A question for the straight members of DU.

[Midlodemocrat]

What will it cost you personally if the GLBT gets complete and total equal rights? Will it cost you your job? Your spouse if you have one? Will it cost you custody of your children?

Because, for me, as a headed toward late middle age straight, married woman, it won't affect me personally at all. I will still be married, as evidenced by the marriages that took place in San Francisco and I will still have my home, my job and my family.

I will still get to volunteer at my children's schools and I will get to be the one asked about my husband's wishes when he is having additional surgery.

So, why can't we all get behind the push for total and complete equal rights for the GLBT community? Not 'civil unions', marriage. I'm not civil unioned, I'm married. Yes, it is a word, but it is a word that has a tremendous amount of impact to a lot of people in this country.

We NEED to do this, as the progressive party. We NEED to give our friends, our brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, sons, daughters, who are gay complete and total equal rights. It needs to happen sooner rather than later. The GLBT community has been told to 'sit down and be quiet' for too long. The NJ ruling is obviously proof, at least to me, that giving the GLBT community equal rights isn't going to cost elections if that is the concern, and I must say, I don't really think that it is.

Let's get on board, together, as progressives or even extremely conservative members of the Democratic party. Let's do this for them, and for ourselves.

I mean, it's not as though the straight community hasn't completely fucked up the whole notion of 'til death do us part'. How can the GLBT community do any worse?

Peace.

[blonndee]

1. K & R Midlo...

:yourock:

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. Excellent questions, all

Although I have long ago passed the point of asking them as politely as you. :hi:

[Lerkfish]

3. well, I've been completely behind gay marriage since before it was a campaign wedge issue.

Having worked all my life with gay people, and seeing many committed relationships.

soooooo....just cause I'm straight doesn't mean I'm against you.
I've also been one to scream when "centrists" told us to abandon your issues to win elections.

so, obviously, to answer your questions, giving gay people every right that I enjoy as a citizen does not diminish my own rights. Diminishing their rights, however, diminishes our own humanity.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. May I speak frankly, or do I get booted off DU for my honesty?

[kansasblue]

I was watching for your comments, Backlash...

with 100,000 members surely someone will disagree with you but I think you should feel free to say it.

kb

[The Backlash Cometh]

35. Well, yes, now that I've got your attention...

I absolutely believe that Equal Rights should have been passed, years ago. A person shouldn't lose their jobs based on who they chose to spend their lives with.

However, none of it will happen, no matter how much the liberals jump on board, until you at least look at the truths or half-truths that give the conservatives the momentum they need to keep the discrimination and prejudice alive. So, here I present a couple of suggestions which will hopefully bridge those obstacles:

(1) No one, heterosexual or homosexual has a right to make undesired physical or verbal advances to anyone, and comments such as, "Only heterosexuality is normal," or "Every man is inherently homosexual," should be considered hostile and threatening. Especially to young adults who may not really know what their sexual orientations are, and may feel peer pressure to try something for the wrong reason. (And have I heard a homosexual male tell me that all men are homosexuals? Yes, I have. And I have also had a lesbian make physical advances which were absolutely not wanted, and I was left feeling like I was the one that was uptight for feeling repulsed by it. So, it does happen.)

(2) Whatever rights are allowed, should never breach the government's right to protect the public's safety, health and welfare.

Well, that's it in a nutshell.

[bicentennial_baby]

36. What in Gawd's name are you talking about?

What does any of what you're saying have to do with marriage equality? :crazy:

[The Backlash Cometh]

53. How can you not see it?

The good news is, you head off their objections from the beginning, and you win. But you deny it exists, and the battle continues.

And if you think that there isn't a backlash against heterosexual males who have stepped over the line, you haven't been paying attention.

[Zuiderelle]

66. Backlash against heterosexual males stepping over the line?????

You really aren't making any sense. I gather from your post earlier that for some reason you think that some gay men and women who flirt with straight people ruin all gay people's chances for equality. Is that what you're saying? That we should go find these people and force them to act in a way that pleases you before we should expect equal rights? Holy shit man, that's just nuts.

[The Backlash Cometh]

116. I think the rules that apply to heterosexuals, should also apply to

homosexuals. If someone clearly likes to be flirted with, have at it. But if someone is clearly offended by it, back off.

And what you say, does matter. A gay friend really did believe that all men were homosexually oriented and was waiting for all of our husbands to eventually come out of the closet. It got so bad that if any of them went to visit an old college buddy who had come out of the closet after college, and that friend decided to take him to a known gay bar, the rumour went around at the next reunion that so and so was a bisexual and his wife doesn't know it. It's stupid, it's catty and it happens.

[Zuiderelle]

119. I agree. Tell that to all the heterosexual men who come on to me

despite my telling them I'm not interested, despite my telling them I'm gay.

Who cares if your gay friend believes all men are homosexual. Laugh at it and walk away. I laugh at heterosexuals all the time who say that being homosexual is a choice (in essence saying that all people are heterosexual).

You keep bringing up these individuals you've known in your life. I don't get the connection, anymore than if I were to judge all straight men by the ones that have been disgustingly lascivious with me.

If we take away the prejudice, those rumors at your reunion won't have any more effect than if they were insinuating someone was having a straight affair. I think you are way too caught up on sex. I guess all straight people must be then. :rofl:

[The Backlash Cometh]

123. You know, you may have a point that might help you steer through this.

Perhaps conservative straight people are caught up on sex, and maybe that's their right. So what we have to do is find a way not to breach their individual comfort zones, and still give you the freedom to be who you were meant to be.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

127. Their "comfort zones" are their problem.

If they're obsessed with gay people hitting on them, that's their fault, not that of gay people.

[The Backlash Cometh]

129. No. Their comfort zones, are your problem.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

130. First of all, I'm straight, if you're implying I'm gay.

Secondly, to use the (ludicrous) excuse of some straight people's irrational homophobia as something to even remotely deny civil rights for gays is insane.

[The Backlash Cometh]

131. I think we need a modern day Leticia Baldwin.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

132. What?

[The Backlash Cometh]

195. Rules of etiquette. Unless, of course, it's now an American tradition

to be as nasty as you wanna be. (And I mean that for heterosexual behavior, as well as homosexual.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

205. Rules of etiquette?

Like expecting people not to freak out at the thought of civil rights for gay people?

:eyes:

[The Backlash Cometh]

216. Well, you can try shoving it down their throats, if you like.

I'm just here on a peripheral visit, myself.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

218. Wow, a homophobic allusion to illustrate your lack of a point.

:eyes:

[The Backlash Cometh]

224. The point is, you have no argument that carries water for anyone, anymore.

There is no basis for that response. It is simple and most people figure out that you've run into a deadend.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

225. BWAHAHAHAH!

Is "most people" you?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :eyes:

[The Backlash Cometh]

227. You're being silly.

But if it makes you feel superior, have at it.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

233. Oh, man, this is rich.

You think being hit on by one or two gay people in your life has something to do with denying them marriage rights, and I'M silly?

:rofl:

Seriously, this is more fun than FR.

[The Backlash Cometh]

238. Go back to my earlier posts, and please, please show me

where I ever stated that I wanted to deny marriage rights.

I think it would be easier to be convincing in your superiority, if you actually could show some proficiency at reading.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

244. You predicated your "support" with this extremely hyperbolic strawman:

However, none of it will happen, no matter how much the liberals jump on board, until you at least look at the truths or half-truths that give the conservatives the momentum they need to keep the discrimination and prejudice alive. So, here I present a couple of suggestions which will hopefully bridge those obstacles:

(1) No one, heterosexual or homosexual has a right to make undesired physical or verbal advances to anyone, and comments such as, "Only heterosexuality is normal," or "Every man is inherently homosexual," should be considered hostile and threatening. Especially to young adults who may not really know what their sexual orientations are, and may feel peer pressure to try something for the wrong reason. (And have I heard a homosexual male tell me that all men are homosexuals? Yes, I have. And I have also had a lesbian make physical advances which were absolutely not wanted, and I was left feeling like I was the one that was uptight for feeling repulsed by it. So, it does happen.)

(2) Whatever rights are allowed, should never breach the government's right to protect the public's safety, health and welfare.

What the hell does that have to do with gay marriage? And what does your second point even refer to?

And why do you care about conservatives' rationale? Do you care about their reactions on other "controversial" issues?

[The Backlash Cometh]

268. The answers to the test are in the back of the book:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=298867&mesg_id=301396

[Starbucks Anarchist]

366. ...

:rofl:

Be sure not to suffocate in your tent of hate. I'm sure it's constructed from strawmen. :eyes:

[Name removed]

418. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Laha]

377. Your comfort zone can kiss my lily white ass, thank you very much

Your suggestion that I, and all other gay people need to modify our behaviours for you, before we deserve the same rights is as ludicrous and insulting as it would be for me to suggest all women need to learn to dress less slutty if they don't want to be raped. Your arguments are the same tired old homophobic crap that suggests it's actually our fault that in many places in the world we have to worry about being targetted - not because of who we, but what we do.

Grow up and be truthfull to yourself why don't you. Quit using your own ignorance to justify your ignorance.

[King Coal]

390. Remember, you can get cured now.

[Laha]

420. Maybe of my foul mouth, eventually

Would you suggest the bible, or electrodes attached to my testies? :crazy:

I tried to come back earlier and clean up an even less mature post I made down the list a bit, but a moderator rightly removed it before I had the chance. I'll try not to post so eagerly when I'm overtired and cranky in the future.

Oh well. Peace

[Debi]

209. Ahem...Letitia Baldridge (love her books) n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

219. LOL!

You got me. No wonder everybody is so confused. I even looked up "Letitia Baldwin." I guess someone misspelled her name too. Though I should have been tipped off when I came across a post that reported that she was picked up for vagrancy. LOL!

[Midlodemocrat]

135. Nope. Like SA said, if someone is that offended, their comfort zones

are the issue.

