Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8936 total)
31 online now:
Dredge, ringo (2 members, 29 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Post Volume: Total: 861,614 Year: 16,650/19,786 Month: 775/2,598 Week: 21/251 Day: 21/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Landmark gay marriage trial starts today in California
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 6 of 759 (542798)
01-12-2010 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by subbie
01-12-2010 2:44 PM


Re: Trial blogger, multiple posts per day.
Which way do you think he leans?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by subbie, posted 01-12-2010 2:44 PM subbie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by subbie, posted 01-12-2010 11:47 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 16 of 759 (572223)
08-04-2010 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Dr Adequate
01-13-2010 10:08 AM


Re: Dennis Hollingsworth
Hey DrA, could you link to something? I can't seem to find anything on this.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-13-2010 10:08 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


(1)
Message 18 of 759 (572227)
08-04-2010 7:40 PM


Some people have been convinced that the gay right issue is not at all comparable to the civil right issue back in the 60's. This is particularly coming strong from the black community where many members just simply don't want to recognize gay rights as real rights.

Someone just brought my attention to the fake prom shame in Mississippi earlier this year.

http://www.cbsnews.com/...0/04/06/national/main6367855.shtml

quote:
(CBS) A lesbian student in Mississippi who sued her school for the right to bring her girlfriend to the prom said she was sent to a fake prom instead.

Constance McMillen, 18, told The Advocate that last month's invitation to an alternate prom was a sham, saying that most students attended another dance organized by parents at a secret location.

"They had two proms and I was only invited to one of them," McMillen told the magazine. "The one that I went to had seven people there, and everyone went to the other one I wasn’t invited to."

"It hurts my feelings," she said.

Itawamba Agricultural High School cancelled its prom over the controversy sparked by McMillen's attempt to overturn the school's policy banning same-sex prom dates.

Las month, a federal judge ruled that the school district violated McMillen's constitutional rights, though did not reinstate the prom.

According to McMillen, the prom she attended was at a country club. She said of the five other students at the country club, two had learning disabilities.

"They had the time of their lives," McMillen said. "That's the one good thing that come out of this, [these kids] didn't have to worry about people making fun of them [at their prom]."


When saw this story for the first time today (shame on me) I vaguely remembered a similar story that took place in the 60's. After a little digging, finally found it.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=XSAfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=qa...

Carolyn King-Miller was a victim of the same fake prom stunt pulled by the same mother fucking bigots. The entire town literally took part in the mother fucking prank in both cases.

Shame on those school officials and parents who did the organizing.

Added by edit.

I'm not sure I have the same grace as Carolyn King. If I were her and was invited to a reunion, I would have told them to fuck off and rot in hell. Not very politically correct, but I don't believe in the forgive and forget bullshit anyway.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by dwise1, posted 08-04-2010 8:44 PM Taz has responded
 Message 22 by Taz, posted 08-05-2010 2:05 AM Taz has not yet responded
 Message 50 by Species8472, posted 08-05-2010 1:50 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 20 of 759 (572241)
08-04-2010 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by dwise1
08-04-2010 8:44 PM


Wait, hang on, you're a fa... gay? Learn something new everyday

Edit.

Thanks for the film. I'll look for it.

Edit again.

I'm just sitting here in awe about the fake prom thing. Back in the 60's I could understand the whole town taking part in the cruelty. The whole damn south was a cesspool back then. I just can't believe not a single school official, student, or parent had a conflicted conscience about this. I mean, this is 2010 for fuck's sake. Jesus H Christ!

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by dwise1, posted 08-04-2010 8:44 PM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by dwise1, posted 08-05-2010 1:31 AM Taz has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 22 of 759 (572262)
08-05-2010 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Taz
08-04-2010 7:40 PM


The fake prom incident that took place earlier this year in Mississippi takes me back to an argument I've been having here with some of the so-called pro-gay rights members.

As some of you may have known, there are members here who wishes to abolish completely the state recognition of marriage and would rather issue "civil union" to everybody.

