Proposition 8 discussion continued

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Apparently. :shrug:



i guess i didn't realize the cosmic weight of two men getting married to each other. i guess it changes everything doesn't it.

it doesn't just mean that two people who love each other can protect their relationship and be socially recognized and treated as people.

it means the very destruction of civilization itself because, startlingly, it might mean that some children grow up in families that are different than a 2-parent nuclear family where dad is the man and mom is the woman.

i suppose a relationship model that's structurally, biologically equal -- or, where inequality is determined upon something other than gender -- is quite terrifying to people. :shrug:
 
it doesn't just mean that two people who love each other can protect their relationship and be socially recognized and treated as people.

:

how are two people in a GCU unable to protect their relationship and not recognized as people?

<>
 
how are two people in a GCU unable to protect their relationship and not recognized as people?

<>

Here we go again.

Civil unions do NOT give the same rights as marriage.

We've gone over this before: Survivor benefits form the military, employer health benefits, etc etc.

Not to mention the stigma of not having a "real" marriage in the eyes of the general public as well as the bigots who supported 8.
 
how are two people in a GCU unable to protect their relationship and not recognized as people?

<>




why do you need this distinction? how does it help us to have two distinct categories of relationships? what if straight people would prefer a civil union to a marriage?

i would like to point out, however, that GCU's -- so controversial even as 2004 -- are now the consensus position of the social Right.

i suppose that is progress.

and all thanks to cowboys fucking.
 
y'all.

again. same question.

could you tell me what marital rights should be withheld from gay couples, and why?

be specific.
 
No adoption, huh? Should we also sterilize gay men and lesbians to make sure they don't give birth to a biological child? I mean, after all if it's not in the best interest of a child to be raised by a gay couple, then surely they shouldn't multiply either. Thinking of the children here.
 
none, other than adoption.

<>

You realize that is not a marital right, right?

I think we should stop stupid people from adopting.

Maybe we should ban interracial couples from adopting.

Maybe we should ban Mormons from adopting.

Should we put it up for a vote?
 
none, other than adoption.

<>



so, setting aside the adoption -- and the reality that it's quite good for society to have gay couples around to adopt the children that straight people continue to shit out onto the street -- if there are no differences whatsoever in your "GCU" and a marriage, why do we need different words?
 
something like this, on the other hand, actually is complex:


A life thrown into turmoil by $100 donation for Prop. 8
Steve Lopez

December 14, 2008

Margie Christoffersen didn't make it very far into our conversation before she cracked. Chest heaving, tears streaming, she reached for her husband Wayne's hand and then mine, squeezing as if she'd never let go.

"I've almost had a nervous breakdown. It's been the worst thing that's ever happened to me," she sobbed as curious patrons at a Farmers Market coffee shop looked on, wondering what calamity had visited this poor woman who's an honest 6 feet tall, with hair as blond as the sun.

Well, Christoffersen was a manager at El Coyote, the Beverly Boulevard landmark restaurant that's always had throngs of customers waiting to get inside. Many of them were gay, and Christoffersen, a devout Mormon, donated $100 in support of Proposition 8, the successful November ballot initiative that banned gay marriage.

She never advertised her politics or religion in the restaurant, but last month her donation showed up on lists of "for" and "against" donors. And El Coyote became a target.

A boycott was organized on the Internet, with activists trashing El Coyote on restaurant review sites. Then came throngs of protesters, some of them shouting "shame on you" at customers. The police arrived in riot gear one night to quell the angry mob.

The mob left, but so did the customers.

Sections of the restaurant have been closed, a manager told me Friday during a very quiet lunch hour. Some of the 89 employees, many of them gay, have had their hours cut, and layoffs are looming. And Christoffersen, who has taken a voluntary leave of absence, is wondering whether she'll ever again be able to work at the restaurant, which opened in 1931 (at 1st and La Brea) and is owned by her 92-year-old mother.

"It's been so hard," she said, breaking down again.

A lot of customers saw Christoffersen as the face of the restaurant. She was the hostess who roamed from table to table with a pitcher of water, refilling glasses and schmoozing with friends.

Christoffersen, raised Mormon by her late father, told me she has no problem with gay people.

"I love them like everybody else."

But she supports her church's position that marriage is between a man and a woman.

I, on the other hand, opposed Prop. 8. And as I wrote more than once, I think organized Christian religion reached new levels of hypocrisy in using the Bible to preach discrimination and promote the initiative.