Maybe the real issue is that the individuals whom you are referencing are encouraging being hit on, either by gay or straight people? And if the individual is gay, their own latent, hidden homophobia is coming out?

I don't have a homophobic bone in my body and I've NEVER been hit on by a lesbian. EVER. And, I don't wear my rings all that much.

[The Backlash Cometh]

198. Just like a robot, you said it.

"And if the individual is gay, their own latent, hidden homophobia is coming out?"

That's precisely what I'm talking about. That's the quick comeback that liberals give whenever someone says they're uncomfortable with homosexuality. The canned response is that the person must be latent homosexual. Tell me by now, just how far with this debate are we going to get dragging that old trout out?

Can't you see that you're offending people when you accuse them of being what they are not? Just like gays get offended when they say that only heterosexuals are the norm?

[Midlodemocrat]

213. You misunderstood what I posted.

Here. I'll spell it out for you.

Being upset because you are hit on by members of the same sex is homophobic.

Clear enough?

[The Backlash Cometh]

217. I understood you exactly.

And I think that's old thinking that gets us no where.

[Midlodemocrat]

221. Are you upset when a person of a different race hits on you?

Because that would be racist.

So if you are upset when a person of the same sex mistakenly hits on you, that's homophobic. It's an inherent, ingrained feeling that you are better than that and 'How dare they think I'm gay?"

It's homophobic. Through and through.

[The Backlash Cometh]

226. I think I made it very clear that I feel the same rules should apply.

"Same" generally means that someone is looking for a fair and equal way to handle two similar situations.

[Midlodemocrat]

231. Well, that made no sense.

You didn't answer the question.

If you are hit on by a person of a different race, are you offended? If you are, that's racist.

And, if you are offended by being hit on by a person of the same sex, it's homophobic.

When I get hit on at our community's gatherings during the summer, it's usually some drunk guy who wants to buy me a drink. I smile, thank him politely and decline.

I don't "take offense" even if the person knows I'm married.

Sometimes a duck is just a duck.

[The Backlash Cometh]

240. Same, generally means, same.

I would be offended if anyone were to "hit on me," in an inappropriate manner. In fact, I don't relish being "hit on" now, or have ever. There's a lot to be said for subtlety. The old classics, never die.

[Midlodemocrat]

349. Hey, the same could be said for slavery.

It was, after all, an old classic. :eyes:

[Zhade]

421. Exactly. You nailed it.

Nicely done.

[Jamastiene]

361. There is no need to talk about anyone dragging a trout out here.

That has to be the strangest phrase I have ever heard.

[Zuiderelle]

147. Their comfort zones are their responsibility and their problem.

I have no responsibility to make them comfortable.

[The Backlash Cometh]

199. Apparently not.

And don't expect any courtesy from them in return.

[Zuiderelle]

314. Really? So then you think they shouldn't expect courtesy from us either.

What's your point in all this? We should bend over backwards to prove that we are not like some of our brothers and sisters so that we can please bigots?

[Name removed]

422. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zuiderelle]

146. So, you think I'm responsible for gay people who act the way you describe?

I never breach anyone's comfort zone in that way. All I do is offend them by being alive.

I suppose you're responsible for all those nasty straight men who come onto lesbians all the time.

[The Backlash Cometh]

201. I say, take a cue from rules of etiquette. Update them if you must.

But, I guess, good manners are no longer in fashion.

[Midlodemocrat]

215. But homophobia is alive and well.

:kudos:

[The Backlash Cometh]

236. Imagine the power you would have, if you managed to establish

those rules, and if you follow them so that there is never any mistaking someone's intentions. If we could succeed in improving communication, then that would relieve any feelings of discomfort or fears that come with the uncertainty of something new.

[Name removed]

423. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Midlodemocrat]

424. That is completely nonsensical.

People can't read each other's minds. To try and establish a culture where no one was EVER offended by anyone is impossible.

And, I think you know that.

[Lost-in-FL]

281. "Rules of etiquette"

Sorry to get in this argument but I am trying to understand your point about the "Rules of etiquette", but I can't. You need to read this quote of yours perhaps tomorrow and maybe you'll realize that you do sound like a homophobic. I don't see what "etiquette" has to do with human rights tho.

[The Backlash Cometh]

287. Where you're confused...

This isn't about how I feel about the marriage bill. I think it should pass, even Pat Buchanan thinks it will pass. What I'm interested in, is having it become less of a source of conflict for us, a wedge issue, per se. I'm looking forward, to what happens next.

[Zuiderelle]

323. Huh? What does etiquette have to do with me being responsible for others' actions?

Seems to me that you should update your rules of etiquette, the ones you use apparently left out consideration of and respect for gay people.

[Name removed]

378. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Midlodemocrat]

37. Of course no one should make unwarranted advances, but I

don't think that is the norm. I don't know anyone who had that happen to them, except for when I was a young single teacher and my male boss hit on me. He was married. It was awful.

[The Backlash Cometh]

56. Not so with me.

Perhaps because when I was younger I freely labeled myself as a liberal, and to that I meant I was tolerant of other people's views. Calling yourself a liberal, shouldn't be taken for a neon sign that everything goes. Unfortunately there were a few "South Park Jumped the shark" moments which some would prefer were left forgotten.

[Zuiderelle]

45. I get unwanted advances from straight men and even straight women all the time.

What the hell does any of that have to do with equality for gays?

That's the oddest post I've read in a long time.

[The Backlash Cometh]

51. I don't think you're seeing it.

And, that is the reason why you'll fail.

[Zuiderelle]

64. WTF? Seeing what? Fail at what? What are you TALKING about?

:crazy:

[John Q. Citizen]

77. What backlash cometh is talking about is the unspoken fear among a

significant percentage of self identified hetrosexuals who are afaid if being gay is OK that they or their families will be hit on.

A certain percentage of the public fear that life will be more complicated. But they won't generally tell you that.

hence, it's an unspoken (though as far as I can tell) unfounded fear.

But if that fear isn't confronted, then the political effort to achieve full political/civil rights is harder.

Think of it from a sales point of view. It's the unspoken objections that a good salesman bring up, examines, and puts to rest for his/her customer.

What I see backlash as saying is that fear has to be dealt with, not just ignored. Unreasonable or not.

[Midlodemocrat]

78. I understand what you are saying, but I have to say that I think

the fear is beyond unfounded. As a straight female, should I worry all the time about being hit on by straight men? Should I be afraid to go to the pool for fear of being accosted by straight men?

I have to say, I have NEVER been hit on by a female. EVER. I have however been hit on when I was single and again after I was married by men.

I don't think the homosexual population just waits around for one of 'us' to walk by so they can hit on us. It would seem to me that homosexual attraction is the same as heterosexual attraction, you are interested in people to whom you are attracted. You're not interested in every possible person of either the same or opposite sex.

[John Q. Citizen]

93. Of course. But the fear is different than reality. (As it often is in sales) And it has to

be acknoledged, examined, and laid to rest to get the deal signed.

Act Up achieved a lot quick with an-in-your face message that kind of cut through fear in it's bold and audicious aproach to the AIDS issue.

Now there should be an ad about gay people hitting on straight people, and straight people hitting on gay people, just to acknowledge the sexual terror that afflicts a significant portion of our populace in both simular and different ways.

[Zuiderelle]

91. How do we deal with that fear other than talking about it, which we are?

It's like dealing with the fear that RWers have that democrats will raise taxes and take their money and ruin the economy. Even after all the evidence that it's pretty much the opposite of what they fear. Sometimes, fear cannot be dealt with.

Thanks for boiling down backlash's post. It really made no sense to me. I suppose I understand now that what he was saying is that he has the same deep-seated, irrational fears of homosexuals as RWers do, and that we are somehow responsible for that fear and need to address it before we can expect equality. But of course, that's insane. Some people fear black people, but no one told the black community that they should address others' irrational fear of them before they could expect equality.

[John Q. Citizen]

104. I would suggest addressing the fear not out of obligation but rather self interest.

see my suggestion in post #93

Same with the irrational fear of black males. Black males now have the equality to be arrested first, and released last. The fear needs to be acknowledged and dealt with.

And yes, I agree with you talking about it does help.

[Zuiderelle]

113. But we do address that fear, every day. Just by existing openly.

I saw your suggestion in #93. It's a nice idea to think that television ads showing gay people coming on to straight people and straight people coming on to gay people would reduce the irrational fears of homophobes. I just don't see that happening. Act Up might have educated some people, but I also think it generated more fear and hatred from others.

And who will play these ads? Will the markets they are really needed actually play them? I doubt it. I remember the episode when Ellen came out of the closet on her sitcom. It didn't play in the market in which I lived. Instead they played it during the afternoon a few days later. This was a prime-time highly rated television show. And the conservative pressure to suppress it was great enough to actually take it off the air. There's no way that these ads would even be allowed.

I think the only thing we can do is live openly and show them that we are all the same.

[John Q. Citizen]

134. The ads could be done tastefully, some humerus, a couple poignant,

I mean we did the dating game so it's not like missed signals or potentially socially embarrassing situations are always off limits. Three's Company has it's share of gay/straight romantic misunderstandings. Rudy will see his "drag" photo on Jay Leno for sure.

The Ellen show was a big deal when it happened but now she's on tV everyday when the kids get home from school, and it hasn't exactly shaken America to it's roots. Did theses channels refuse to show the Oscars?

As to the ads, the message could be; "Don't limit gay peoples rights because you are afraid you will get hit on."
And the ads should be tame, light, humorous or thoughtful.

Then the resulting controversy over the ads will help spread viewership over the net as well as making the premise of the ads a subject of conversation on Good Morning America, or some such thing.

ACt Up was a tiny group of committed activists who reshaped how America thought about aids. They got a lot of bang for their buck, and are worth studying by any activists looking into how a small committed group can impact policy. Because they did. And from the left. I don't doubt they left a trail of dismayed and disgruntled opponents. Nor do I really know a whole lot about them other than superficially. I've always thought it would be interesting to read up on their political story. How they saw the struggle.

