Pink triangles and barbed wire

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by Elspode

The only possible objections [to gay marriage], then, are ultimately based on religious morality, and so any laws attempting to restrict same gender marriages are in fact impositions of religion upon law.

Is gay marriage permitted by the governments of China, Cuba, Japan or Finland or are all those governments in Pat Robertson's pocket too?

[Elspode]

Not as far as I know. I'm not particularly enamoured of living under the governing precepts of *those* countries, either. In fact, aren't a couple of them Communist regimes, typically not known for their liberal human rights handling?

I would be interested in knowing how much debate there is over the issue in the countries which you cite, and what reasons are given for disallowing the practice there, though.

I'd also be interested in hearing some non-morality based points in favor of the continuing ban on gay marriage.

[Elspode]

Turns out Finland recognizes civil unions between gays, which takes care of the legal issues. If those who are so registered then decide to have a ritual, find someone to solemnize it, and call it a marriage, I'm thinking that is between them.

I'd be good with that same sort of deal here in the US. I don't really care if people want to say that a gay union isn't a real marriage, as long as they don't deprive a united same sex couple of their civil/property/benefits rights.

Looks like it is still naughty in Japan, from what I'm reading online.

[slang]

Originally Posted by Elspode

I'd also be interested in hearing some non-morality based points in favor of the continuing ban on gay marriage.

I suppose my points that I've done so poorly at describing here are based on letting the legal machine crank on with regard to this issue.

It's not that I'm personally opposed to it but that I dont see the push for legalized worth pushing for right now. I do not see that not legally allowing GM is somehow anything near the comparison to the Black civil rights issues of years ago. Call me an ass.

The thing that I'm most worried about, respectfully, the thing that most people here discount totally, is the size and scope of the Christian population and how the changes they make in large numbers might affect all of us. Like boycotts and such.

Even worse, Imagine instead of 1 abortion bomber, 100 "GM bombers" or something similar but less violent. What would the drain on resources and our freedoms be in bringing that sort of thing back in check? Sure, worth it to defend the rights of gays, but really necessary? I dont think so. Let the issue crank through the legal system.

In that way, just knowing that this group is as large and committed as it is, the non-religious argument against GM is to keep force on those things that will decide all the legal cases as quickly as possilbe.

That might be tomorrow but I'm guessing not.

Yes, I know that many of you here hate the Christians. Yes, I also know that they are clearly wrong in most everything that they do. They must represent a large influence here in the US or this issue would have been slam dunk a long time ago.

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by Elspode

Not as far as I know. I'm not particularly enamoured of living under the governing precepts of *those* countries, either. In fact, aren't a couple of them Communist regimes, typically not known for their liberal human rights handling?

I would be interested in knowing how much debate there is over the issue in the countries which you cite, and what reasons are given for disallowing the practice there, though.

I'd also be interested in hearing some non-morality based points in favor of the continuing ban on gay marriage.

I picked a few commie countries just to make the point that its not just about religion. I'm obviously not a big fan of China's government either. I can tell you that it has actually been voted on in China's parliament but did not come close to receiving the required number of yes votes. I should have known better than to choose Finland but did not dig deep enough to verify their position on the matter. Suffice it to say that there are quite a number of countries who do not recognize gay households who do not base their position on religious texts.

I just have a problem with the gay rights advocates painting everyone who does not agree with them as either religious bozos or homophobic bigots. There are a lot of people who aren't on their side (not all of whom are necessarily opposed - just not in favor) who are neither.

[wolf]

Rich, you know that I like you, your lovely family, and hold your ability to barbeque in high regard ...

but.

How is it that you can equate the deaths of 6 million Jews and countless others with gay marriage? There aren't any death camps, and as far as I can tell, nobody's being systematically killed.

[Elspode]

I don't think he's equating the two cases...yet (I know, I know...you didn't ask me, you asked Rich). Still, with the current trends in society, it seems interesting that we are apparently creating a designated "whipping boy" to suit the moral themes which are being more and more propagated in our social structures these days.

