Same Sex Marriage Thread - Part III

[martha]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Disgusting!! Regardless of one's beliefs on SSM marriage the fact that, once again, a single judge has overruled the will of the people (75% of voters in OK) and asserted the power to redefine marriage is another blow against the separation of powers, state's rights, religious conscience and self-government.

California Proposition 14 (1964) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Redefining property rights! Disgusting!!!1!!1!!

 

State's rights?? Are we going there?

__________________

[LuckyNumber7]

MORAL AMERICA don't you understand?!?

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by martha

California Proposition 14 (1964) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





Redefining property rights! Disgusting!!!1!!1!!

 

State's rights?? Are we going there?

I also remember Prop 187. A law that was votes on by the virtuous people of California and passed 59 to 41%.

[martha]

That damn thing. It broke the Republicans out here; they still haven't recovered. Boo-freakin'-hoo.

[Galeongirl]

I'm still curious about those consequences of allowing gays to marry, still haven't heard a proper argument one sofar. And from experience, I got zilch. Gays have been getting married for over 10 years here now, and what's the consequence for the country? Gays are getting married. That's about it..

[PhilsFan]

It is a nasty little trick, isn't it? Take advantage of public distrust of minorities by appealing to "the children," have it go to a public vote and when that vote is eventually declared unconstitutional (because you can't vote discrimination into law), claim that the judges are activists overturning the will of the people.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by Galeongirl

I'm still curious about those consequences of allowing gays to marry, still haven't heard a proper argument one sofar. And from experience, I got zilch. Gays have been getting married for over 10 years here now, and what's the consequence for the country? Gays are getting married. That's about it..

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

It is a nasty little trick, isn't it? Take advantage of public distrust of minorities by appealing to "the children," have it go to a public vote and when that vote is eventually declared unconstitutional (because you can't vote discrimination into law), claim that the judges are activists overturning the will of the people.

perhaps the answer really is that we're calling gender and gender roles into question. that when two men are able to function not only as capable partners but capable parents, it calls into question what heterosexual men often excuse as a function of their gender. it might be that's what's so threatening -- men can't weasel their way out of homemaking or parenting duties because she is better at it, because we have examples of men who are just as good at it as women.

as the article i linked to pointed out:

Related to this is the question of how gay fatherhood might impact heterosexual fatherhood—by, for example, encouraging the idea that men can be emotionally accessible, logistically capable parents. Will the growing presence of gay dads in some communities mean that men are more often included in the endless e‑mail chains that go to parents of preschoolers and birthday-party invitees? As radically as fatherhood has changed in recent decades, a number of antiquated attitudes about dads have proved strangely enduring: Rob Hardies, the pastor at All Souls, reports that when his partner, Chris, successfully folded a stroller before getting on an airplane with their son, Nico, he was roundly congratulated by passersby, as if he had solved a difficult mathematical equation in public. So low are expectations for fathers, even now, that in Stephanie Schacher’s study of gay fathers and their feelings about caregiving, her subjects reported that people would see them walking on the street with their children and say things like “Giving Mom a break?” Hardies thinks that every time he and Chris take their son to the playground or to story hour, they help disrupt this sort of thinking. He imagines moms seeing a man doing this and gently—or maybe not so gently—pointing it out to their husbands. “Two guys somehow manage to get their act together and have a household and cook dinner and raise a child, without a woman doing all the work,” he says. Rather than setting an example that fathers don’t matter, gay men are setting an example that fathers do matter, and that marriage matters, too.

i guess this is upsetting for some heterosexual men. they really are having their position questioned, and it must be difficult to realize that manhood isn't a fixed thing. it must be scary, to have someone expect you to cook dinner and tend to the emotional needs of a 3 year old. for women too, who are also trapped by these gender role expectations -- the notion of "i'll let my husband take them for the afternoon." let him? he's their father!

a friend of a friend has a fairly popular blog about being a stay-at-home dad. part of the blog is how he never expected this! what a surprise! how funny life is! his wife does so well! he still works from home! gosh, how funny! yes, i'll write a blog about my wacky adventures! i'm a SAH dad! ker-azy!

would a mother ever write a blog about how, gosh oh gee, i'm suddenly a SAH mom! weird! let's turn it into a sitcom!

it applies sexually, too. as we've all noticed from the debates, the anti-gay organizations seem overwhelmingly preoccupied with anal sex. just look at the Duck Dynasty guy. much of what is upsetting is thinking of a man in a receptive sexual position -- how can you be a man but be penetrated by a man? men aren't women! and yet, men who are receptive sexually are still men, and they are still masculine, and in another situation they might be the insertive partner.

i think that's what's so upsetting -- understanding homosexuality as natural and unchosen upsets many men's understanding of themselves, and tosses out the notion that gender is a fixed thing. not that men and women aren't different -- indeed, they are, just look at differences between gay men and lesbians -- but that there are many different ways to be a man, and many different ways to be a woman. it's not so much about eradicating differences between the gender but expanding our understandings of what it means to be a man and what it means to be a woman. for all the psychobabble, it might be as simple as that.

how can i be a man if i can't denigrate gay men?

likewise, how can we be married if gay people are also married?

