SPLIT--> California's Proposition 8 on Same-Sex Marriage - Page 11 - 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 10-01-2008, 12:11 AM   #151
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,337
Local Time: 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I can disagree with whatever conclusions I like, then as now.
You really didn't answer my question. It was the holy will of the majority back then to vote on an aspect of marriage, something you seem to think is a good idea.
__________________

__________________
martha is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 02:50 AM   #152
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Is a democratic government fundamentally one that is "of the people, by the people, and for the people," or is it rule by an isolated few who decide for all?
Protecting liberties from mob rule is a fundamental element of a liberal democracy, in the case of gay marriage it seems that there is an issue of a right (namely state recognition of marriage contracts) which is not being recognised equally. The discrimination between straight and gay relationships is rooted in religious opposition as well as bigotry and not in evidence based arguments about the harm of gay marriage, mainly because the evidence from where it has been enacted is that it doesn't harm society.

Gays pay taxes just like the rest of us, they deserve equal treatment. I don't think that churches should be forced to marry gays (but then again, they do enjoy tax-free perks), but the government should recognise gay marriage. Yes, it may be offensive to a decent segment of the population, but in my mind the principle of equality under the law trumps those objections.

Opposition to gay marriage is a loosing argument; they're here, they're queer, and they want joint bank accounts, established mechanisms of inheritance, mortgages and a settled middle age - you really should get used to it, it shouldn't impact you that much.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 03:16 AM   #153
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 05:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by martha View Post
Two, I was indeed referring to women as property. When did you vote against that? Or did you.
You know, after thinking about this some more, I'm surprised we disagree with each other. You seem to imply that there are some things that become apparent over time: the value of women in society. That any progressive society will recognize the value of women as more than mere property. That recognizing a woman's value should be obvious to all.

Isn't that exactly what Prop 8 defends? That women are crucial to marriage, family and society -- since family is the cornerstone institution of society, as the Declaration of Human Rights reminds us. Opponents of Prop 8 however want to put forward the notion that gender doesn't matter, at least in any significant way (if Irvine's comments are representative of mainstream opposition at all), in the constitution of family, and by extension society. Doesn't this seem to be a huge backwards step to you?
__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 03:20 AM   #154
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:23 AM
How does gay marriage effect the status of straight women?

Allowing gay marriage doesn't change the proportion of gays wandering about, it won't create an explosion of faggotry or a dyke swarm (geology joke).

All it does is guarantee certain rights to gays in line with what are afforded straight couples, no polygamy or bestiality, just equal treatment under the law.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 03:22 AM   #155
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 05:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
The discrimination between straight and gay relationships is rooted in religious opposition
Has the Bible been brought up once in this long discussion? Certainly not by me.

Quote:
you really should get used to it, it shouldn't impact you that much.
Have you not read this board? On the contrary. The short- and long-term affects of redefining the value of gender in society as well as the constitution of family are all in play here. Not to mention the methods by which this issue has been pushed, which directly undermines the very values of democracy and self-governance in the first place.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 03:29 AM   #156
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:23 AM
That sentence didn't finish on religion, and the value judgement of gay relationships that is implied by most opposition, if not driven by religious ideas, can definitely fall into that category.

Some areas such as free speech, equal rights and religious freedom should be protected from democratic subversion. Reconciling the treatment of citizens with the law is important, I don't think that democracy should allow majorities to extinguish minorities rights.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 06:02 AM   #157
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,468
Local Time: 04:23 AM
The value of gender? my gawd. I don't even know where that comes from.
I just don't understand why people are against gay marriage. I seriously, cannot understand why. Even if you think its an abomination or some shit, what does it matter if they can get married? Does is really change how marriage is viewed, because sadly, the "sanctity" of marriage is not as sacred and pure as it used to be (see me last post! )
__________________
dazzlingamy is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 07:47 AM   #158
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
The short- and long-term affects of redefining the value of gender in society as well as the constitution of family are all in play here.
I'll ask this question again since nobody ever seems to answer it - how have the societies which have legalized gay marriage on a national basis fundamentally changed?

What is the night and day difference between Canada and the US in this respect? What are the negative consequences we are experiencing?
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 10-01-2008, 08:03 AM   #159
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
You know, after thinking about this some more, I'm surprised we disagree with each other. You seem to imply that there are some things that become apparent over time: the value of women in society. That any progressive society will recognize the value of women as more than mere property. That recognizing a woman's value should be obvious to all.

Isn't that exactly what Prop 8 defends? That women are crucial to marriage, family and society -- since family is the cornerstone institution of society, as the Declaration of Human Rights reminds us. Opponents of Prop 8 however want to put forward the notion that gender doesn't matter, at least in any significant way (if Irvine's comments are representative of mainstream opposition at all), in the constitution of family, and by extension society. Doesn't this seem to be a huge backwards step to you?
I've seen some big stretches in your arguments on this subject(but then again they would have to be) but this is definately your biggest stretch yet. Congratulations!
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 10-01-2008, 08:07 AM   #160
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 01:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
I'll ask this question again since nobody ever seems to answer it - how have the societies which have legalized gay marriage on a national basis fundamentally changed?