There's an old story about the south back in the 60's. When the courts ordered the schools to allow black school children to be able to swim in the same swimming pools with white children, the schools put cement in their swimming pools rather than allow those black school children to swim in them. The state of Alabama even closed down their public school system in response to desegregation. In other places, they created fake proms to keep their proms all white.

And now in 2010, an entire town decided to create a fake prom to send what they perceived as undesirables to.

Can't you people see that by ending secular marriage you're following the same tactics as past bigots have taken? Rather than allowing gay people the same right to marry, you'd rather scourge the whole system?

Sometimes, I wonder what your real motives are.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Taz, posted 08-04-2010 7:40 PM Taz has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Huntard, posted 08-05-2010 3:02 AM Taz has responded
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-05-2010 8:54 AM Taz has responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 26 of 759 (572306)
08-05-2010 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Huntard
08-05-2010 3:02 AM


Huntard writes:

I think church should not have the right to close these kind of contracts anyway.


Then there is absolutely no reason for you to propose it, because every marriage is already a secular, state recognized marriage. Your marriage in a church doesn't mean squat if you don't obtain a marriage license from the state.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Huntard, posted 08-05-2010 3:02 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Huntard, posted 08-05-2010 9:11 AM Taz has responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 30 of 759 (572314)
08-05-2010 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Hyroglyphx
08-05-2010 8:54 AM


Hyro writes:

I just think there needs to be a distinction between a religious marriage and civil marriage.


There is already a distinction between religious and civil marriage. Every marriage in the US right now is a civil marriage. Your marriage in the church doesn't mean a thing to the state. You have to obtain a marriage license from the state for the state to recognize that you're married.

Because I think you're getting hung up on the term. It doesn't matter what you call it, I'm just trying use a phrase that sets apart religious marriage from civil marriage.

Yes, it does matter what we call it just like it mattered what school those kids went to back in the 60's.

Like I said, every marriage is a civil marriage already. There's absolutely no reason why you should want scourge the current system of civil marriage just so gay people couldn't "get married".

From a strictly practical point of view, either allow gay people to get married or change a thousand laws or so dealing with marriage. Who's more practical?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-05-2010 8:54 AM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-05-2010 9:41 AM Taz has responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 35 of 759 (572325)
08-05-2010 9:41 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Huntard
08-05-2010 9:11 AM


Huntard writes:

I think we had these discussions before...


And as I pointed out before many times, it's not just the term and the law that are in question. It's also the social acceptance that gay people seek.

Back in the 60s with desegregation, it wasn't just the drinking fountains and the schools that black people wanted to be able to use. Hell, if the whole fight was just about a damn drinking fountain, then the whole civil right movement was stupid.

The governor and school boards of the south recognized the social issue surrounding the civil right movement. By allowing black kids to attend the same schools as white kids, the symbolism was that black people would finally be accepted as equals. That's why so many schools closed down in the south and parents sent their kids to private schools instead.

The gay right issue isn't just about getting married. If this was all of it, then the whole movement is stupid. But the fake prom incident proved that this is more than just marriage. The problem runs much deeper than that. The school canceled prom altogether just so a lesbian couldn't go to prom with her girlfriend. Then the whole town full of adults planned out a fake prom for the lesbian couple and mentally challenged kids.

Gaining state recognized gay marriage is only one battle that we're trying to win. The real war is in the social acceptance of homosexuality in our culture, which is moving forward painfully slow. Just remember that sodomy laws were finally declared unconstitutional in 2001. Before that, gay men were still being jailed for doing private acts in their own bedrooms in some places. Hell, the country even elected a president (twice) that while he was governor of Texas supported and endorsed Texas' anti-sodomy law.

By destroying marriage and put in its place "civil union", we're practically taking a step backward as far as society is concern on this issue. Just like closing down all public schools and institute a privatized schooling system statewide. The excuse at the time was that they wanted people to be able to choose, which was of course bullshit.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Huntard, posted 08-05-2010 9:11 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Huntard, posted 08-05-2010 10:01 AM Taz has responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 40 of 759 (572333)
08-05-2010 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Hyroglyphx
08-05-2010 9:41 AM


Hyro writes:

But I also think it is wrong for a religion to be forced to marry homosexuals if it goes against their religion.