[donco6]

255. To me, the whole thing is a non sequitur.

"Don't limit gay peoples rights because you are afraid you will get hit on."

Does this really have anything whatsoever to do with denying rights? I just think the whole concept is bizarre.

[John Q. Citizen]

399. Why do you think that a significant portion of the population are opposed to

civil rights for people who are GLBT?

[Zuiderelle]

406. Why do you think that a significant portion of the population is racist?

Because a significant portion of the population is afraid or anything that is not the same as they are.

Let's make a bunch of TV ads depicting roving groups of tall black men who help little old ladies across the street and save kittens from burning buildings. I'm sure that will completely reverse the racism in this country. Just as your suggested touchy-feely 'gays are wonderful people' ads would reverse the homophobia.

It's a nice idea, but it's not a solution to the problem. Only with time will these bigoted people finally realize that we are no different than they are, and many will never realize that. Just as many white people will always feel superior to black people no matter how much evidence there is to the contrary.

[John Q. Citizen]

408. There are ads just like you depict. Ads that challenge fears can work well.

If you don't deal with the fear, then, you don't deal with the underlying cause of bigotry. Which is fear. Fear of something unsaid, usually.

Most problems of this type don't have bullet solutions, where passing a law assuages the unspoken fears of the significant population of bigots. Clinton found that out when he tried to executively pass "Don't ask don't tell." He got a shit load of push back.

Ads like I suggested won't be the end all but they would be an opportunity to address those fears.

[Zuiderelle]

409. And there are also already ads encouraging kids to not discriminate based on sexual orientation.

I've seen them... with the little NBC "The more you know" jingle at the end. But putting more ads on television, putting money into that instead of putting money into electing politicians who will actual do something about our civil rights, that would be a waste.

In any case, it's but one tiny little suggestion, that is already being done, by depicting gay people positively on television shows, having gay people host popular talk shows, having celebrities come out of the closet. Those are even stronger methods than television ads, and they haven't gotten us equality.

[Silver Gaia]

383. JQC... ACT UP came up in some research I was doing for

an essay I wrote last semester, and I still have a link handy to the NY chapter of ACT UP. There's a lot of interesting info about their history on the site. From what you said above ("I've always thought it would be interesting to read up on their political story. How they saw the struggle."), I thought you might enjoy reading it.

http://www.actupny.org/

[John Q. Citizen]

398. thanks, Joolz. n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

118. That's absolutely correct.

I live in the heart of conservative landia and in their minds they are absolutely convinced about certain things and if you tell them it doesn't exist, they find some way to shut you out. It's best just to say, yes, that does happen, and we are completely against it for heterosexuals, as we are for homosexuals.

[LostinVA]

164. "It's best just to say, yes, that does happen..."

OMFG.

This is truly an irrational, hateful "argument."

[The Backlash Cometh]

203. So, you're saying that homosexual can never behave in an offensive

manner, the way that dumb jock heterosexuals have been known to act? It never happens?

[gollygee]

210. Any person can be offensive, but what does that have to do with GLBT marriage?

Should we outlaw heterosexual marriage because straight people are sometimes obnoxious and make unwelcome advances?

[donco6]

212. Well, of course it happens.

But how would granting rights to gays have any impact on that?

[The Backlash Cometh]

241. I thought you were concerned about the backlash that would come

with it, if people were not ready for it. That's what this exercise has been all about. How do we squelch the right-wing criticism, before they even get started.

[donco6]

249. I'm not at all concerned about the backlash.

They'll never be happy with it. They think being gay is the absolute WORST thing that can befall a man. There is NOTHING that will convince them otherwise. So let's just get it over with and let them start tearing their clothes and throwing dust in the air.

[The Backlash Cometh]

270. We all need to find some way to help them to accept the next step.

Until then, you're still going to have the disasterous impact of the next generations of David Brook types in the Republican party, doing heinous things to our country, in order to feel accepted.

Our country has been divided enough. If we're going to survive, we're going to have to do it by finding a way to meet half way.

[donco6]

275. Why?

Because they can't accept me, I have to sacrifice my rights? Isn't that why I don't have them in the first place?

You make no sense whatsoever.

[The Backlash Cometh]

278. You can do whatever you like.

Or, more to the point, get away with. But, that opposite and equal reaction thingie has a way of creeping up when you least expect it.

[donco6]

280. So, for fear of a negative reaction, I should content myself

to second-class status? They are NEVER going to have a positive reaction. NEVER. So what's the point of waiting? What's the point of relegating myself to the back of the bus? It's not like they are going to give up their seat willingly! It just isn't going to happen. We need to press for our rights and simply prepare for the yowling.

[The Backlash Cometh]

290. I don't think you should wait.

But I also don't think that you should be naive to believe that you won't be bothered with the conflict that will come from it. Look at Roe v. Wade. It's law and it's probably the biggest wedge issue in this country. I think all that backlash can be appeased, if we plan ahead.

[foreigncorrespondent]

261. No she isn't saying that at all!

It does happen, no one is denying that. What people are saying is, you are using your own prejudice to hold back a group of people because you fear they are going to hit on you. Tell me, is that because you realize if queers didn't have the fear and pressure of society holding us back that you might actually find the straights in the minority for a change?

No one can make an accurate account of how many queers there are around the world, so long as prejudice holds us back from coming out.

[LostinVA]

262. Oh yeah, that is soooooooooooo what I said

NOT.

Keep spinning.

You know exactly what I'm saying -- your disingenuity isn't too disingenuous.

"Hey, MLK, Jr., just admit that black men want to rape women, even if they don't -- how else are we gonna get those good old boys to let the Colored vote???"

Same thing.

[The Backlash Cometh]

303. Why don't you set the drama aside, and

try to speak clearly. I'll listen, or, at least, give it my best shot. I just won't accept canned answers.

[donco6]

211. What's to fear from being "hit on"?

You say "no thanks, I'm straight" and move on . . . sheesh.

[The Backlash Cometh]

243. I perceive something very different with the term, "hit on."

It, somehow, doesn't seem very respectful.

[donco6]

246. Well, how about a definition then?

Because I really don't want to be disrespectful of people. But it's not like people wear signs around their neck, "Hi, don't ask me out, because I'm straight." I just have to read the clues that are there. So I should just quake in fear because I just MIGHT make a mistake?

[The Backlash Cometh]

267. How about establishing a platonic relationship first, before jumping

the gun?

[donco6]

273. Oooh-kay.

So a straight guy meets a cute girl on the 5 p.m. train. They strike up a conversation - things seem nice - she's single, he's single. "How about stopping for a drink sometime?" he asks. She grins and nods yes, that would be great.

Gay guy meets guy on train. They strike up a conversation - things seem nice - both are single and seem interested in similar things. "How about stopping for a drink sometime?" he asks. Other guy punches the guy in face, screaming, "How about establishing a platonic relationship first, faggot!"

[The Backlash Cometh]

283. Lots of assumptions there.

First of all, I don't think there are too many women who will accept to go out with someone who they just met on a train, so, I don't think that's a good example.

However, just to pick up the pace of the conversation, just for the hell of it, do you think that women get "propositioned" by women in a public bathroom more, less or the same as men do in the men's room by another man?

Me? Never have been "propositioned" in a woman's bathroom. In fact, it's probably the safest place I've ever been in, as far as not getting unwanted advances, unless of course you count mystery odor attacks from the next stall over.

[donco6]

285. Not having been in a women's bathroom, I cannot say.

But from what I know about women's sexual habits and appetites, I would imagine it's very rare for a lesbian to proposition a woman in a bathroom. It just doesn't sound right to me.

[The Backlash Cometh]

291. Thank you, very much.

Thank you, thank you. We've made some inroads.

[Zuiderelle]

316. The condescension in your posts in this thread is stifling.

Now I think you're just pretending to be so horrid.

[The Backlash Cometh]

331. Do you even see the point I'm making?

I doubt it. I doubt you're even trying.

[LostinVA]

325. It doesn't happen, trust me

[Midlodemocrat]

351. My cousin met his wife on a train.

So your anecdotal evidence is crapola.

No absolutes.

[Hepburn]

374. Exactly...

...I am female and straight and I have been hit on by a woman a few times and actually I was flattered. I just said that I was straight and I thanked her for the compliment. No one was embarrassed and no one was uncomfortable. Why would I make her uncomfortable for paying me a compliment by showing interest in me? Same with straight guys who did not interest me. I said thank you for the compliment, but this was just not the right time for me to get involved. There are polite ways to turn someone down when that person has basically paid you a compliment.

The only time that I have ever been offended when anyone has hit on me? If it was done in a crude manner.

Crude crosses all lines. Polite interest crosses all lines, too. It is NOT a gay, straight, racial thing.

However, I just do NOT see where any of this dating/mating etiquette is related to the rights of any group. Beyond me.

[foreigncorrespondent]

256. And the reason you fail is simple.

Everybody knows that the majority of people who hit on other people is usually the straight male looking to get his dick wet. Yet as a straight person you enjoy all the rights associated with your sexuality. Yet you would deny us rights because we might hit on you. You really are a class act TBC.

FYI: queers are meant to be the minority, so it really can't happen as often as you obviously would like it to happen.

[The Backlash Cometh]

293. I shall ask you a question, and let's see if you can be honest about the

answer:

Do women in a lady's room get "propositioned" more, less or the same, as men do in a men's room?

[foreigncorrespondent]

301. ROFLMAO

You have shown us how homophobic you are, why do you want to continue?

Stop spinning a right wing argument.

Tell me, do men get picked up every single time they walk into a bathroom? Do women for that matter?

Yes I just love walking into a dunny which usually smells like shit, because someone has recently had one. Turns me on so much it turns me into a raving psycho who needs to be laid right then and there.

Give me a break.