As for the Mormons, I have trouble taking any cues on social mores from a group whose founder and early leaders believed they were acting on directives from on high when they took enough wives -- many in their teens -- to fill every booth in the cavernous El Coyote.

But I didn't like what I was hearing about the vilification of Margie Christoffersen and others in California being targeted for the crime of voting their conscience.

"I agree with you on this," said Fred Karger. On his Californians Against Hate website, Karger has been outing Prop. 8 supporters, but he thinks Christoffersen's small personal donation didn't warrant such a backlash against El Coyote. Karger also spoke out against the resignation of a Sacramento theater director who gave $1,000 to Yes on 8 and happens to be Mormon.

The focus should be on the Mormon Church, Karger said, and on people and businesses that gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Yes on 8. Wayne Christoffersen, who is also a manager at El Coyote, is not a Mormon, and he said he doesn't care who marries whom. But he doesn't think it's right that he and other employees at the restaurant are seeing their livelihoods threatened. Should Apple be boycotted by Yes on 8 people, he asked, simply because the computer company donated $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign?

El Coyote has never been known for gourmet cuisine. But the warm, kitschy vibe and cool patio scene have always been a hit with customers willing to wait in long lines under the distinctive neon sign.

Now business is off about 30%, Wayne said. Margie wants to blame it on the economy, because she can't deal with the alternative. But Wayne insisted the low-priced restaurant is largely recession-proof, and it's the controversy that has stemmed the flow of margaritas.

Margie tried to smooth things over last month by inviting gay clients to a free lunch to talk it over, but she left in tears when asked if she would write a check to the group challenging Prop. 8.

She blubbered all over again as she thought back on the last month. She has been a nightly fixture at El Coyote for two decades, walking to work from her home just a few doors away. It's been her life, she said. And she can't stand that it's been taken away.

On the other side, thousands of gay people can't stand that their recent marriages could be taken away, and thousands more feel as though their civil rights have been violated.

So even if Margie returns to work at El Coyote, her husband said, "she will never, ever be back here on a Thursday night."

Thursdays, as tradition had it, the place was mobbed with gay customers.

I had lunch at El Coyote on Thursday, and most of the tables were empty.

Margie was off in a dark corner of the restaurant -- at the table where Sharon Tate had her last meal -- exchanging Christmas presents with friends and her mother.

I sat on the patio with Wayne and two other El Coyote managers -- Arnoldo Archila and Bill Schoeppner -- who happen to be gay.

"We always joked around with Margie," said Schoeppner, who's been on the job 26 years. "I'm a Democrat and voted for Obama; she probably voted for McCain -- so what? If she were a bigot or a homophobe, you wouldn't have had all these gay people" working at the restaurant or eating at it.

Besides, the donation was personal.

"She didn't cut a check from the restaurant," added Archila, a 28-year employee. "The restaurant didn't have anything to do with it."

Archila said he and other employees voted no on Prop. 8 and gave money to the legal challenge. As someone who came to the U.S. 30 years ago from El Salvador, Archila said, he's always cherished this country's right of free speech and the diversity of opinion.

"You can express yourself as a citizen," said Archila. "Not everyone has to believe the same things."
 
^ I read that in the paper yesterday.

I can't help but wonder how many gays ands lesbians have held the hand of a stranger and wept because of the actions of others.

Was she really that much in the dark about what happens when the rug is pulled out from people? Did she really have no clue about what she was supporting?

And this bit:
Should Apple be boycotted by Yes on 8 people, he asked, simply because the computer company donated $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign?

Does he know about Focus on the Family and all their boycotts? People's panties sure get wadded up when their own tactics are used against them. :tsk:
 
Something tells me that most Mac users are not exactly drawn from the Southern Baptist pool.

Actions have consequences, I guess some people are only finding that out now.
 
Actions have consequences, I guess some people are only finding that out now.



i do feel badly for that woman on some level.

but at the same time, perhaps this is the only way that some straights will come to terms with the fact that they can't just dismiss gay relationships in the way that they might have done in the past. the woman probably thought, "well, this is what my church says, so whatever, no biggie, i still love them," and it might have never occurred to her just how much her thoughtless donation would reverberate. i say thoughtless because i she probably never gave the issue much though, and because, even though she obviously knew and loved her gay customers, she probably never paused to consider the fact that their relationships are exactly the same as a straight relationship.

this is something that many people still don't understand. it's all, "don't hate me, i'm not a bigot, i just have a different belief than you." but, really, your votes actually are hateful if not intentionally hateful. they convey the message that you, a gay person, are not as good as a straight person.

it's hard to explain this morning as my brain seems to be stuck in mud.
 
