking the law but the rights of the people in a democracy?

but wait, we should just toss aside the will of the people so a tiny majority can ruin a institution based on a man and women!!! dude, you haven't posted anything worth merit, your whole touchy feely I have rights bs is exactly that, bs based on a PC culture. I got news for you, gay marrige won't happen because presedent tells us the will of the people will be followed..

however the fudemental nature of democracy tells us, that it can be changed, nothing is set in stone, so in 20 years if the will of the people has changed so should the law... But gays arogance and lack of respect for the people of this coutry is why it will never get changed.