Being able to licensed marriage practitioner is a business in America. If they don't want to practice their business fairly, they should get out of the damn business.

I am reminded of Tyra Hunter, who was a victim of the same argument. The difference was Tyra paid with her life rather than just her dignity. Paramedics, because of their religion, refused to help her. When she finally arrived in the emergency room, doctors and nurses refused to help her because of their religion. They literally let her bleed to death.

I'm sorry, but I'm really not finding your argument convincing. If you become a doctor, then it is your obligation to treat everyone. If you become a licensed marriage practitioner, then you have to marry everyone. If you don't like it, then get out of the business.

Well, you have civil marriage where the State marries you (gay or straight), but pastor's and priests have no authority through the state whatsoever. It's just a ceremony "under God."

What on this green earth are you talking about? Priests and pastors can already marry anybody they want with no authority of the state. It just won't mean a damn thing without obtaining a marriage license from the state.

In other words, what you're suggesting is already in play and has been in play for 300 years.

My way, because marriage was never state-sanctioned in the past to begin with. This is a recent invention, and one that totally flies in the face of the Constitution.

But you're suggesting more than just having strictly state sanctioned marriage. You're proposing we begin calling it "civil union", which is nothing short of scourging the whole system in people's eyes.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-05-2010 9:41 AM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-05-2010 10:38 AM Taz has responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 41 of 759 (572334)
08-05-2010 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Hyroglyphx
08-05-2010 9:45 AM


Hyro writes:

I'm sure you're aware that there will be many pastors who disagree with homosexual marriage still, but now they are legally obligated to marry them.


Not really. They can already refuse to marry couples from other religions. A rabbi can already refuse to marry a catholic couple. Why should gay marriage be any different?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-05-2010 9:45 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 47 of 759 (572351)
08-05-2010 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Huntard
08-05-2010 10:01 AM


Huntard writes:

And allowing them to "marry" will change this how?


I didn't say it would change it. In fact, I specifically said that this was just one small battle to be won. One small step at a time.

I must have missed that, got a link?

I already posted a link earlier. Just back step. An entire town created 2 proms, one for a gay couple and mentally disabled kids and the other (the secret one) was for everyone else. We know that the entire town was involved because it really took everyone's cooperation to keep the real prom where everyone went to a secret. Only 7 kids showed up to the official prom. Among them were the gay couple and mentally disabled kids. According to their interview, when these kids asked where the prom was, they were told in writing the time and location. The people who organized this made sure that everyone else went to the other one and that nobody told these kids about the real prom. After prom night, they taunted them at school. They even created a face book page named "quit yer cryin constance" where they posted the nastiest messages. The page is now down because of face book policies.

You see, the thing about the event was that the school canceled the prom so that the parents could take over. Nothing could be done in court about it because the real prom wasn't really a prom or so they say. It was suppose to be just a private party with pictures labeled "prom 2010".

Like I said, this is an act of pure evil by an entire town to segregate themselves from "the others". We're talking about adults here. This wasn't pulled off by the teens in school alone. This was pulled off by the entire community.

I posted the links in message 18.

Again, I just don't care what they call it, that's all.

I do. All my gay friends do. Hell, in the last national gay meeting that we went to where everyone who supported gay rights from everywhere in the country cared.

Like I said, one small step at a time. If we can't even win this step, what makes you think we can win anything else?

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Huntard, posted 08-05-2010 10:01 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 69 of 759 (572459)
08-05-2010 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by subbie
08-05-2010 4:43 PM


subbie writes:

I recall seeing a headline yesterday about an Episcopal bishop celebrating the ruling, so you are absolutely correct about some "mainstream" churches welcoming gay marriages with open arms.


It really depends on what you mean by mainstream. The episocopal church is split right now, and from what I understand there could be a bloody civil war coming soon. So far, the anti gay marriage crowd within the church has only been threatening to pull fundings of aid works outside the country.

