Reparations for gays?

[REDWAVE]

I for one don't get all too excited about the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas. For one thing, it was long overdue. What took them so long? They should have gotten it right the first time, in Bowers v. Hardwick. Gays and lesbians still can't get married (althoough that might be about to change), and have no protection in federal law against discrimination. We are still an oppressed minority.

That brings me to another issue. Aren't gays and lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders owed reparations for all the vicious discrimination they have been (and still are) subjected to? I remember all the harassment and persecution I've suffered in my life, just for being different. If African-Americans are entitled to reparations for slavery, and all the discrimination they've undergone since then, aren't GLBT's entitled to reparations also?

I'd like my check now, please. Make it big.

 

[KisstheSky]

*perks up* check?

 

[Etoile]

DOMA's still on the books. The recent Supreme Court ruling is fantastic news, but I wouldn't bet on marriage being legal anywhere in the U.S. anytime soon.

 

[modest mouse]

.. I wouldn't bet on marriage being legal anywhere in the U.S. anytime soon.

Welcome to Vermont.

Enjoy your stay.

 

[seXieleXie]

Welcome to Vermont.

Enjoy your stay.

hey, civil unions are not the same as heterosexual marraiges, legally speaking.

 

[alltherage]

There is a case in Mass. that seems to bode well for legalizing gay marriage in that state. Once that door is open it will be very hard to close. States traditionally recognize the marriages originating in other states.

Watch the publicans on this one. Bush will use this push for gay marriage to stimatize the democrats and paint them as servants of the extreme.

 

[modest mouse]

hey, civil unions are not the same as heterosexual marraiges, legally speaking.

Could you please illustrate the differences for me?

 

[REDWAVE]

Full Faith & Credit

DOMA's still on the books. The recent Supreme Court ruling is fantastic news, but I wouldn't bet on marriage being legal anywhere in the U.S. anytime soon.

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, in my opinion. It violates the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, which says an act (such as marriage) which is legal in one state has to be recognized in every state. Whether the Supreme Court would rule that way I don't know, but the recent decision indicates it may.

I don't know much about Vermont's civil union law, but my understanding is it differs from marriage in name only, or at most in minor ways.

 

[Pookie]

Re: Full Faith & Credit

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, in my opinion. It violates the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, which says an act (such as marriage) which is legal in one state has to be recognized in every state. Whether the Supreme Court would rule that way I don't know, but the recent decision indicates it may.

I don't know much about Vermont's civil union law, but my understanding is it differs from marriage in name only, or at most in minor ways.

There is currently a proposed amendment to the US Constitution that would invalidate all legal protections for unmarried couples -- gay or straight. The proposed amendment would nullify domestic partnership laws in several states and in more than 100 counties, cities and towns.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) has introduced H.J. Res 56, the "Federal Marriage Amendment."

I'll post more in a new thread.

 

[REDWAVE]

Re: Re: Full Faith & Credit

There is currently a proposed amendment to the US Constitution that would invalidate all legal protections for unmarried couples -- gay or straight. The proposed amendment would nullify domestic partnership laws in several states and in more than 100 counties, cities and towns.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) has introduced H.J. Res 56, the "Federal Marriage Amendment."

I'll post more in a new thread.

I don't think they'll be able to get that on. Passing an amendment to the Constitution takes a two thirds vote of both houses of Congress, plus ratification by the state legislatures of three quarters of the states. If the Democrats stand up for gay rights at all, they should be able to stop it. And if they can't even do that, they don't deserve any support from gays and lesbians.

 

[seXieleXie]

Could you please illustrate the differences for me?

don't get me wrong, i think vermont is miles ahead of other states on this issue. i just wanted to point out that civil unions are not legally equal with heterosexual marraige.


from http://www.buddybuddy.com/d-p-verm.html

Federal rights NOT Covered by Civil Unions
[*]Immigration Rights — Ability for a non-U.S. spouse to become a full citizen.
[*]Social Security — Ability to collect benefits upon death of a spouse.
[*]Federal Taxes
[*]Tax-Free Situations— Retirement plan roll-overs, inheritance.
[*]More than 1,042 federal laws that are triggered by legal marriage (http://www.buddybuddy.com/mar-fedd.html)

 

[modest mouse]

don't get me wrong, i think vermont is miles ahead of other states on this issue. i just wanted to point out that civil unions are not legally equal with heterosexual marraige.


from http://www.buddybuddy.com/d-p-verm.html

Federal rights NOT Covered by Civil Unions
[*]Immigration Rights — Ability for a non-U.S. spouse to become a full citizen.
[*]Social Security — Ability to collect benefits upon death of a spouse.
[*]Federal Taxes
[*]Tax-Free Situations— Retirement plan roll-overs, inheritance.
[*]More than 1,042 federal laws that are triggered by legal marriage (http://www.buddybuddy.com/mar-fedd.html)

 

[LarzMachine]

Aren't gays and lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders owed reparations for all the vicious discrimination they have been (and still are) subjected to? I remember all the harassment and persecution I've suffered in my life, just for being different. If African-Americans are entitled to reparations for slavery, and all the discrimination they've undergone since then, aren't GLBT's entitled to reparations also?

I'd like my check now, please. Make it big.

There's just one HUGE problem with reparations for gays, namely that there's no real test for "gayness" available. You can tell a black, Asian, or Latino apart from a white person pretty easily. It's not so easy when it comes to identifying GLBT except in certain situations (TG preparing for SRS or post-SRS, for example).

A friend of mine once said that if the University of Minnesota ever puts the same sex domestic partner benefits deal through (which they make noise about constantly so they can appear properly liberal, while not really doing much about it), he and his roommate (who have lived together for like 8 years now) would "come out" the day it went through, point at their living together for so long, and claim to be a gay couple just to get the bennies. And since there's no way to prove their sexual preference conclusively, they'd probably get away with it.

The same thing would happen if reparations ever went through. You'd have Jerry Falwell claiming to be homosexual just to get his check, and it would make a mockery of the whole thing.

 

[NYSubGrpplr]

The Africa American's won't get any money and niether will the gay or lesbians. Every screw ball would come out of the wood works demanding reparations because they'd been descriminated against.

 

[REDWAVE]

Good point

There's just one HUGE problem with reparations for gays, namely that there's no real test for "gayness" available. You can tell a black, Asian, or Latino apart from a white person pretty easily. It's not so easy when it comes to identifying GLBT except in certain situations (TG preparing for SRS or post-SRS, for example).

A friend of mine once said that if the University of Minnesota ever puts the same sex domestic partner benefits deal through (which they make noise about constantly so they can appear properly liberal, while not really doing much about it), he and his roommate (who have lived together for like 8 years now) would "come out" the day it went through, point at their living together for so long, and claim to be a gay couple just to get the bennies. And since there's no way to prove their sexual preference conclusively, they'd probably get away with it.

The same thing would happen if reparations ever went through. You'd have Jerry Falwell claiming to be homosexual just to get his check, and it would make a mockery of the whole thing.

That reminds me of an episode of LEXX where Stanley Tweedle wants to get onto the set of an adult movie. He tells the director he's a fluffer, having no idea what that entails, and claims to have many years of experience at the job. He even fails to get it when the director (who calls him "fluf daddy") points out that all the other fluffers are women. When the male lead drops his trou and Stanley finally realizes what fluffers do, he runs away screaming "I'm not a fluffer! I never fluffed! I lied!"