[The Backlash Cometh]

306. That's not an honest answer.

The answer is simple. Women rarely, no, never get propositioned by other women in a woman's room. But that's not the same experience that men get in the men's room, is it? No, it's not. I have several male friends who have had at least one "proposition" made to them, and that is a source of concern. It's not just testimonials, either. There are courses that cover this material because it's a public health and safety issue. Certainly makes you think when you have to let your six year old go in alone. This is what I'm talking about when I say there are things we can do better to avoid breaching the comfort zones of those who would stand in your way from happily enjoying a marriage bill.

[foreigncorrespondent]

312. Yes...

...so because you have several male friends who have had this happen means that all queers are oversexed idiots who will enter bathrooms for the purpose of getting laid by straight men. Because this happens all the time, because you have several male friends.

I am surprised you have any friends at all, actually.

[Jonathan50]

335. I'm a not unattractive fifty six year old heterosexual male.

I've *never* in my life been "hit on" in a mens restroom and no man has ever told me that he has had that happen to him either.

I *was* groped once at twelve years old by an older redneck "family friend", I just pushed him off walked away and never told anyone about it. The only time I've ever been "hit on" by a gay man was when I was about eighteen and hitch hiking. Got picked up by a guy that put his hand on my leg, I just gently pushed it away and told him I didn't swing that way, he never pushed the issue and it was no big deal.

My wife is a young looking forty seven with long dark hair and she got "hit on" twice in the time it took her to eat a salad after a business meeting in a restaurant/bar just a couple of months ago. She finds it flattering and a compliment to her attractiveness and just gently tells the men that she's not interested in having a drink with them.

[NMMNG]

355. I've never been propositioned by a strange woman in a rest room

Nor have I been propositioned by a woman I didn't know/barely knew anywhere for that matter. I have, however, been propositioned by men who were complete strangers many times (including a guy who looked only at my boobs and asked "are they taken"?).

It has nothing to do with gay vs. straight. It has to do with, and I'm quoting several men here as well as many women, the fact that in many cases men. are. pigs..

[Zuiderelle]

320. Why don't you just ask, Do straight men pursue anonymous sex more than straight women?

And there you might find the answer, that there are likely more men in general who would welcome anonymous sex more than women, be they gay or straight. You aren't making any point at all regarding gay marriage. You're only making a point about society related to male versus female. And even then, you are making a very broad generalization.

[Midlodemocrat]

352. Are you kidding me?

NEVER. Not once and that goes for me, my teenaged daughter, my 10yo and my sisters in law and their daughters.

Holy crap! Where do you live that this constant 24/7 propositioning goes on?

[Lost-in-FL]

296. Look out!!!

Gay men are on a rampage, looking for heterosexuals to suck... their blood!!! LOOK OUT!!! LOOK OUT!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

402. "They're out to get you..."

:rofl:

[LanternWaste]

416. Maybe I speak only for myself...

I'm neither the most stupid nor the most obtuse guy in the world, yet I don't comprehend what you're saying either. Without negative implication on my part, your posts have been somewhat incoherent insofar as you seem to make reference without context.

As far as I can tell, you're saying that '...flaming homosexuals and flaming heterosexuals should both keep it in check, although current and common (mis)perception warrants that it's only the flaming homosexuals who prevent the common man from tolerance, and finally acceptance of alternative lifestyles-- flaming heterosexuals will be accepted, while their counterparts in the gay community will not.' Is that a correct summation of what your position is?

Maybe I speak only for myself, maybe I speak for a handful, but why not simply and plainly state this position of yours that so many of us have failed to understand?

[Midlodemocrat]

425. Bingo. And to state it any clearer runs the risk

of those posts being labeled as homophobic by a homophobe.

Hence the obtuseness.

[LanternWaste]

430. Then I guess I'm running a risk by stating it clearly...

Then I guess I'm running a risk by stating it clearly. Let's wait and see how many flames I get, shall we?

I'm betting none, because I believe that if one can state a position clearly with little room for error or misinterpretation, our gentle readers have the depth of both wit and wisdom to understand if a statement I post is actually my own opinion or one I believe is that of others, regardless of whether I disagree with it or not.

Personally, I believe that one runs the greater risk by being obtuse... but that's just me.


On Edit: Crap. Although I preached about clear and concise communication, I just realized how damn snarky my reply to you sounded. Not meant as such by any stretch of the imagination. You now have one free "Call Lantern Waste Anything You Want Without Consequence" card.

[Midlodemocrat]

432. I don't think you will be flamed.

Most people agree with you in regards to the obtuseness.

And, you're 100% correct. If you're going to state a position over and over and over, word it so people can understand what you mean.

I think I was reading about 100 posts before I finally *got it*.

[ieoeja]

52. So you always say "yes" to the men who proposition you?

That post doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Surely you have been propositioned by men who didn't interest you. Why is that different than being propositioned by a woman?

I hear this a lot from men who say they would "kill" any man who propositioned them. And I find this so very weird. I have been propositioned numerous times by gay men. I find it flattering! And if they want to buy me a drink thinking they're going to get somewhere, well... I'm all for free drinks.

You don't want to know how far I'll go for free booze.

[The Backlash Cometh]

55. Excuse me, but in no way could you possibly have gathered that

I was given the courtesy of a proposition. And yes, I have been propositioned before and I politely refused and the friendship continued. This was something else.

[ieoeja]

57. Sure I can.

"I have also had a lesbian make physical advances which were absolutely not wanted"

Some woman tried feeling you up. And this is different from a man doing so because either (a) it has never happened, (b) you don't object to an undesirable man feeling you up or (c) fill-in-the-blank because I can't think of anything else that fits.

And how many lesbians have tried forcing themselves onto you that makes you believe this is part of the gay agenda?

[The Backlash Cometh]

115. How is it different? LOL!

It's the same! That's my whole point. It's the same. But in my liberal days, the liberal comeback to anyone who didn't accept such advances was considered uptight. "Uptight" was a hot word back in my time. "How do you know if you don't like it, if you don't try it?" It was a different time. Yes, we were stupid. Caveman stupid, because someone had to go through it to reach the point where we can turn around and say, hey, it's wrong. If it's wrong for heterosexuals, it's wrong for YOU. And believe me, that was not an easy point to get across back in the Liberal days. People were coming out and embracing their gayness for the first time, and quite a bit of common sense went out the window back in the 80s, when common sense was what we desperately needed as a nation.

By the way, what happened was clearly a direct effort to embarrass. I had seen a friend in the parking lot and went to greet her. She was with a group of her friends. My friend was in her twenties and had just left her husband because she decided she preferred women. I gave her all the support I could muster during this transition stage. Her new friends were lesbians and knew that I was there in the parking lot to meet up with a class and our teacher. The teacher and a few classmates had arrived at the same time and were approaching us when one of my friend's girlfriends grabs me and smacks one on the lips. I had never been grabbed in such an offensive manner by a man, perhaps because the rules of ettiquette are so well spelled out. And I never really put myself in a situation ever again for it to happen, so you might say that was the end of that.

You know what they say, If you fool me once, I won't be fooled again.

[Zuiderelle]

117. In your "liberal days?" You make liberal sound like a bad word.

What common sense went out the window when people embraced their gayness? I really want to know what you mean by that.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience with a person who had no boundaries and made inappropriate sexual advances towards you. That one person has nothing whatsoever to do with everyone else though. That's pretty simplistic of you. Basically, you're saying that a lesbian kissed you without you wanting it, and now you will have nothing to do with gay people because of it. Has a straight person ever done something you didn't like? Did you alienate all straight people because of it?

[The Backlash Cometh]

120. LOL!

I'm a self-proclaimed eccentric recluse, so, yes, I do tend to keep to myself. My youth, however, was spent eagerly meeting new and different kinds of people. That entire desire to be around "different" ended with an alliance of community activists who ran from Green, to Republican to Libertarian. Nobody could agree on anything, and in the end, I just got burned out. Republican/Libertarian polices were creating the problems that brought us all together, but the Republican/Libertarians couldn't understand how their desire for no government regulations, also created the loss of public lands, parks, bad zonings rules etc.

I've never had a problem with heterosexual men because the rules seem to be better defined. Remember, there are 90% of them to your 10%, so more contacts, and their rules of etiquette have been around for centuries, by the way. There are rules of decorum.

I haven't had any experience with gay people recently because I have been a stay at home mom for the last 18 years and have no social life. LOL!

Oh, and I was referring to the book, "And the Band Played On," when I was referring to common sense in the 80s. I think it was Randy Shilts himself who said that gays were coming out for the first time, embracing their homosexuality, and would not listen to the warnings about AIDS.

[ieoeja]

133. I sort of understand.

Like the couple (straight or gay) making out on the street then looking to see who might be "scandalized" by their behavior. That doesn't make them Liberal, Progressive, Conservative, Libertarian, LaRouchie, Green, Ku Klux Klan, Davidian, etc. It makes them young and stupid. You are taking your personal experience with a handful of idiots and applying it with a very broad brush.

Actually, you remind me of all the "I used to be a Democrat" rightwingers like David Brock. Brock turned out to have been a former Communist. He was NEVER a Democrat. When the evil of his first ideology finally dawned on him, he went way over to the other side never dreaming that 90% of the country, including virtually the entirety of the Democratic Party, was somewhere in between the two extremes.

[The Backlash Cometh]

214. Some of us found out the hard way that

sometimes it is very difficult to follow the premise, "they can do whatever they like, as long as they don't hurt me." We found out that there are some mistakes we make that are not personal, nor private, as much as we would like them to be. Now, THAT, is a broad brush.

But, yes, mark me down as a disenfranchised ex-liberal.

[Zuiderelle]

149. Re. warnings about AIDS, I suppose that now is the time for straights to lack common sense.

Since the majority of new HIV cases occur in heterosexuals.

I'm fascinated that you think heterosexual men follow any defined rules. Unless those rules are that they think they are gifts to women and have the right to flirt with any women they find attractive.