In other news, the gheys are getting scarier by the minute


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by subbie, posted 08-05-2010 4:43 PM subbie has acknowledged this reply

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 73 of 759 (572548)
08-06-2010 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Hyroglyphx
08-05-2010 10:38 AM


Hyro writes:

I can assure you that pastor's and priest's can legally marry people. They obtain their licenses through the state. BUT, if what Jar says is true (that any religion can deny whomever they want for religious purposes) then I see no viable objection. If it protects both homosexuals and religion then my concerns are not valid.


I know this issue has been cleared up, but I just want to know out of curiosity. Are you married? The reason I asked is because you don't seem to know about this stuff from personal experience and really sounded like those deceiving ads from the far right... I'm-a-doctor-and-I-must-choose-between-my-job-and-my-faith kinda ads.

Added by edit.

I know they can legally marry anybody they want, but only through the state. I said they could marry anybody they want but won't mean a damn thing without that licence they get from the state. That's exactly what they're already doing.

I just attended a gay wedding at a gay friendly church a few months ago. 2 gentlemen (friends of a friend) had been together for 15 years and they'd been waiting all that time. Now that it really looks like Illinois just won't budge, they decided to get a ceremonial wedding. They were married by a pastor in a church in front of a hell of a lot. Their marriage still doesn't mean a damn thing because it's not licensed through the state.

And would someone please explain to me what the hell being a doctor has to do with gay marriage? How does that California doctor has to choose between her faith and her job? Like she has to choose to treat them or not? What does that line mean?

Edit again.

In fact, let's look at every line of that storm commercial.

quote:
There's a storm gathering...

Ok.

quote:
The clouds are dark, the wind is strong...

That's what a storm means, dumbass.

quote:
And I am afraid...

Yup, them gheys are coming to get you.

quote:
Some who advocate for same-sex marriage are taking the issue far beyond same-sex couples...

How so?

quote:
They want to bring the issue into my life...

Again, if you don't believe in same sex marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex.

quote:
My freedom will be taken away...

How so?

quote:
I'm a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job...

What does gay marriage have to do with the doctor profession? I mean, do you guys want the right to choose to who you treat and who you let to bleed to death? Is that it or am I missing something here?

quote:
I'm part of a NJ church group punished by the government because we can't support same-sex marriage...

How is the government punishing your group? Be specific.

quote:
I'm a Massachusetts parent helplessly watching public schools teach my son that gay marriage is OK...

And as far as I know, Massachusetts hasn't been struck with fire and brimstone from the sky yet.

quote:
But some who advocate for same-sex marriage have not been content with same-sex couples living as they wish...
Those advocates want to change the way I live...

Again, how the hell does same sex marriage change the way you live?

quote:
I will have no choice...

Choice about what?

This ad has been out for a long time now, and I still don't understand what the hell those people were talking about.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-05-2010 10:38 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-06-2010 1:50 PM Taz has responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 76 of 759 (572576)
08-06-2010 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Dr Adequate
08-06-2010 1:50 PM


This may be hard to believe, but sometimes I really do try to understand this whole moral high ground bullshit from a christian point of view. I really do. But the more I try, the more I find my head further up my ass.

Christians claim to have the moral high ground, yet they don't act like it at all.

And to preemptively strike at the "not all christians are like that" comments, it requires at least the majority to keep striking down gay marriage from state to state. You can't tell me the majority of christians are loving, christ-like. And you can't tell me there is such a thing as the silent majority.

When gay marriage are instituted via popular vote, then I'll back down on this. In the mean time, in my book christianity DOES NOT have the moral high ground.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-06-2010 1:50 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Stile, posted 08-06-2010 4:24 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1545 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 86 of 759 (573213)
08-10-2010 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Hyroglyphx
08-10-2010 12:29 PM


Hyro, no offense but are you still listening to those liars who lie right through their teeth for jesus? This pastors'-rights-are-violated bullshit have been bullshit ever since the beginning. Yet, here you are still repeating this bullshit.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-10-2010 12:29 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-10-2010 1:15 PM Taz has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019