Let me get this straight - this woman is upset because she was outed as having made a donation based on a bigoted belief, and it's having an adverse affect on her business, with her clientele being comprised largely of the group this bigoted belief directly affects, and their supporters?

This is me not caring.

Does he know about Focus on the Family and all their boycotts? People's panties sure get wadded up when their own tactics are used against them. :tsk:

:up:
 
i do feel badly for that woman on some level.

but at the same time, perhaps this is the only way that some straights will come to terms with the fact that they can't just dismiss gay relationships in the way that they might have done in the past. the woman probably thought, "well, this is what my church says, so whatever, no biggie, i still love them," and it might have never occurred to her just how much her thoughtless donation would reverberate. i say thoughtless because i she probably never gave the issue much though, and because, even though she obviously knew and loved her gay customers, she probably never paused to consider the fact that their relationships are exactly the same as a straight relationship.

I agree with you.

I think she probably pretty much "mindlessly" gave the money in that she thought that the Church thinks it's a good idea and it makes sense to her, but she never stopped to consider the impact on real, individual people and how hurtful her actions were to them.

On a very basic level, she isn't the hotbed of bigotry (that honour goes to others), but at the same time, if this is what it will take for people to be at least minimally thoughtful about the decisions they make, then so be it.
 
none, other than adoption.


Maybe you can use the time of your recuperation to think about that :)

What exactly is it about being gay that disqualifies someone from being a wonderful parent? I can't think of a single thing.

Characteristics of individuals make them bad parents-but those have nothing to do with being gay. Or with being black, or Jewish, or Christian, or blonde, or brunette...Those have to do with being human beings, that's all.
 
Anyway, anarchy, chaos, force and destruction of property never sway people.

I think better methods such as peaceful demonstrations always are more successful ala MLK.

That said if any Christian religous faction that would have the most empathy for GCUs, it would be the LDS Church based on their history of discriminaion.

Also as much as the LDS Church is Unorthodox Christianity which infuriates Orthodox Christianity with our history of Heavenly visitations by God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, visits by Angels of God sent from the prescence of God and a Newer Testament of Scripture on par with the and accepted established cannon of scripture, changing the meaning of marriage would be a baby step for our Faith.

Until we hear otherwise from above "marriage" is the divine model instituted by our Creator and there is room on Earth to coexist with our brothers and sisters who are in GCUs-peacfully.

<>
 
Balance? What's that code for?



i'm assuming the male/female binary relationship.

men are one way. women are another. children need a dad who hunts, shoots, and can't express himself emotionally. children need a mother who cooks, cleans, and gets overly emotionally involved in her children's affairs and who ultimately forgets herself and lives vicariously through her children and then when they grow up and leave she has no idea who she is or who she married so it's time for some vodka and valium, please.

5,000 years have taught us this is nothing else.
 
Anyway, anarchy, chaos, force and destruction of property never sway people.

I think better methods such as peaceful demonstrations always are more successful ala MLK.
<>



you realize that *all* of the organized protests have been textbook examples of peaceful demonstrations. yes, an individual here or there might act out, but considering how heightened emotions are, the gay community has been exemplary these past few months.
 
i'm assuming the male/female binary relationship.

men are one way. women are another. children need a dad who hunts, shoots, and can't express himself emotionally..

no.

a mother =emotional attributes.
a father= logical attributes.

and I have the most empathy for single parents thru no fault of their own doing their best to play mom and dad at the same time.

<>
 
you realize that *all* of the organized protests have been textbook examples of peaceful demonstrations. .

storming chruches, defacing property, desrupting traffic,spittle in the face of Believers and screaming at people is peaceful??

Clearly as in marriage there is a correct definition there is also a correct for peaceful.

<>
 
a mother =emotional attributes.
a father= logical attributes.

An emotionally unavailable father equals disaster, trust me on that one. Logic becomes completely irrelevant

Both parents providing logic and emotion equals optimum parenting. Logic and emotion are not gender based traits. They are human traits that men and women (and gay and straight people) possess equally. It's socialization and trying to live up to stereotypes that screws that all up.
 
Back
Top Bottom