It's also fascinating that you have such strong opinions about what we as homosexuals need to do to improve our image, when you haven't had any experience with gay people for the past 18 years. LOL!

[The Backlash Cometh]

230. A good point.

I'm sure in 18 years everything has changed. That's why everyone is welcoming you all with open arms.

[Zuiderelle]

321. Wow... you really are a snotty thing, aren't you?

[foreigncorrespondent]

266. I am too!

I'm fascinated that you think heterosexual men follow any defined rules.

What defined rules. I am a lesbian, but to look at me not many would know, unless I wanted them to know. So I have had my fair share of straight men coming onto me, even during the 7 years I have been with Sapphocrat.

Just before I actually got together with Sapph, I had a very large man come onto me. He honestly believed he would be able to cure me of ever wanting to be another woman. His advances were disgusting. Right down to the grope between my legs he believed was his right, to him asking me to get nude pictures taken of myself, sending them to him, so he would masturbate over them.

Shall I talk about the man I was dating for 15 years of my life, that believed no was yes because he owned me and subsequently raped me as a result?

Shall I talk about the recent one (with in the last two weeks) where I had a male pin me down proceed to try and rip my clothes off, because he believed he had every right to me, because I was wearing make up and looked hot?

And I could go on about the "defined rules" straight men tend to use, but I think I have made my point.

[The Backlash Cometh]

286. If I may intrude,

You're a lesbian, but dated a man for fifteen years? Did you realize you were gay after you dated him? How long were you with the cretin who did the other things? Me, I have no trouble communicating how I feel when I disagree with someone, and if I feel I'm unable to get my point across, I never, never put myself in a situation where we're in the same room again. I avoid them like the plague. And you are blessed more than most because you could leave the company of men, and never look back.

If these things happened to you here in the USA, you should have reported it. That's what I mean by defined rules. As well as be able to tell him off, and he would know without question, that he was the one that crossed the line.

[foreigncorrespondent]

297. Your post is insulting on so many levels...

...I just don't know where to begin.

The history about my sexuality is of no concern here, but I will answer it for the simple reason I don't hide things when I am being as open and honest about my private life as I have already been.

I have known I was a lesbian since I was a little girl. At a very young age I developed a crush on Wonder Woman, and then a close friend to my grandmother, who wasn't near my grandmothers age.

It wasn't until I was in my teens that I began to realize what my having crushes on women actually meant. That realization to me meant my family would be ashamed of me. They would disown me and I would be on my own, because I had some awful disease that was incurable and no one wants to be around someone like that. So my only alternative was to hide this part of me and just begin living my life as a lie.

I met the male I was involved with at age 16. This was during a very rough period of my teens when I would be bashed at home on an almost daily basis, so I took my meeting him as a sign of finally be able to get away from what was misery, while not being alone with no one around, so I took the opportunity and didn't look back.

He was a total chauvinist raised in a new Australian home, where the male dominated everything, including the direct ownership of the woman sharing his bed. I tolerated this because I was young, stupid, naive, and very scared of having absolutely no one in my life. Can you say battered wife syndrome?

He didn't rape me once, he raped me several times over the 15 year period. But due to fears I had, I kept on putting up with it.

It wasn't until I hit 30 that I realized I just couldn't continue living this way. I was denying who I was. I was denying my family of ever knowing me properly, because I was hiding in a big dark closet.

As you can see, that has all changed now.

Now to your insults.

And you are blessed more than most because you could leave the company of men, and never look back.

Blessed you say? You think I want to live my life where I can't have the person I love more than life itself because of people with opinions like yours? That ain't blessed, that is hell.

And I never chose to leave the company of men. I chose to live my life as a lie. When I hit 30 I chose not to go on living that lie and came out. Those are the only choices I have ever made concerning my sexuality.

If these things happened to you here in the USA, you should have reported it. That's what I mean by defined rules.

So now the U.S. is the only country to be so defined as to have rules to keep men in line? Please give me a break.

Those rules don't stop things like what I have mentioned from happening. Why? Because society looks at women who have been in this position as the instigator. That she deserved what she got. So long as we have attitudes like that expressed right across the world, women will be too afraid to have charges made against these perps.

My experience with the rather heavy set guy, was in the U.S. Louisiana to be precise. The rest have all happened in Australia where we have rules too. But we also still have prejudice so the rules don't work.

I suggest you stop digging yourself an even deeper hole. You have made your feelings quite known to us. And quite frankly, you say you support full equality, but with the homophobic feelings you have expressed, I really don't want you on my team. You being there does little to help us advance our cause for full equality.

[The Backlash Cometh]

302. Thank you for your sincerity.

I'm sorry for what you have had to experience, and I wish I could tell you that, if you live in the USA, this marriage bill will be the end of what you'll have to endure, but sadly, it will not be the end. If you live in the US, I hope that you will have more sense than I and find a state, or atleast a city that embraces your life choices. I don't have that luxury, so I face reality every day living in a conservative town, and I don't know what it will take to bridge the multiple gaps that seperate everyone, but, I think the only failure is in not trying.

[foreigncorrespondent]

304. How about you try being sincere!

or atleast a city that embraces your life choices

Choice indeed?

No honey (oops best retract that, you might think I am coming onto you. So sorry), I do not live in the U.S. Know why? Because people who are just as bigoted as you make the rules, so my partner was never able to sponsor me for immigration. Now, I don't have that partner any longer, thanks to bigots like you.

[The Backlash Cometh]

308. Unload if it makes you feel better.

I don't blame you. Just writing to make myself clearer. You used the word, "chauvinist" to describe the men and environment you were in. The opposite of the word, for me, is "choice." To be free to be able to do the things that are not rigidly expected of you. "Choice."

So, I apologize if my choice of the word, "choice," was the wrong one and it offended you.

[foreigncorrespondent]

311. Keep digging.

Chauvinism isn't a choice, it is something that is taught, not something that is chosen.

You knew damn well I would be offended by your use of the word choice. You intended on that happening. Are you happy now that you have managed to get that reaction out of me?

[The Backlash Cometh]

326. Believe it or not,

I didn't intentionally set out to offend you. Remember, I haven't been around the gay community for several years and I just forgot proper etiquette. See, it's that simple to offend, and that easy to correct if someone tries.

I do partly disagree with you on that bit about the chauvinism. It is a choice. Yes, it is taught, and in some societies, it is the mores, but that which is not genetically predetermined, can be rejected as part of free will. It may not be an easy choice, but change never is.

What is that line? The time will come when we must decide between what is right and what is easy.

[foreigncorrespondent]

340. Yes...

...but when something is drummed into your head from a constant young age you are going to believe those things for the rest of your life, no matter what.

For me, I was always told I would never be any good. I would never amount to anything. And I would never know what true love was all about, because I was rejecting the kind of love this person wanted to continue giving me. That has been drummed into me so much, I really do believe them to this day.

That man I dated for 15 years he told me I was ugly, just ask Sapphocrat how low my self esteem is, she could tell you, she dealt with it for 7 years.

[The Backlash Cometh]

394. I am sorry you had those bad experiences.

But I am happy you did find Sapphocrat to help you through it. As for that low self-esteem issue, I can tell you from my personal experience that it might be because you care too much about what other people think and you allow them to decide for you if you are successful or not. It is very, very hard to break away from a bad connection and sometimes, there are very few options left, the older you get. They say withdrawal is a reaction to an abusive situation. Stay young, and don't withdraw. Find a good support system and find whatever it is that makes you feel good about yourself, then keep doing whatever that is with passion. Soon, that thing that you created with your hands or which you created in your mind begins to define who you are, and it will give you strength and be your shield against all those people who thought you were not capable of great things.

[foreigncorrespondent]

401. WTF???

Please don't assume to know anything about my low self esteem issue, other than what I have told you.

I don't give a flying fuck what others think of me, because they aren't important to me. If I thought that, then I wouldn't be here now, standing up to the phobes.

What I do give a flying fuck about though, is all you straight people who offer me advice on how to live my life, when you know absolutely nothing about me apart from what I have told you, or what it is like to be queer in a world where there are an awful lot of bigots, both blatant and stealth.

[Zuiderelle]

315. ...

I don't know what to say... other than :hug: I'm very very sorry for your loss, and I blame people like this for it too.

[Zuiderelle]

313. They are not "life choices"... how many times do people have to hear that?

[The Backlash Cometh]

329. As many times as you have to correct them (us)...

because you're teaching proper etiquette and these things sometimes require repetition. Yes, it's PC, but it's also good manners.

[donco6]

347. It's also considered good manners to pay attention.

It's like having someone have to repeat their name . . . several times. After the second time, it's just plain rude. Even Letitia Baldridge would tell you that.

[The Backlash Cometh]

393. Yes, I know.

And for that, I apologize. However, be prepared because there are a lot of rude people in the world, and if you like, you could always chose my way, and live a reclusive life to shelter yourself from other people's bad intentions, or you can find strength in numbers and trooper on.

[Zuiderelle]

396. So, since I'm gay, it's my lot in life to have to teach etiquette. LOL

No thanks, I'm tired of teaching people to act like human beings. After 20+ years of repetition, I'm done with this teaching business. If you haven't learned proper etiquette yet, and I'm guessing we are probably about the same age, then it's YOUR problem. In a roundabout way, it's my problem too, since you remain ignorant about gay people, but I think it's time to cut my losses with people like you, and concentrate on people who really DO want to elevate themselves to a more enlightened and understanding place.

[Midlodemocrat]

433. Do you want to borrow my copy of Emily Post?

:rofl:

:hi:

[Lost-in-FL]

288. ...

BRAVO!! :applause: :applause:

As women we have to tolerate unwanted advances from even the must disgusting assholes. But my guess is that homophobic men are intellectually incapable to deal with such advances just the way we do.

[foreigncorrespondent]

305. Thank you! n/t

[Zhade]

"she decided she preferred women" - she didn't decide, she realized.