What is the night and day difference between Canada and the US in this respect? What are the negative consequences we are experiencing?
But, but, don't you see, it's not the same? You're Canadian -- you all are weird right from the beginning.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 10:29 AM   #161
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,337
Local Time: 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Isn't that exactly what Prop 8 defends? That women are crucial to marriage, family and society -- since family is the cornerstone institution of society, as the Declaration of Human Rights reminds us. Opponents of Prop 8 however want to put forward the notion that gender doesn't matter, at least in any significant way (if Irvine's comments are representative of mainstream opposition at all), in the constitution of family, and by extension society. Doesn't this seem to be a huge backwards step to you?
No. It isn't a bcakwards step. On the contrary, it's a huge leap towards a future where people are valued for who they are rather than any inherent gender-defined value.

Any time people start to want to "protect and defend" me simply because I'm a woman, I start to worry. That kind of thinking relegates me to lesser stature. I'm not a weak and defenseless creature needing protection because of my gender.


eta: And, as usual, you didn't answer my question at all.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 10:39 AM   #162
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
I'll ask this question again since nobody ever seems to answer it - how have the societies which have legalized gay marriage on a national basis fundamentally changed?
Maybe no one ever answers it because the question is inconvenient

MA was the first state and there have been no fundamental changes. Unfortunately the winters are still hell and the cost of living is sky high. People are leaving for those reasons, not because they're outraged over gay marriage. Unbelievably day to day life goes on just as it did before. There are still plenty of straight marriages to assure that all is well in the universe. Believe it or not it is not a cesspool of moral decay (though some might beg to differ, of course).

Manny Ramirez is gone, but that had nothing to do with gay marriage either.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is online now  
Old 10-01-2008, 11:17 AM   #163
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Besides the fact that you're taking my words out of context, I sure think that the ability to vote on a radical definition of a core social institution is one of the best ways to affirm a fair society.


could you enumerate the radical effects that have come about from such a radical redefintion of a core social institution in the places that recognize marriage equality -- Canada, Massachusetts, Denmark, the Netherlands.

or are you little more than just a Chicken Little and it's your own set of prejudices and convictions that there's something defective about gay people that are making you come off as very Y2K about the whole thing.

same sex marriage could happen everywhere tomorrow. and you'd just wake up and it would be Thursday.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 11:20 AM   #164
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
The short- and long-term affects of redefining the value of gender in society as well as the constitution of family are all in play here.


and this is really the issue here.

all the time i thought you were unconsciously homophobic. really, you're unconsciously sexist.

and, ultimately, homophobia is sexism in disguise. that's why straight men have such issues with it. gay men do upend "traditional" gender roles. they do subvert paradigms that put men on top and women on the bottom, and talking about treasuring and loving and cherishing your wife and all her wifely attributes sounds to me like she's less a person and more a role player in an idealistic construct that doesn't bear much reality to anyone's lived-in experience.

i know it's uncomfortable for some straight men. i know that, despite the advances of women, they like to think of themselves as having an irreducible worth on the basis of their gender alone, and that there are god-given manly roles in society and in families that they must fulfill. the whole point of the past 50 years has been to free people from precisely these gender roles. it's not that gender doesn't *matter* and that we're all androgynous, but that gender isn't a determinant of one's place in the world. the individual is. it's a simple as saying that if a woman wants to be an astronaut, she can be an astronaut. if she doesn't want to get married, there's nothing wrong with her.

gay people upset the apple cart. because they don't easily fall into such traditional, god-ordained roles. it starts with sex, of course, since a gay man can so easily be "the woman" as well as "the man" in intercourse. so perhaps this NYT article gets at the heart of it all:

Quote:
Notably, same-sex relationships, whether between men or women, were far more egalitarian than heterosexual ones. In heterosexual couples, women did far more of the housework; men were more likely to have the financial responsibility; and men were more likely to initiate sex, while women were more likely to refuse it or to start a conversation about problems in the relationship. With same-sex couples, of course, none of these dichotomies were possible, and the partners tended to share the burdens far more equally.

While the gay and lesbian couples had about the same rate of conflict as the heterosexual ones, they appeared to have more relationship satisfaction, suggesting that the inequality of opposite-sex relationships can take a toll.
my guess is that as same-sex couples become more visible, that's going to mean that opposite-sexed couples are going to have to become more egalitarian, and notions of specific duties assigned on the basis of gender -- whether doing the ironing or having to be the disciplinarian parent -- are going to disappear. soon, it could be just as likely to hear, "just WAIT until your mother gets home!"

the notion that mother is soft and father is hard, that mother is emotional and father is practical, that mother dotes and father disciplines ... all this is subverted by gay marriage and gay adoption. however, it's quite likely that most gay relationships will have one partner that is more emotional than practical, or more doting than disciplinarian. but that role will be determined on a far more egalitarian principle than gender.

so, yes, i can see how this is upsetting to some.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 10-01-2008, 12:13 PM   #165
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

my guess is that as same-sex couples become more visible, that's going to mean that opposite-sexed couples are going to have to become more egalitarian, and notions of specific duties assigned on the basis of gender -- whether doing the ironing or having to be the disciplinarian parent -- are going to disappear. soon, it could be just as likely to hear, "just WAIT until your mother gets home!"

the notion that mother is soft and father is hard, that mother is emotional and father is practical, that mother dotes and father disciplines ... all this is subverted by gay marriage and gay adoption. however, it's quite likely that most gay relationships will have one partner that is more emotional than practical, or more doting than disciplinarian. but that role will be determined on a far more egalitarian principle than gender.

so, yes, i can see how this is upsetting to some.
nice post, irvine.

you raise some interesting points here that are often overlooked or ignored.
__________________

__________________
Se7en 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 12:23 PM.


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