marriage equality in California - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-06-2008, 04:28 PM   #31
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 05:42 AM
I think the debate that Irvine and Nathan have going is fascinating. You both have intelligent and well thought out points of view. It does bother me, however, that we as a nation are still arguing over whether or not certain people should be allowed to get married in a country that guarantees freedom and equality to all of its citizens.
__________________

__________________
U2isthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 04:37 PM   #32
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 04:42 AM
i do think it's an interesting springboard into the topic of what is marriage "for" and what is it supposed to "do" in our society.

i think if we answer these fundamental questions, or at least understand them better, we'll see even less of a basis for discrimination.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 04:48 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 09:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




i appreciate the constructive approach, but this does feel like a bit of a dodge.
Not really. Marriage is tied to monogamy, which civil unions don't exactly promote. (They don't lend themselves to a "death do us part" mentality.) I would hate for couples -- opposite-sex or same-sex -- who have been together for three months and have no intention of making a go of it to register as civil partners and automatically get the same kind of "incentives" that my wife and I, who have made committments to each other and intend to see them through, do. So at that level, I'd like marriage to be a little more iron-clad, and rather than making it harder for people to get divorced, which I don't think is appropriate, I'd like to see it harder for people to get married.

So on one hand, I'm probably for gay marriage over civil unions, as I think it promotes monogamy among same-sex couples and certainly provides a more stable environment for children to thrive in. At the same time, my friends who are gay and are in long-term monogamous relationships don't seem to need the "M" status to define their relationship either way (or sort out their finances -- a good will covers a lot of ground). I'm thinking about my friends Mike & Frank and Stephen & Brian in particular here, whose monogamy has proven itself over time and is self-chosen as opposed to government-defined.

So when I say that your desire promotes dialogue and conversation, I genuinely mean that, without being able to say more because it's a multi-faceted issue and I'm not sure where I land. But this is part of a larger cultural conversation that we should have. You and Memphis wanting to get married definitely changes the conversation and the definitions. I'm probably against civil unions for the reasons outlined above, but I think any talk of gay marriage should probably be part of a larger re-think of what marriage is and should be.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 04:53 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 09:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2isthebest
I think the debate that Irvine and Nathan have going is fascinating. You both have intelligent and well thought out points of view. It does bother me, however, that we as a nation are still arguing over whether or not certain people should be allowed to get married in a country that guarantees freedom and equality to all of its citizens.
I appreciate the affirmation, though I think in this thread Irvine and I are less debating and more discussing.

And I think it's healthy to be having these discussions about what marriage is and what it should be. Vigorous debate is probably better than silent approval. An ongoing national conversation about what marriage means is helpful as we think more deeply about issues like family and sexuality and try to chart a course of action. (Even though there are those unhelpful few in the "God Hates Fags" crowd whose vitriol is unhelpful. But God remembers what they've said...and dare I say it, knows where their hatred will ultimately send them.)
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 04:55 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 05:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

and i can't think of a more "separate but equal" institution than civil unions.
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

and i can't think of a more "separate but equal" institution than civil unions.
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

and i can't think of a more "separate but equal" institution than civil unions.
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

and i can't think of a more "separate but equal" institution than civil unions.
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

and i can't think of a more "separate but equal" institution than civil unions.

I don't know why something that was wrong 45 years ago is somehow acceptable today.
__________________
Utoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 04:56 PM   #36
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 04:42 AM
so much to discuss, but i've got some things to take care of.

back in a while.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 05:06 PM   #37
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977


Not really. Marriage is tied to monogamy, which civil unions don't exactly promote. (They don't lend themselves to a "death do us part" mentality.) I would hate for couples -- opposite-sex or same-sex -- who have been together for three months and have no intention of making a go of it to register as civil partners and automatically get the same kind of "incentives" that my wife and I, who have made committments to each other and intend to see them through, do. So at that level, I'd like marriage to be a little more iron-clad, and rather than making it harder for people to get divorced, which I don't think is appropriate, I'd like to see it harder for people to get married.

So on one hand, I'm probably for gay marriage over civil unions, as I think it promotes monogamy among same-sex couples and certainly provides a more stable environment for children to thrive in. At the same time, my friends who are gay and are in long-term monogamous relationships don't seem to need the "M" status to define their relationship either way (or sort out their finances -- a good will covers a lot of ground). I'm thinking about my friends Mike & Frank and Stephen & Brian in particular here, whose monogamy has proven itself over time and is self-chosen as opposed to government-defined.
DOUBLE STANDARD!!! and incorrect, one needs more than a good will.

Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977

So when I say that your desire promotes dialogue and conversation, I genuinely mean that, without being able to say more because it's a multi-faceted issue and I'm not sure where I land. But this is part of a larger cultural conversation that we should have. You and Memphis wanting to get married definitely changes the conversation and the definitions. I'm probably against civil unions for the reasons outlined above, but I think any talk of gay marriage should probably be part of a larger re-think of what marriage is and should be.
I'm really trying to wrap my mind around this, but I can't. What is there to redefine or rethink? This "larger conversation" isn't making any sense, it just sounds like a cop out.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 05:10 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 04:42 AM
On a bit of a tangent but related to the whole idea of equal rights... Whenever we start having the gay marriage discussion, I think about the fact that some fifty-odd years ago, I would not have had the right to marry my boyfriend.

"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix." according to Judge Leon Bazile in 1965. To me, this doesn't sound all that different than the arguments one usually hears against gay marriage. Some sort of appeal to what's "natural" and/or mandated by God. (please note, I'm not saying that this is being put forward by anyone in this thread only that this has been a common argument against extending marriage rights to gays and lesbians).

Today, I don't know of any rational person who would argue that my boyfriend and I should be excluded from the institution of marriage just because he's black and I'm white. And 50 years from now, I think our children will look back and wonder how anyone could have justified discrimination against gays and lesbians. I truly think that history is on the side of human rights and full equality.
__________________
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono

sulawesigirl4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 05:20 PM   #39
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sulawesigirl4
And 50 years from now, I think our children will look back and wonder how anyone could have justified discrimination against gays and lesbians. I truly think that history is on the side of human rights and full equality.
I agree. It's just sad that certain groups never learn from history.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 05:23 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 05:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sulawesigirl4
On a bit of a tangent but related to the whole idea of equal rights... Whenever we start having the gay marriage discussion, I think about the fact that some fifty-odd years ago, I would not have had the right to marry my boyfriend.

"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix." according to Judge Leon Bazile in 1965. To me, this doesn't sound all that different than the arguments one usually hears against gay marriage. Some sort of appeal to what's "natural" and/or mandated by God. (please note, I'm not saying that this is being put forward by anyone in this thread only that this has been a common argument against extending marriage rights to gays and lesbians).

Today, I don't know of any rational person who would argue that my boyfriend and I should be excluded from the institution of marriage just because he's black and I'm white. And 50 years from now, I think our children will look back and wonder how anyone could have justified discrimination against gays and lesbians. I truly think that history is on the side of human rights and full equality.
Brilliant post. I couldn't agree more.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 05:26 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 09:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


DOUBLE STANDARD!!! and incorrect, one needs more than a good will.



I'm really trying to wrap my mind around this, but I can't. What is there to redefine or rethink? This "larger conversation" isn't making any sense, it just sounds like a cop out.
Tell me, BVS, does everyone you disagree with look like a nail to you?

I didn't say a good will solves everything. I said it covers a lot of ground.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 05:46 PM   #42
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 03:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977


Tell me, BVS, does everyone you disagree with look like a nail to you?
Not at all. In fact I was holding back with that response.

Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977

I didn't say a good will solves everything. I said it covers a lot of ground.
"Seperate but equal" covered a lot of ground for many folks too.

Why don't you try and answer the question of what this greater conversation of rethinking means?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 05:56 PM   #43
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 01:42 AM
It's interesting that so many straight men see gay marriage as a way extend the discussion of what marriage is and should be, rather than a legitimate extension of rights to all adults.
__________________
martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 06:02 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 09:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Not at all. In fact I was holding back with that response.
I guess a little civility never hurt anyone. Glad to have yours.

Quote:
Why don't you try and answer the question of what this greater conversation of rethinking means?
I think I've done a pretty good job of summing up my thoughts on the subject of monogamy and its place in society, as well as the issues I've raised -- and in a constructive manner.

But I guess, as with my ultra-Right friends who can't fathom that I'd even consider gay marriage as a legit option, there are people on the far Left who think I'm an idiot too. Happy to oblige, BVS, happy to oblige.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2008, 06:03 PM   #45
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 09:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha
It's interesting that so many straight men see gay marriage as a way extend the discussion of what marriage is and should be, rather than a legitimate extension of rights to all adults.
See my earlier question of uncertainty as to whether marriage is a legal right.
__________________

__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com