You sound like you don't know sexual orientation is something with which you're born.

You sound afraid of us queers, actually, which is unfortunate.

[The Backlash Cometh]

245. She must have been afraid of you as well,

since those were her words.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

74. Huh?

:wtf:

[LostinVA]

80. WTF are you talking about?

Ugh.

Gay marriage harm's the public's safety, health and welfare. And, homos like to sexually attack people.

[foreigncorrespondent]

269. Hey LVA...

...I am thinking of having a get together in Australia very soon where we can go out and sexually attack straight women. Care to join me? Tell Haruka I know she would love to be in on this.

And for those stupid enough not to recognize sarcasm when it hits them this is for you: :sarcasm:

[donco6]

282. Can I come, too?

Jesus, this thread is making my head hurt. On so many levels.

[foreigncorrespondent]

284. Of course you can!

The more we have the more straight people we can sexually abuse in one night. ;)

I know what you mean. I have had a headache for days, it had eased a little today, but it is raging again with some of the comments in this thread.

[LostinVA]

327. Can we go to mall dunnies? PLEASE???

I love attacking straight women in bathrooms -- it's so fucking hot. God, the sight of the tampon machines and the smell of unflushed pee makes me all.... well, let's go say tres stimulated.

[foreigncorrespondent]

339. Of course we can!

Tell me, would you like to hit the same mall we hit last time we did this here? Or would you like me to take you to the big posh mall up the road, so we can sexually attack rich women with boring husbands?

[LostinVA]

403. OOOH -- the big posh mall!

Those bored rich women LOVE hanging around bathrooms waiting for lesbian sexual predators....

[Jamastiene]

362. Oh yes, we gays are on the rampage just knocking down

doors to attack people. Damn, I never heard that call to arms. I must have missed a memo.

[yurbud]

87. gay marriage won't affect someone making an unwanted pass at you

actually, it might give some timid closet cases the courage to come out.

The times that I have been hit on by members of the same sex, they have been either bi or closet cases looking to be able to say what they did after sex in Brokeback:

"I aint no queer," one said.

"Neither am I," the other said.

[The Backlash Cometh]

124. Perhaps I was looking beyond preaching to the choir.

I can't imagine that anybody on DU would have a problem with a gay marriage bill. However, instead of a mutual admiration thread, I thought it was more productive to attack the things that would stop you from achieving your goal.

[Zuiderelle]

154. You've known a few gay people 18 years ago, and watched a film about bathhouses in the 80s...

and now somehow you are the authority on what we need to do to achieve equality. You're right, that your fears and the fears of others like you are what contributes to our remaining second-class citizens. I'm just confused why a progressive, posting on a democratic website, would have such right-wing misguided fears.

[yurbud]

202. you mean like not wearing assless leather chaps on TV?

[belladonna]

103. I just have to know WTF you mean by #2

"Whatever rights are allowed, should never breach the government's right to protect the public's safety, health and welfare"

Maybe I'm just thick today, but please explain this to me :shrug:

[belladonna]

111. Nevermind, someone else explained it to me

And you know what? This is the same kind of fucked up attitude that leads to gay bashing and all the horrible hate crimes out there. So, gays as a WHOLE just want to hit on anything that moves? That's like saying every straight guy out there who works in an office job with a secretary is going to hit on her.... wait, not ALL straight guys are like that, right?

This just proves out my theory. I've said for awhile now that people like us, fortunately not all of us, but a large segment of the so-called "straight community" have had it so damn good for so damn long that we've become THAT arrogant... to think that somehow we're so damn desirable that no gay man will be able to resist hitting on a straight guy, the same with a lesbian. I am under no such delusion. Have I been hit on by another woman? Yep, but I've been hit on by wayyyyyy more men and, honestly, this girl who hit on me? She was a hell of a less lot upset about being turned down than any guy who ever hit on me. I know TONS of gay and bi people and, let me assure you, THEY DO NOT WANT YOU. Being gay is not a fucking addiction or sickness that a person cannot control. I'm just going to stop ranting now because I have a sinking feeling that anything more I say will fall on deaf ears

[The Backlash Cometh]

126. WTF?

I was thinking of Randy Shilts and "And the Band Played on." His book documented the resistance from the gay community to close the gay bathhouses, even though the activities that were taking place in them back in the 80s was helping transmit the virus. If we had to do it again, and we could have stopped the death of 100,000 people, would you have been on the side that would have closed those bathhouses?

Something like this may happen again, what side will you be on if it does?

[belladonna]

144. And I was thinking of the Boy Scouts, etc

And the attitudes that closed gay men out of being Scout leaders. I was thinking of this attitude that all gays are perverts who just wanna have sex with whoever happens to be standing there at the moment. The bathhouses? Are you seriously going to tell me that we need to FEAR the gays because SOME of them supported keeping bathhouses open? And something else... why the hell do you think they protested closing the bathhouses? Could it have had something to do with the fact that homophobia was SO widely accepted back then that these places were one of the few places where they could go to be themselves without fear of being strung up for being gay?

Yeah, AIDs is a terrible thing, but I'm sick of this fucking attitude that it's all the gay's fault. Tell that to all those children in Africa dying of AIDs. Or are we all missing some horrible truth? Did all the gays invade Africa and bring the AIDs to them? And btw, I will ALWAYS be on the side of equality for EVERYBODY... even the rights of misguided homophobes to say what they have to say. Better to know what they think than wait til you meet them in a dark alley somewhere, right?

[Midlodemocrat]

158. Except that the demographics for AIDS have shifted and now

African American Women have the greatest number of cases. Should we tell African American women to stop having sex?

Because it seems to me that that is what you are arguing for. Closet, repressed human beings who have a different sexuality than you do.

[ScreamingMeemie]

108. Have you spoken with a trained therapist about these unwarranted

fears?

Your nutshell appears to be empty. "peer pressure to try something for the wrong reason". I am highly disturbed by this statement. Did you decide to be straight? Try it on for size first? :shrug:

[The Backlash Cometh]

128. Grumpy ole puss.

I was thinking of children. Young adults of today. You know, it's not as easy to get laid as it was back in our time. I often wonder how difficult it must be for a shy heterosexual male to find his groove.

[Midlodemocrat]

137. Not that hard. Just ask my son.

Not that hard at all.

Now, an acquaintance of his, who is about to come out of the closet, he's having a hard time finding his groove because of attitudes like the one of which you speak.

[cboy4]

162. Grumpy ole puss? You remind of that Grumpy old man

character played by Dana Carvey on Saturday Night Live.

Grumpy Old Man: "In my day, we didn't have video-games! We just sat around and watched a potata' bake! And that's the way we liked it!"

It's 2007...not 1927 :hi:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

163. Dagnabbit!

:rofl:

[ScreamingMeemie]

220. I don't know, when I "came of age" in 1984, it wasn't so very different.

:hi:

[donco6]

229. I think you get more confusing with every post.

"I often wonder how difficult it must be for a shy heterosexual male to find his groove."

Huh? You think that a young man might "turn gay" if he's propositioned and - because of peer pressure - "gives in" to a gay "advance". (Sorry for all the quotation marks - I don't have good definitions on ANY of those things).

Oh brother . . .

[Midlodemocrat]

426. Oh, NO! I had lunch with Haruka and LostinVa on Sunday!

I wonder if they gave me the gay?

I kissed my son when I came home! Did I give the gay to him?


In other words, poster to whom you are speaking is bsi.











Bat Shit Insane.

:hi:

[foreigncorrespondent]

276. MrsG

Let me just say I am so sorry for flirting with you the other day. What you must have thought of me. All those unwanted advances of mine. I shall never do it again!!

BTW you look hot in leathers, swinging that whip!

[ScreamingMeemie]

294. ...

:spray:

:yourock: so much.

Luckily, I somehow managed.

[foreigncorrespondent]

298. ...

:hug:

[Warren DeMontague]

138. So I guess that Nirvana song with the line "Everyone is gay" in it should be banned?

Just wonderin'.

[donco6]

206. How would I know an advance was undesired?

And what *is* an "advance," anyway? Is it just asking someone out for a date? Is it physical molestation? Somewhere in the middle? How does a gay guy ever know when it's OK to ask someone out on a date, if they may "never make an undesired verbal advance?" Is it not OK for him to take a chance that someone might be gay? I don't get it.

And when would granting me rights ever breach the government's right to protect the public safety? Do you have an example? I'm scratching my head on that one . . .

[LeftishBrit]

257. Surely 'undesired physical and verbal advances' have nothing to do with marriage rights?

Persisting in advances that are clearly unwelcome, or making advances in an inappropriate place or context, would count as sexual harrassment. And I agree that this is equally true for heterosexuals and gays, and for men and women. But sexual harrassment and marriage are (I hope!!!!) two totally different things. Gay marriage rights have nothing to do with the issue. Nor are gays any more likely to harrass others sexually than heterosexuals.

[ProudDad]

295. The current science tells us

that "homosexuality" and "heterosexuality" are two poles on a continuum. Nearly everyone has elements of both in their makeup the only question is in what proportion at what age(s).

As for being "hit on" by others, I've been "hit on" by all combinations. If I was receptive, I was receptive. If I wasn't receptive, I made that clear. In NO case was I overly offended. It usually didn't really ruin my day...

YOU are responsible for YOUR emotions and reactions. Don't blame them on someone else...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

299. Whaaaaaat?

I've had lesbians drop hints at me. I just casually mention some of my past relationships with men, and they drop the subject. I have NEVER been sexually harrassed by a lesbian. Wish I could say the same about heterosexual men.

[Jamastiene]

360. wtf?

I suggest grabbing a dictionary and looking up the two words, pedophilia and homosexuality. They are two unrelated things. There are straight pedophiles too. Last time I checked 2 consenting adults who want to get married are not after children. What you seem to believe because of one bad experience is different from what the majority of the GLBT community that I have met feel when it comes to the issue. I highly suggest you commit the difference between the definitions of the two words, pedophilia and homosexuality, to memory for future reference.