[Galeongirl]

That is an interesting point there... maybe that is why it's really not an issue here, as our gender roles are less black and white than in the US. Here it's perfectly acceptable for a father to be a stay at home dad, if the mother has a good job. It would also not be weird for a dad to take his kid out to the park, or do other things in the old outdated mother role.



Fun thing I notice is that the anti SSM people have FAR more issues with men-men relationships than lesbian ones... Bit of hypocrisy there? Or is it truly a deep routed fear about the change of masculinity?

[Irvine511]

Because misogyny.

[anitram]

I think that any straight couple which has a "modern" marriage would be hard pressed to care that gay marriage is a legal reality.

By that I mean a couple which shares in the household and child rearing duties (guess what, my husband can dust just as well as I can and I am perfectly able to mow the lawn), in which women are free to pursue their career ambitions even if it means they don't have dinner on the table every night at 6 pm, where both parties understand and participate in the joint finances, where there is no "head" of the household and so on. These people have already turned the traditional definition of marriage on its head.

[Irvine511]

men can be warm and nurturing and bake cupcakes, and women can be stern taskmasters and teach you how to change a tire.

some men can do both, and so can some women.

[martha]

You guys are redefining things. Stahp.

[Galeongirl]

Originally Posted by anitram

I think that any straight couple which has a "modern" marriage would be hard pressed to care that gay marriage is a legal reality.

By that I mean a couple which shares in the household and child rearing duties (guess what, my husband can dust just as well as I can and I am perfectly able to mow the lawn), in which women are free to pursue their career ambitions even if it means they don't have dinner on the table every night at 6 pm, where both parties understand and participate in the joint finances, where there is no "head" of the household and so on. These people have already turned the traditional definition of marriage on its head.

I think that's pretty much the way things are here. Sure, there still are people stuck in the past where the male is the head of the household and women exist to raise babies, but they generally live in our Bible belt and mind their own business. They're not shouting out loud that we all have to conform their standards, they just want to live the way they do. And we let them, as long as it's conform the law. Sure there are some issues here and there with vaccinations and such, but you don't see them protesting gay marriage.

[Irvine511]

so, kind of random, but this was just made much more personal for me.

a friend of mine has a friend.

said friend of friend and his partner needed some work done on their grout. the company came, gave them an estimate, and then retracted the quote once she found out they were gay. she did not want to do business with them.

that is illegal in DC. (it's not in VA). it would also be illegal in CO.

and so it goes with our baker and the wedding cake. it's the exact same thing.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

so, kind of random, but this was just made much more personal for me.

a friend of mine has a friend.

said friend of friend and his partner needed some work done on their grout. the company came, gave them an estimate, and then retracted the quote once she found out they were gay. she did not want to do business with them.

that is illegal in DC. (it's not in VA). it would also be illegal in CO.

and so it goes with our baker and the wedding cake. it's the exact same thing.

Ugh. What was she afraid of, a disease or something she spent anymore time with them?

[Irvine511]

She said she'd come over to do the estimate. She walked in, saw the two men, said her services were no longer available, and left.

But DEEPLY HELD RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS, guys!

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

She said she'd come over to do the estimate. She walked in, saw the two men, said we services were no longer available, and left.

But DEEPLY HELD RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS, guys!

She better get used to having gay clients because none of you are going anywhere.

[Galeongirl]

I truly cannot comprehend how people could get away with that. Here you'd have a public outrage defending the gays, not the offenders!

[martha]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

so, kind of random, but this was just made much more personal for me.

a friend of mine has a friend.

said friend of friend and his partner needed some work done on their grout. the company came, gave them an estimate, and then retracted the quote once she found out they were gay. she did not want to do business with them.

that is illegal in DC. (it's not in VA). it would also be illegal in CO.

and so it goes with our baker and the wedding cake. it's the exact same thing.

The hell.

I'm sorry. On behalf of straight people, I'm sorry.

[martha]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

She said she'd come over to do the estimate. She walked in, saw the two men, said her services were no longer available, and left.

But DEEPLY HELD RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS, guys!

Some people are unclear on the concept:

12:28-34pp -- Mt 22:34-40
28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?" 29 "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' 31 The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these." 32 "Well said, teacher," the man replied. "You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33 To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices." 34 When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.