equality blooms with spring - Page 49 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-10-2009, 06:45 PM   #721
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
if one chooses to find that spectacle completely unappealing, one is automatically a homophobe.
There is a difference between finding two men kissing unappealing, and kicking them out of a restaurant for it. I know you're not so stupid as to not recognize that.

And for the record, I don't care for PDAs either.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 07-11-2009, 01:06 AM   #722
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 04:32 AM
does my avatar bother you?


Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
If I'm in a restaurant, I don't want to see guys snogging at the next table, as a matter of fact, I don't want to see anyone snogging at the next table.

were these men "snogging" or did one give the other a quick kiss?

my guess is the latter.


Quote:
Obviously, if one doesn't want to see two gays in a passioniate embrace at any time of the day or night, if one chooses to find that spectacle completely unappealing, one is automatically a homophobe
.

i have to watch straights kiss on the streets and fuck in the movies all the time. you're taking your original argument a step further, now, in that you really do seem to have two different standards when it comes to PDA.

but don't worry -- Memphis and i are well trained enough not to hold hands even while walking down majority-gay streets in DC, nor do we kiss in front of anyone but our closest friends and always at apartment parties, not in restaurants. so you'll be safe here!


Quote:
I say, give the gays marriage, and soon enough they'll find - like the rest of us - it's not exactly the bed of roses some of them seem to think it is.


who's said that "we" think that it's a bed of roses? i think it certainly does seem like a bed of roses when you're not allowed to make medical decisions for your partner or your partner's parents take half your assets should one of you die. but the thing itself will probably be treated just like straight people treat it. some gays will act like 24 year old girls and think they'll be the prettiest princess ever, and others will marry when they are 50 with a small ceremony and continue on with their quiet lives.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-11-2009, 01:09 AM   #723
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
without dealing with that kind of crap. I'm not gay, so maybe you can ask someone who is. But if I was and I had to deal with stuff like that, it would be important to me.


do you remember a post a few years ago when i talked about Memphis and i making the drive down the California coast along Big Sur and whenever we'd stop to get pictures and we wanted one of the two of us, we'd always ask the youngest women we could find since we thought they would get it and not act like it was oh-so-strange to photograph two ... guys.

it's little things like that. that's what puts you on edge, just a bit, and is something that straight people generally never tend to think about. even if not a single negative thought goes through the mind of the person taking the photo, the process that i quickly went through in my mind -- "quick, which person here would not be bothered by us" -- lets me know that, no matter what, i'm still different.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-11-2009, 08:47 AM   #724
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
some gays will act like 24 year old girls and think they'll be the prettiest princess ever
YouTube - Bridezilla Cake Smash!

Because, clearly, "the gays" can't be expected to form serious, lasting relationships like our upright hetero counterparts.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-13-2009, 09:54 AM   #725
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
do you remember a post a few years ago when i talked about Memphis and i making the drive down the California coast along Big Sur and whenever we'd stop to get pictures and we wanted one of the two of us, we'd always ask the youngest women we could find since we thought they would get it and not act like it was oh-so-strange to photograph two ... guys.

Yes I remember that..very well

At this point I don't know why I even bother to try to make such a point. It seems so much easier for some people to make statements as if actual living feeling human beings are not involved.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 07-13-2009, 10:18 AM   #726
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
Yes I remember that..very well

At this point I don't know why I even bother to try to make such a point. It seems so much easier for some people to make statements as if actual living feeling human beings are not involved.



?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-13-2009, 10:23 AM   #727
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
?
Oops, sorry..that wasn't directed at you at all if it looks like it was. Sorry, I don't really know how to say what I'm trying to say. I can try to tell you privately if you like.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 07-13-2009, 12:23 PM   #728
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 04:32 AM
no problem.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-13-2009, 02:47 PM   #729
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
do you remember a post a few years ago when i talked about Memphis and i making the drive down the California coast along Big Sur and whenever we'd stop to get pictures and we wanted one of the two of us, we'd always ask the youngest women we could find since we thought they would get it and not act like it was oh-so-strange to photograph two ... guys.
What does your perception that young women are the least homophobic demographic derive from?
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 07-13-2009, 03:29 PM   #730
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
What does your perception that young women are the least homophobic demographic derive from?


experience.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-14-2009, 02:24 PM   #731
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 04:32 AM
look for more Democrats to "evolve" over the next few years, and for Obama to fully "evolve" shortly after 2012:


Quote:
Bill Clinton Backs Same-Sex Marriage
By Michael Tracey

July 14, 2009


Michael Tracey: The former president's reversal is the highest-profile one to date. It may also have political implications for the future of the Defense of Marriage Act.

After speaking at the Campus Progress National Conference in Washington, DC, on July 8, the former president was asked if he supported same-sex marriage. Clinton, in a departure from past statements, replied in the affirmative.

Clinton opposed same-sex marriage during his presidency, and in 1996, he signed the Defense of Marriage Act, which limited federal recognition of marriage to one man and one woman. In May of this year, Clinton told a crowd at Toronto's Convention Centre that his position on same-sex marriage was "evolving."

Apparently, Clinton's thinking has now further evolved. Asked if he would commit his support for same-sex marriage, Clinton responded, "I'm basically in support."

This spring, same-sex marriage was legalized in Iowa, Vermont, Connecticut, Maine and New Hampshire. In his most recent remarks on the subject, Clinton said, "I think all these states that do it should do it." The former president, however, added that he does not believe that same-sex marriage is "a federal question."