[sniffa]

17. no, just pounced on my the oversensitive crowd

[Bluebear]

148. Thank heavens for the subthread above.

It's so very, very crucial to the discussion. :crazy:

[LostinVA]

165. I know, and it's so very, very rational

[Caution]

388. So basically you don't like being hit on

however you wish to say it (unwanted sexual aggression should not be allowed until a platonic relationship is first established).

And thus if homosexuality is accepted you fear being hit on more often?

Wow. Just wow. How exactly do you think most relationships in this country start? Ever try simply using the words "No thanks I'm not interested?" If that doesn't work the person who pushes too far is an asshole regardless of sexuality.

As a straight guy who spent a lot of time in gay bars in support of his best friend, I used that exact line quite often. Not ONCE did I feel anything but flattered that someone would be interested in me and not ONCE did I feel threatened in any manner.

I think rather than restricting the rights of a large minority that maybe those who fear unwanted advances should 1.) grow a backbone and 2.) takea self-defense course if their fear is quite so extreme.

[porphyrian]

5. I'm not standing in your way. I think we should all be treated equally by law. - n/t

[helderheid]

6. It won't cost me anything other than my efforts to make sure it happens and in return, I GAIN with

friends and family in the GLBT community being seen as complete and whole equal human beings, not to mention the rights that go along with that recognition.

[LostinVA]

81. Thanks -- I ALWAYS appreciate your comments!

[Laurab]

141. What she said! n/t

[lukasahero]

7. Wish I could remember which political figure

here in Massachusetts noted that "the only impact gay marriage has had on straight people were the folks who had to buy a wedding gift for their neighbors".

I don't understand straights, and worse - progressives/liberals - who believe this is not our fight, who believe ANYone should have to "wait" for society to "get around" to "their issues". I swear if I hear one more person say "You should wait until the Dems get back in power" (hey, aren't they IN power now?), I am going to lose it. Why on earth would anyone trust that line of thinking - if you're not willing to fight for my rights now, why would I believe you'll do it later?

[izzybeans]

8. Won't it cause your marriage to break up? I mean if we allow "it"

what's to stop us straights from catching the gay. Everybody knows that. :sarcasm:

I agree with you 100%. Civil rights for GLBT's cost me nothing, but costs some family and friends a whole heck of a lot for them not to be extended.

[BOSSHOG]

9. Zip. Zero. Nada.

The religious zealots who get out of bed every morning raring to hate are the cost factor in this country. Tying up courts with knucklhead legislation, wasting the time of state and federal legislators with their need to codify their hate.

The constitution is a shield, not a weapon and if used as such there is no cost relative to any citizen. Use it as a weapon as zealots would love to do and the costs would be catastropic for our country.

I DID NOT SPEND 24 YEARS IN UNIFORM SUPPORTING AND DEFENDING THE BIBLE.

[mmonk]

10. True justice will be cost free.

It certainly won't take anything away from me or my family. I'm on board.

[MuseRider]

11. I am behind you

100%. Nicely said.

As far as I am concerned my rights will be enhanced if everyone has the same rights. My life as a citizen will be enhanced if we ever come close in this country to being what we say we are. If you meet the obligations of a citizen you should have all the rights and privileges of a citizen. I do, you do and all we had to do to get it was get the fuck out of bed in the morning and breathe. How does that make any sense?

I am sick of fighting this stupid fight. I can't see any reason at all for this to continue. I would really like someone to give us some answers as to why this is having to be fought. Real answers, not answers that fall under the headings of "unprovable superstitions" or personal "feelings". Real answers to the question of why this is even a concern of anyone other than the people wanting to get married.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bicentennial_baby]

13. Um, chill out...

There are plenty here that are not on board for marriage equality. Those are the ones being addressed...Defensive much?

[devilgrrl]

16. Yep. Especially about topics that have been discussed ad nauseum...

by people who are fine with gays, gay marriage, etc....

I'm annoyed that someone finds the need to accuse progressives of denying equal rights.

[lukasahero]

22. Can you point out the accusations in the OP?

'Cause I can't see any....

[Midlodemocrat]

23. Because there aren't any. Thank you. That was a nice comment.

[LostinVA]

82. Exactly

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zuiderelle]

41. How about all the DUers who are NOT "fine with gays" ?

There are plenty. Regardless, I didn't find anything in the OP that was accusatory. I found it very supportive.

Have you really not read all the posts from progressives here telling gay people that their civil rights aren't as important as everything else?

[Midlodemocrat]

43. If she had read the OP in its entirety, she wouldn't be

assuming that I'm gay. So, it was probably a knee jerk.

[Zuiderelle]

46. Good point.

And I'll let it be a lesson to me to hold my knees if they start twitching before I finish reading something. :D

[LostinVA]

83. Exactly what I was thinking, Midlo

"Oh, just one of those over-sensitive lesbians spouting off."

She saw the avatar and that was it.

[swimboy]

44. Oops. My bad. You were deadly fucking earnest.

(and it's ad nauseam)

It turns out the people who are NOT fine with it don't discuss it favourably. And some of those folks ARE here. And I'm a person who is agitating for change. That does tend to get under the skin of those who prefer not to change.

Midlo kindly did NOT accuse. She was rallying. But you should not deny that there are progressives not eager for my equal rights. I have seen them myself.

[sniffa]

14. wow

she won't STFU, and neither wiLL we.

and yes, some DUers are enemies. you're either bLind or wiLLfuLLy ignorant. shame on you for either option.

[blonndee]

19. Wow, STFU? That's even worse than "sit down and be quiet."

What's the problem with this discussion, exactly?

[LostinVA]

85. Know what?

Thank god for Ignore, so I don't have to read this poster's stuff.

[swimboy]

40. Oops. You should have used the sarcasm thingie to make clear you are kidding.

:hi:

[madokie]

15. All people are born equals, they know how to suckle and learn the art of crying early on

It wouldn't cost me anything and it sure would make me one happy camper to see it happen. Anothers sexuality is not a concern of mine, nor does it threaten me in any way

[hobbit709]

18. Doesn't bother me in the least

I consider ANY restrictions on ANYONE'S rights as wrong.

[cali]

20. Full marriage rights for Gay and Lesbians

are inevitable, and I'm completely on board, but sorry, it's not going to happen in a year or two. All we can do is keep supporting that marriage rights be extended.

[babylonsister]

21. As a straight, middle-aged (ugh) woman, I WANT

the GLBT to get complete and total equal rights! That should have happened when I got them!

[smoogatz]

24. But but but---

Straight people have stopped getting married in Massachusetts and New Jersey! And Canada's been struck by plagues--plagues, I tell you!--of, um, persimmon-colored sofas and excellent Italian shoes! I'm not kidding!!

[Ex Lion Tamer]

25. It costs me when GLBT do NOT HAVE equal rights.

The unfairness of it offends me. The irrationality of it offends me. The hate behind it offends me. It is the same psychic injury that results from racism, sexism, etc.

This isn't a zero-sum issue. Human rights never are.

[Solly Mack]

27. Big R!

:)

[Kali]

28. I'm on board.

There are certain issues that make no sense to me at all that they still need to be fought. This is one of them. There are complex matters out there that need to be addressed. This is not one of them. Why are there still morans even concerned about things like this?

[npincus]

29. I'm all for it, friend.

What's good (or bad) enough for me, is good (or bad) enough for you!

Discrimination is discrimination.

[Bunny]

30. As a single woman, I'm afraid that the gay guys are going to snap up all the straight men.

And leave me without a husband. :cry:

:sarcasm:

Equal rights for everyone won't negatively effect me in the least. In fact, I think it will make my life better, and I think the world will be a richer place for it.

[hlthe2b]

31. I have no problem with it... I believe EVERYONE should be able

to designate a beneficary of medical, survivor, and inheritance benefits--whether it be a spouse, committed partner, regardless of gender, or even a live-in family member or close friend. As we are looking at an increasing population of aging, single Americans, I am worried about THEM as much as any couple. If they are fortunate enough to have someone live with them to offer support as they move through life, I think whoever that person, whatever the relationship, there should be an opportunity to receive the benefits that allow for a stable future, for both of them.

So, while I certainly support gay rights, including marriage, I just want to open this up a bit. The problem is enormous, when it comes to being fair about benefits. I know I may get flamed for this by some who want to keep the scope of this argument very narrow. But, we don't have that luxury if one looks at the demographics of this population and the vulnerabilities of our larger society.

[AlCzervik]

32. it cost as more as a society to deny equal rights.

[file83]

33. I'm right there with ya - I believe all Americans should have equal marriage rights.

Anything less is less American.

[Rob H.]

34. I've had a lot of gay & lesbian friends over the years

...so I've been on board for a long time. Love is love, regardless of what some fundagelical nutjobs think.

[terip64]

38. It will cost me nothing...

Recently, my son, 16, asked if he could start going to the youth group at the local Catholic church. He wanted to go for social reasons and I said no. I explained to him that the church was blaming the pedophile scandal on the gay priests and not only was that not true but it was dead wrong. He has plenty of social outlets. I am tired of organized religions telling me that I am not moral when they are in fact many times totally immoral. I was raised Catholic. I was there. I remember what happened. The making up shit stops here.


We have to start standing up for what is right...

[Midlodemocrat]

42. What gets lost in that whole mess is that there were an equal number

of heterosexual priests who abused kids.

I'm Catholic. I say let him go. Maybe he can change a few minds. My daughter is making her confirmation this year and when she was on the retreat, she had a lot to say about GLBT rights and a lot of kids were very receptive.

They had to write little notes to each other over the course of the retreat and one young boy told her that he was gay and thanked her for being so 'in your face' about gay rights. Because you see, she knows that Jesus never spoke about homosexuals, just adultery and divorce. She kept repeating that over and over and it's hard to look into a very earnest teenaged face and dismiss what they are saying.