Why can't we make murderers, thieves and child molesters the objects of our scorn and constant moral outrage, and leave people who just want to do each other in mutual peace and harmony alone?

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by Elspode

Why can't we make murderers, thieves and child molesters the objects of our scorn and constant moral outrage, and leave people who just want to do each other in mutual peace and harmony alone?

i am so there.

dude: I so didn't mean YOU. i was being orgasmic. Or, something..

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Elspode

Why can't we make murderers, thieves and child molesters the objects of our scorn and constant moral outrage, and leave people who just want to do each other in mutual peace and harmony alone?

Because in current parlance, they are not responsible for their actions ... they are these things because of some defect or sadness in their upbringing. Personal responsibility, whether it be for good things or bad things, is a concept of the past. It's the rotary dial telephone of the new millenium.

[Elspode]

Don't get me started on Victim Mentality. Sheesh.

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by Elspode

Don't get me started on Victim Mentality. Sheesh.

do your worst, els. Enlighten me.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by wolf

How is it that you can equate the deaths of 6 million Jews and countless others with gay marriage? There aren't any death camps, and as far as I can tell, nobody's being systematically killed.

You could make the same argument about the Civil Rights movement in the 60s. How can you equate segregated bathrooms with death camps? You might as well say that all injustice is now OK, because the holocaust was worse.

[slang]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

You might as well say that all injustice is now OK, because the holocaust was worse.

Sorry for butting in here.

No, not OK but of the same urgency? Of the same degree of injustice? That's for the fence sitters to decide, not coming from one extreme or another.

People being killed by the millions versus people that cant get insurance for their sig other. Granted, a tragedy. Any true comparison is just laughable to the middle roaders. THOSE are the people that you need.

(Not YOU specifically HM but as a whole of the movement )

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by wolf

How is it that you can equate the deaths of 6 million Jews and countless others with gay marriage? There aren't any death camps, and as far as I can tell, nobody's being systematically killed.

This is why I used Germany in the 30's. This was before the 'final solution', when unpopular groups were being disenfranchised and isolated.

I don't expect death camps in the US. Resettlement camps? Reeducation camps? How about a law declaring homosexuality a mental illness? I don't know where this country is headed, but if you look back to the early 20th century when racism and anti-semitism were institutionalized, it is possible to see how bad it could get.

When I mentioned similarities to the civil rights movement, I was thinking of all of the laws on mixed marriages, some of which were written into states constitutions. For over 100 years states were allowed to prevent members of different races from marrying. I don't know if this was based on pseudo science, or if everyone just admitted that it made them uncomfortable, but for a very long time this was a fact of life embedded in society and law.

I went to a Jewish school and had to study the Holocaust. One lesson that I learned that some people don't remember is that it did not happen overnight. Death camps did not spring up on the outskirts of towns in a single year. The period from the first discriminatory laws to the 'final solution' was about 8 years. The rise to power came from a manufactured 'crisis' and the gradual dissolution of Constitutional checks and balances.

Especially on the Internet, people automatically are suspicious of playing the 'Nazi' card. Look at the timeline and see if you notice any parallels with events today.

The difference today is that Jews and other minorities would see it coming. While conservatives are rolling back affirmative action, there is no chance for them to attempt active racism or anti-semitism today. However, gays do not have any significant legal protection and can provide the same visceral response to the 'base' that Jews did in Nazi Germany.

Death camps? No. Active disenfranchisment and legalized discrimination? Maybe.

BTW, we like you too Wolf.

[Trilby]

Ok--I've not read the above with the sober eyes of Muhammad--Or, Jesus, or Y*w*H, or, God-De-Jour. I'll tell you this:

Stupid humans! LOVE one another! Honor me thru your neighbors! Kay-Rist!

your stupidity is astounding.

PPS-God is an Ideal.