Hollywood joins the furor over gay marriage ban - quoted from yahoo news

[Weird Harold]

...They lack the sacred part that many of the "why can't you just accept civil unions with full rights" people don't understand...

The people you're trying to explain the 'sacred uinion" aspect to probably don't understand that aspect any more than the close-minded bigots who are totally opposed to gays even existing.

Many of them are like my brother and sister-in-law; They didn't get married until there was a clear financial advantage to get married over simply co-habiting. They didn't feel they needed a ceremony of any kind to "sanctify" their commitment to each other so the marriage when it happened was strictly a civil union for the legal, pension and tax benefits. An appeal to people them on more than the legal differences between civil unions and civil marriage will fall on deaf ears becasue they simply don't see any "sacred" aspect to legal marriage, to them it's just a shorthand legal contract.

As far as that goes, I understand that there is a spiritual aspect to being legally married, but I don't personallly associate that spiritual aspect with the civil contract side of "marriage;" I associate that with the formal wedding ceremony which doesn't require a license, just a willing clergyman.

 

[Stella_Omega]

T

As far as that goes, I understand that there is a spiritual aspect to being legally married, but I don't personallly associate that spiritual aspect with the civil contract side of "marriage;" I associate that with the formal wedding ceremony which doesn't require a license, just a willing clergyman.

Which is so ironic, because there are a number of churches who will gladly bind a same sex couple in the sacred marriage-- they just can't supply them the civil contract.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Maybe I'm overly optimistic but somehow I see the CalCourt giving a very dignified, properly framed in legal language finger to the Prop 8'ers. "Look assholes, we told you once . . . "

 

[Weird Harold]

Ah, that "tone" thing again.

My friends of color have this discussion all the time, it's never-ending. Do you take a calm and reasonable tone with people who express bigotry, in the hopes that you'll somehow, magically, reach them?

Or are you allowed to show your real sorrows and angers in the face of their ignorance and hurtfulness? Will it make any difference, which tone you take?
...

Missed this one the first time through; sorry.

I'm not so much talking about the "tone" if the arguments as much as the choice of what to argue.

I can raise a lot more ire and indignation over the very real possibility that some homophobic cousin has more inherent legal right to make final days decisions than a life-partner of decades standing than I can over the lack of a ceremony.

I think most people can at least understand being shut out or pre-empted as being unjust where they see "sacredness" as being an unrelated Church/State Separation issue.

I think a good howling-mad diatribe against greedy second-cousins' throwing a will into long and costly probate because your life partner obviously "exerted undue influence on you through your sexual deviancy" can do a lot to bring the issues most people can drop their emotions to deal with into the public eye.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Maybe I'm overly optimistic but somehow I see the CalCourt giving a very dignified, properly framed in legal language finger to the Prop 8'ers. "Look assholes, we told you once . . . "

I hope so, but I really have my doubts. The first time, they could find it unconstitutional. Now, it is part of the constitution, which meand it is constitutional by definition. SCOTUS might overrule the voters, and that would open up gay marriage for everybody.

 

[Techomancer]

You're doing it wrong...

Want to get junk like prop 8 tossed? It's so simple.

Forget the public, forget the government, forget the homosexual community.

Just show the law firms that they will get to bill 50% more divorce cases than before if gay marriage is instituted.

Done.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Want to get junk like prop 8 tossed? It's so simple.

Forget the public, forget the government, forget the homosexual community.

Just show the law firms that they will get to bill 50% more divorce cases than before if gay marriage is instituted.

Done.

You're probably part right. When more marriages are contracted, there will be more divorces. It's just simple arithmetic but there would not be 50% more.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

SCOTUS, if you recall, made slavery legal everywhere in the 1857 Dred Scott case. States that didnt want it were stuck with it. They may do the same with same-sex marriage but such a decision opens the door to every other permutation and combination of relationship. If Heather can have 2 mommies, she can have 5 mommies.

 

[AllardChardon]

A child will thrive under the care of a single good-hearted woman and could only benefit from two such wonderful beings, rather than no mommies at all.

In native American cultures, the babies were part of the community, the grandmothers did most of the babysitting whiles the wives did the cooking, cleaning and the rest of the domestic chores. Many mommies are beneficial as long as they agree on how to raise the children.

 

[alyxen]

If all these big bucks celebs had come out about two months earlier we might have won. Typical Hollywood.

So we should ignore the many that did TV adds here in California? and donated millions, generally publicly, to the organizations opposing it?

 

[Happily_Variant]

Let's hope for that! I am still amazed there are so many of the religious right here in California. Utah I can understand, but California. Whew! What the fuck happened? Obviously, I am still reeling from it all.

I join in that response, I was quite shocked as well. I would have thought it was a no-brainer, considering how freedom of expression has been a foundation of culture for so long. Could others have felt not obligated to get out the vote, making false assumptions as well?

 

[Safe_Bet]

So we should ignore the many that did TV adds here in California? and donated millions, generally publicly, to the organizations opposing it?

Damn! You had to dig all the way back 3 pages to find something to condemn didn't you?

If you read the follow up posts I think you would have found that statement clarified by statements to the extent of saying their comments were with kind regards to the one's who DID donate and speak out for Prop 8 BEFORE the vote.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

1. Allard lives in NorCal, west of the Coastal Range, I believe. That puts her under the influence of SF. Her confusion is understandable.

2. HV lives in Texas where, even if he personally isn't affected, there is a feeling that Californians are all slightly dazed.

