This is disgraceful

That's the best you can do? "It doesn't affect me in anyway, so just give them the word?"

What happened to "hate" and "opression" and the stripping away of civil rights?

My answer is: No.

 

You lost me with this.

If you're going to argue that the difference is so minuscule that homosexuals shouldn't care about it, you'll have a hard time saying why it's then a big issue to you.

 

Hi Xericx, you keep arguing that discriminating against gays in marriage is different from the old "separate but equal" doctrine in racial segregation because there is no tangible harm; in other words, the old Jim Crow system was worse, in your eyes, because blacks were deprived from access to tangible things like the front of the bus, water fountains, etc. Gays today, meanwhile, as you see it, are being deprived merely of the intangible status of being able to say they are married.

But you should go back and read the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board. (Link: http://www.nationalcenter.org/brown.html )

The argument that the Court made in overturning the doctrine of "separate but equal" was precisely the one that defenders of gay rights are making today, and the one that you are arguing against: that it was the *intangible* harm and psychological damage done by singling out one minority group within society for separate treatment that was the problem, *not* the tangible damage of being deprived from access to better water fountains or whatever.

If you swap out "negro" for "gay", and "schools" for "marriage", I think you'll see where those of us who are dismayed by Prop 8 are coming from. You don't have to agree with us, of course, but you should know that the arguments we're making linking gay marriage to civil rights really are rooted in a long historical tradition.

And don't even get me started on miscegenation law, Loving v. Virginia, and other travesties in our very recent past related to marriage in particular. The only thing that makes me feel better about my fellow Californians taking a dump on the Constitution and the gay community on Tuesday is that I'm pretty sure we'll look back on this vote in 30 years with exactly the same shame and embarrassment that we now see when we look back at defenders of anti-miscegenation laws in the 1960s. There was no reason besides tradition and bigotry to oppose interracial marriage then, and there's no reason besides tradition and bigotry for us to oppose gay marriage now. As a straight person in a long-term interracial relationship, I can't even imagine the state telling me that I have no right to marry my girlfriend just because her ancestors came from a different continent than mine. Yet 40 years ago that was the law. Why we straight people would today go out of our way today to discriminate against other people who are doing us no harm whatsoever, to stamp on them "the badge of inferiority" -- to quote Plessy v. Ferguson -- by singling them out for separate and unequal treatment, is beyond me.

The arguments made today by foes of gay marriage are exactly the same as the arguments made by foes of miscegenation back then. These marriages are unnatural! They are against God's plan! They violate traditional social order!

It was bullshit then and it's bullshit now.

SR

 

Its not a big issue to me. I personally think that marriage should be defined as being between a man and a woman. Its my personal opinion.

What the issue is the misnomer that opposition in this matter is based on hate and is parallel to the civil rights violations of the 1950s and 1960s.

 

Yeah, they have four fucking years to open it up again. back of the line bitches! the voters have spoken for the SECOND time.

 

Actually, two years. The next ballot will be the 2010 mid-term elections.

The positive thing is that both sides largely agree that once gay marriage has a chance to happen for a couple of years, public opinion in the state will swing in favour of allowing gay marriage permanently. That's why opponents of gay marriage around the nation treated this like Armageddon, pouring money into the state. Had it failed, that would likely have been the end of gay marriage bans in the state.

 

Preposterous. There is no parallel whatsoever in respect to this matter with gay marriage and civil unions. The degree of separation between the two examples are miles and miles apart. Forming specific white schools, black schools, sections to stand on the street, places you can't stand, places you can't drink from, etc etc etc is NOT even close to the distinction between "marriage" and "domestic partnership" within california. Again, the current descriptions PROHIBIT discrimination, which was HIGHLY EVIDENT in the 1950s America with the separate but equal proclaimation. You can talk about all the feel good, happy BS crap about hurt feelings an a feeling of inferiority or whatever the you want to pull out of your ass, but to me its all irrelevant. This is a simple case of semantics, nothing more.

 

We'll see what happens. The lawmakers might invalidate the choice of the voters for the second time

 

OK fine, but I just hope you're clear that I'm not pulling it out of my ass, I'm pulling it out of the Supreme Court's ass.

 

I was referring to the offensive and ridiculous relationship between the two.

 

Pardon the pun but I want to get this straight. You are now saying a hermaphrodite can not marry. Now matter who they married, it would be viewed as a gay marriage. You are now denying them a right that everybody else, has.

 

?

I don't know the answer to that. What are hermaphordites classified as? a man or a woman? I thought there was a way to determine a sex.

could they not go to the restrooms that are designated male or female?

 

There is no way to differentiate them because they are both man and woman. Many hermaphrodites have problems even finding somewhere to go to the bathroom, and in the workplace, often end up with their own separate bathroom because nobody will have them in theirs. So as I was saying, you are going to deny them a right everybody has just because they are born a certain way. Gays are born a certain way too.

If you say they can have surgery to "become" a man or woman, what is really different besides the surgery being done? It is the same mind in the person. Is that what really makes them what they are? Their anatomy? Are you saying if somebody blew your dick off with exposives you would no longer be a man?

If you follow this argument far enough, you will realize how stupid the argument against gays is. They are people. People treating people badly because they are different than others went out in high school. Folks have a hard enough time making ends meet now, without this bullshit.

 

I don't know any hermaphrodites, I think. I would think that there would be some sort of clear medical classification, if not physiological. I mean, can they not buy clothes except for "unisex" ones?

Again, I am not clear as to the ways of the hermaphrodite, so you need to educate me on this.

1. Do hermaphrodites or are they able to claim their status as a male or female? On a questionaire, why is there no "other" category? or do they check off both "male" and "female".

2. Is there a biological determination that can be made if one is over 50% male or female as a hermaphrodite? This would be a consideration.

3. Can a hermaphrodite choose to be registered as a "male" or "female"?

You seem to be the board-expert on hermaphrodites, please enlighten if possible.

 

Co worker just called me, said a bunch of people are blocking traffic in LA by the Federal Building on Wilshire/Sepulveda. She's been stuck in traffic for like an hour on a side street...they're just sitting in the streets, just being dicks. Yeah, that's going to get people to fucking support your shit dumbasses. haha.

 

http://www.ktla.com/landing_topstor...-Clash-With-LAPD=1&blockID=127805&feedID=1198

 

You seem very hostile towards homosexuals.

 

nope. just defending myself. you label someone as a bigot or hate filled, then I'll attack back.

I'm generally like that with all protestors. was the same way with the anti-war fucks back in the day.