Asked if he personally supported same-sex marriage, Clinton replied, "Yeah." "I personally support people doing what they want to do," Clinton said. "I think it's wrong for someone to stop someone else from doing that [same-sex marriage]."

The former president joins a string of prominent Democrats who have recently switched their position on the issue, including former Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean, New York Senator Charles E. Schumer, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine and Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd.

"Bill Clinton joins other important public figures in stepping solidly into the twenty-first century in support of same-sex marriage equality," said the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force's executive director Rea Carey. "We certainly hope other elected officials, including President Obama, join him in clearly stating their support for equality in this country. Same-sex couples should not have to experience second-class citizenship."

Clinton's reversal is the highest-profile one to date. It may also have political implications for the future of the Defense of Marriage Act. President Obama has pledged to repeal the law, but in June, the Justice Department filed a brief in federal court defending the law's constitutionality.

A recent Gallup poll found that a majority of Democrats favor same-sex marriage.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-14-2009, 02:33 PM   #732
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Yeah he does it now because it has no consequences for him
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 07-20-2009, 11:30 AM   #733
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: 01:32 AM
I spent considerable time in Iowa about a week or two ago. I didn't notice any particular disintegration of that state's morals since their activist judges decided that their Constitution applied to all taxpaying citizens. Maybe I wasn't looking hard enough.

On the other hand, we were celebrating our 20th year of married hell, and we were so busy making out in restaurants that maybe I was distracted.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 07-21-2009, 03:18 PM   #734
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Sacramento Bee

By Susan Ferriss

Published: Tuesday, Jul. 21, 2009

A proposed law to recognize a growing number of same-sex marriages performed in other states and countries is winding its way through California's Legislature.

Opponents of gay marriage say Senate Bill 54 violates Proposition 8, a voter initiative approved last November that amended the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

The bill's sponsor contends that his proposed changes to state family law are consistent with the California Supreme Court's nuanced decision in May to uphold Proposition 8.

The court's decision upheld the right of voters to bar gay couples from the label "marriage," acknowledged SB 54's author, Sen. Mark Leno, an openly gay Democrat from San Francisco.

But the court, Leno noted, also upheld an estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California before the gay-marriage ban was approved. Those marriages took place after the justices ruled in May 2008, in a separate decision, that California's constitution at that time did not prevent same-sex marriage.

The high court did not address how to treat out-of-state marriages, explaining in a footnote that none of the parties involved in lawsuits represented such interests.

In that vacuum, Leno is arguing the Legislature's role should be to clarify the rights of same-sex couples who live in California but wed elsewhere, or couples who might move or travel here in the future.

"Proposition 8 passes," Leno said. "But there are two men who live in San Francisco who pay their taxes, work and got married legally in Massachusetts. What are they? Legal strangers? Clearly, there is a legislative need to clarify this."

Frank Schubert, who was the campaign manager for Proposition 8, disagrees. He predicts a court battle over the law should it pass and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger sign it.

"Our argument is that the people amended the constitution and do not approve of same-sex marriage," he said.

There's nothing in the court's Proposition 8 decision, Schubert said, that should lead gay couples to think they can transfer marriage rights to California because they wed in another country or any of the six states that now allow gay marriage.

Leno's bill would declare that any same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions before Proposition 8 be recognized on par with marriages that took place in California.

Same-sex couples married in other jurisdictions after Proposition 8 was approved would be afforded the same legal rights that marriage gives them here, but they could not use the word "marriage" to refer to their legal relationship.

The proposal now has sponsors in the Assembly, where on July 9 it gained approval in that house's Judiciary Committee in a vote split along party lines – seven Democrats for and three Republicans against.

The bill will go to the Assembly floor before the Senate hears it.

Brad Dacus, president of the conservative Pacific Legal Institute, called Leno's bill "another cheap attempt to undermine the electoral process" and said he'd join in a lawsuit against it.

Alex Ingersoll, a resident of San Francisco, said he'd be willing to go to court as well to defend recognition of his marriage to Martin Tannenbaum.

The pair married in Massachusetts during the window of time when gays were also allowed to marry in California.

"We just assumed that our marriage would be recognized here," said Ingersoll, 62, who manages a law firm.

They chose to marry in Massachusetts, near the Pilgrim Monument, because they wanted to be with family members on the East Coast.

Ingersoll's roots in Massachusetts go back to 1629, he said, and Tannenbaum lived in Boston for 30 years.

"I recognize that change often comes incrementally," Ingersoll said. If he has to go to court to defend his marriage, he said, "I'm honored to be part of it."

A same-sex couple in Sacramento with a stake in Leno's bill got married in Canada in 2007 before gay marriage was legal in California.

John Hancock, president of the California Channel, which airs government hearings, is married to Juan Ramos, who restores historical documents for the California secretary of state's office.

Ramos, 56, and Hancock, 55, wed in Vancouver, British Columbia, during a trip to celebrate Hancock's recovery after a drunken driver nearly killed him.

"I had skin grafts, scars. I was broken. And to have someone want to marry you and show you that devotion, I can't tell you what that does for you," Hancock said. "I want to demonstrate to people that I value my commitment."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 07-21-2009, 04:05 PM   #735
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
Frank Schubert, who was the campaign manager for Proposition 8, disagrees. He predicts a court battle over the law should it pass and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger sign it.

"Our argument is that the people amended the constitution and do not approve of same-sex marriage," he said.
That's nice and dandy for them, but this is a conflicts of law issue, not a constitutional California issue.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline  
 

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 04:32 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