However, the San Joaquin Valley is politically more like Arizona and so is the Inland Empire (Riverside, Kern and San Bernardo Counties.) They balance out the Bay Area. The battleground was the L.A. Basin and it was carried by the Church Ladies that no one on the anti-8 side even thought about until it was far too late. African Americans, especially older ones, are much more socially conservative than the Dem party leadership think. They just vote so reliably Dem that they can be ignored so they are.

 

[AllardChardon]

Yes, that is true. And I keep thinking the old guard will die off. But I always forget they begat the new old guard... be fruitful and multiply and all that.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Yes, that is true. And I keep thinking the old guard will die off. But I always forget they begat the new old guard... be fruitful and multiply and all that.

Uh-huh. That's where Richard Dawkins falls on his stupid face. He keeps worshiping Evolution and down playing Religion whereas anyone of a demographic turn of mind can see that Believers have larger families than Seculars and therefore are more successful from a evolutionary standpoint. And conservatives have bigger families than liberals. Not by much, but statistically significantly.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Uh-huh. anyone of a demographic turn of mind can see that Believers have larger families than Seculars and therefore are more successful from a evolutionary standpoint. And conservatives have bigger families than liberals. Not by much, but statistically significantly.

Hey hey now... I'm trying to balance out that statistic.

 

[Boxlicker101]

1. Allard lives in NorCal, west of the Coastal Range, I believe. That puts her under the influence of SF. Her confusion is understandable.

2. HV lives in Texas where, even if he personally isn't affected, there is a feeling that Californians are all slightly dazed.

However, the San Joaquin Valley is politically more like Arizona and so is the Inland Empire (Riverside, Kern and San Bernardo Counties.) They balance out the Bay Area. The battleground was the L.A. Basin and it was carried by the Church Ladies that no one on the anti-8 side even thought about until it was far too late. African Americans, especially older ones, are much more socially conservative than the Dem party leadership think. They just vote so reliably Dem that they can be ignored so they are.

If Allard lives very far west of the Coastal Range, that puts her under the Pacific Ocean.

No part of CA is as homogenous as you seem to be implying. There are fanatically anti-gay persons living in the Bay Area and fanatically pro-equality persons, such as myself, living in the Central Valley. And there are Church Ladies scattered evenly thoughout the state.

In 2000, I remember reading somebody quoted that the anti-gay marriage attitude was a mile wide and an inch deep. What that person meant was that there are so many persons who believe that, in principle, there is something wrong with two men marrying or two women marrying. It doesn't effect them personally, and they have no strong objections, but it just seems wrong, and they will vote against it because of that.

I have many doubts that SCOTUS will ever rule against Prop. 8, because doing so would cause a cataclysm of change. It would legalize gay marriage throughout the country, and they might not be willing to go that far. They would continue to allow individual states to define marriage.

In that case, the problem is now greater than it was before, because it requires an initiative to change the state constitution and repeal Prop. 8, which is a difficult proposition.

 

[AllardChardon]

Allard reporting in from under the sea...

No, in the mountains to the east is more like it. And they hate homos here.

It is odd but male homosexuals are harassed and females are left alone up here. I guess it's like Dave Chappelle says, "I love lesbians." My daughter says those kind are called lipstick lesbians, not chapstick lesbians. I laughed and said, "Really, those are the new terms?"

The labels today are hilarious. I remember when there was only gay or homosexual, before lesbian was used at all. My sister-in-law's nickname was Gay from Gayle and she dropped that fast when she heard it the first time. Back in the dark ages...

 

[Safe_Bet]

Allard reporting in from under the sea...

No, in the mountains to the east is more like it. And they hate homos here.

It is odd but male homosexuals are harassed and females are left alone up here. I guess it's like Dave Chappelle says, "I love lesbians." My daughter says those kind are called lipstick lesbians, not chapstick lesbians. I laughed and said, "Really, those are the new terms?"

The labels today are hilarious. I remember when there was only gay or homosexual, before lesbian was used at all. My sister-in-law's nickname was Gay from Gayle and she dropped that fast when she heard it the first time. Back in the dark ages...

You speaketh the truth. It's always amazed me how people will want to be friends with Amy and I, but are absolutely repelled by a gay guy. Then you have the exact opposite attitude of the "Fruit Flys" that try to be your friend BECAUSE you are gay or lesbian.

 

[cloudy]

You speaketh the truth. It's always amazed me how people will want to be friends with Amy and I, but are absolutely repelled by a gay guy. Then you have the exact opposite attitude of the "Fruit Flys" that try to be your friend BECAUSE you are gay or lesbian.

Fruit flys???

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/1.gif

never heard that one.

Fortunately, there are people like me out there...those that really couldn't care less what you do in your sex life, and with whom.

 

[AllardChardon]

I suppose seeing women kiss is sexier than seeing men kiss in some people's opinions.

Women kissing, I have seen this on film. Men kissing, I saw this in person at a gay bar in North Hollywood in the 70s. (They loved to shock the straight chick!)

Neither sex has the market sewed up. Kissing is up to the people involved. We have seen enough miscast actors trying to pull that one off and failing miserably to know the difference, yes?

 

[Safe_Bet]

Fruit flys???

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/1.gif

never heard that one.

Fortunately, there are people like me out there...those that really couldn't care less what you do in your sex life, and with whom.

Awwww, you wanna watch. I know you do...
(if for no other reason to see if she really can get that thing... never mind. )

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I, on the other hand, have a fondness for the dual utility of strap-ons.

 

[cloudy]

Awwww, you wanna watch. I know you do...
(if for no other reason to see if she really can get that thing... never mind. )

If I watched, I'd probably have to join in.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I'd want to.