[terip64]

197. I don't think that it had anything to do with sexual orientation. Gays were just an easy target...

and selfishly, I don't get anything out of the catholic mass. My older two daughters are confirmed and one goes to mass sometimes. The other went evangelical on me for a while, which was scary, but we survived.

The bottom line for me is that after 8 years of Catholic school and years of pretending I can't do it anymore. The church locally is not at all welcoming and I believe if they knew where I stand on many issues they would not consider me a good Catholic or worthy of communion (which of course I partake of at every wedding, baptism and funeral;)I figure those words, 'Only say the words and I shall forgive you' works for me!)

I couldn't bring myself to go to a parent meeting and honestly go to mass at all. Selfish? Maybe. Honest, yes. And I think a little self-preservation. Besides which he didn't fight me at all and would have probably tormented the teacher like he did when he was little and fought me about going to church.

[terip64]

389. ...and I shall be healed, it's be longer than I thought!!

[Zuiderelle]

39. Nice post, thanks.

:thumbsup:

[ncrainbowgrrl]

47. K& R, my friend.

:hug:

Thanks for this wonderful post.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

48. Amen to that.

:thumbsup:

[magellan]

49. Abso-frickin-lutely

Hey, I get my back up when the fundie nutjobs try to drive a wedge between "civil unions" and "marriage", as if us straight couples who choose not to have a christian church ceremony are somehow inferior to those who do. I can only begin to imagine what it's like to have to suffer that sort of idiocy on top of all the other hate and stereotyping the GLBT community suffers.

My sister and my best friend are lesbians. It hurts me to see and hear the discrimination they endure for something they could no more change than their eye color, even if they wanted to. We're not free until we're ALL free...and being free of hypocritical moral dictates on civil rights sounds like heaven to me.

[Straight Shooter]

50. I think the hidden agenda behind it all is preventing benefit rights, not marriage rights.

The "anti-homosexual marriage" issue may be the red meat for the fundies, but the real GOP agenda is to prevent homosexual partners from receiving benefits of insurance and other compensation. This would be an added cost of doing business, and in America, business trumps love.

As far as I'm concerned, any two consenting adults who want to get married, more power to them. It takes a lot of faith and courage to make a lifetime commitment to someone.

Just my 2 cents.

[marshall]

395. Domestic partnerships for anybody

I would like to see domestic partnership or whatever you want to call it allowed with benefits for any two adults who live together and share expenses, regardless of whether they can legally marry or whether they are in a sexual relationship. Back when I was living with my mother I called my insurance company and tried to get her put on my health insurance. I argued that she and I lived together and shared expenses. I feel like we should have been able to register as domestic partners and received the same benefits that any other family does.

[gratefultobelib]

54. Just want to say--since joining DU, I have become a strong supporter for

same sex marriage, gay marriage (what should it really be called?), BECAUSE, in another thread last month, one of our gay members said that without having full marriage rights, it made him or her feel like a second class citizen. Well--that convinced me. Even if a civil union produced full marital rights (somehow in utopia-land), and they still feel second class, then that's wrong and it should not be allowed to continue.

[MamaBear]

58. I can't think of anything to add to your OP.

I'm straight, middle-aged, single and I can't think of how gay people marrying would change any of that one bit.

I think the whole argument has been made to rile up the people who like to think they have an exclusive on something -- anything.

Marry and be happy and treat each other well.

[zalinda]

59. There is a problem

but the problem lies with the word marriage. Marriage in this country means joined by the government, legally, but it also means joined by the church, religiously. I don't know if the government or the church co-opted this word, but the word must be given totally to one or the other.

To some in churches, if you are married by the government, you aren't really "married". By law, if you have a license to perform marriages, the marriage is legal. So ministers have to be an arm of the law to perform legal marriages.

There are some who will say okay to gay marriage if the word marriage is changed to civil union. Then that also should apply to straight couples who only get "married" by the government, they should also only have a civil union.

So, some how either the church or the government has to define who really owns the word marriage, and the other make up some other word for their form of union. In my opinion, it should be the churches who should come up with a word that defines what their religious union should be called, as the government is involved in ALL marriages, and the church is not.

zalinda

[Midlodemocrat]

61. But even those who opt for a civil ceremony in lieu of a

church ceremony consider themselves 'married' and not civil unioned. To me, it's a question of asking our GLBT family members and friends to agree to something that isn't quite there.

[zalinda]

364. Are you making a comment on what I wrote?

Because if you are, it doesn't make sense. I said it's the word MARRIAGE that screws with some otherwise sane people. If you use the word marriage for everyone who is legally joined, and let the church make up a word for those who are religiously joined, then some of the conflict can be resolved.

zalinda

[Zhade]

184. Utterly false - or do you think there are no atheist/agnostic married couples?

When I was married, it was at city hall - and I was MARRIED, not in a civil union.

Marriage is not an institution reserved solely for the religious. Sorry. That's just plain untrue.

[devilgrrl]

60. Sorry everyone.... bad morning.

:blush::blush::blush:

Woke up on the wrong side, extra sensitive, very jumpy.

Again sorry.

:blush::blush::blush:
:hide:

[Zuiderelle]

100. I, for one, appreciate your apology.

Thanks.

[Midlodemocrat]

102. I appreciate your apology as well.

Peace.

[devilgrrl]

114. Sorry for being an ass Midlodemocrat

:blush:

[Midlodemocrat]

122. No worries. We all have those days.

[ProfessorGAC]

62. An Unfortunate "Well, Duh!"

I'm in complete agreement with you. It is unfortunate that one has to belabor the obvious about this issue. Who someone marries has ABSOLUTELY NO IMPACT ON ME! When my SISTER got married, it didn't affect me in any way. Same house, same job, same wife, same pets, same hobbies. Nothing changed for my wife and i. Nothing.

It's incredible that someone like you even has to make the point in your OP. It's so obvious that a snail should be able to realize it.

Good post, alas, unfortunate it even needs to be said.
The Professor

[mnhtnbb]

63. Gee, I don't know. Maybe with two sons (one gay) we'll end up

paying for a wedding? :sarcasm:

Seriously, why should I be deprived of being mother of the groom
because of some fundamentalist right wing holier-than-thou jerks?

Why shouldn't both of my sons be able to marry the loves of their life--if they are lucky enough to find that person?

[ieoeja]

65. Gay marriage is a threat to straight marriage.

RW: My church should not be forced to marry gays.

LW: No problem. Gays will have to either be married by a church that does allow it, or by a public official.

RW: But only Christian church officials are allowed to perform a marriage according to the laws in my state.

LW: You can't be serious? What about Muslims and Jews?

RW: While some southern states do allow public officials to perform marriages, in most you need a religious authority of a Jewish or Christian sect. In at least one a marriage can only be performed by a Christian religious authority.

LW: But, that's blatantly unconstitutional!

Poof! Most marriages performed in the Old South are dissolved by a ruling of the US Supreme Court. And all because you GLBT started poking your nose into the marriage laws.

[ProfessorGAC]

67. Did You Forget The Sarcasm Thingie?

The Professor

[ieoeja]

71. No. It's not sarcastic.

Sure, I made this tongue-in-cheek, but technically this could happen.

The statements regarding marriage laws in the Old South are factual.

The last paragraph makes two statements. It suggest that the US Supreme Court could overturn all marriages performed in those states where the marriage laws are unconstitutional. And it says this could happen as a result of the push for gay marriage.


USSC Ruling

It would take at least five Supremes who possess the extremely idealistic Rightwing view that the Constitution MUST be enforced in a very strict fashion. 99% of these "strict constructionists" have proven that they really only believe in strictly construing the Constitution when it serves their ideology. But if they did take that view and damn the consequences, then I don't see how you could rule otherwise. I consider such an action highly unlikely.


Could the GLBT cause this?

The GLBT are already going to court challenging marriage laws. So if you get five Sen. Tom Coburns (R-OK) on the Court as described above....


For both assertions, consider the Dred Scott case. Did the lawyers for Dred Scott challenge the Missouri Compromise? Did either side ask the court to overturn the Free States ban on slavery? No. But that didn't stop nine southern plantation owners sitting on the US Supreme Court at that time from doing just that.


So, no, it's not technically sarcastic because I do consider it technically (though virtually im-) possible. Frankly, the evil part of me would get a thorough kick out of it. The sane side fully appreciates how much evil would result (so you say you want a revolution).

[Maven]

73. WHAT?

The Court is not going to "overturn" existing marriages if any of those dead-letter laws you claim exist actually do exist. It wouldn't be within their power to do so. Your hypothetical is a total fantasy.

The most that would ever happen is that the law itself would be declared unconstitutional. That would ONLY happen if the state actually tried to enforce it, and a couple--a straight couple, since no southern state currently allows GLBTs to marry--challenged the law in federal court. I doubt any state would ever try and enforce such a law, and if it did, good riddance.

I don't know where you read this, but it's totally wrong.

[ieoeja]

75. I don't think so either.

At most they would simply order the states to fix their laws. Unless you had some real nutjobs on the Supreme Court. As did happen in the Dred Scott case where the nutjobs gave a technically accurate ruling only barely related to the case being adjudicated and not requested by either side.

[ProfessorGAC]

96. Then, It's Still Sardonic!

OK. Not sarcastic, but sardonic. A good point, as well.
GAC

[Midlodemocrat]

68. Ridiculous.

:eyes:

"And all because you GLBT started poking your nose into the marriage laws."

Wow. Just wow.

[InvisibleTouch]

69. I'm sure I've said this before, but...

...I'm not a big fan of marriage, period. Having said that, I'm adamant that absolutely everyone should have the right to make that mistake, if they so choose. And hey, I'm told that some marriages are even good, so more power to 'em. :)

And yes, it should be called "marriage" and not "civil union" for same-sex couples. Words are powerful, and if you use two different terms (even if the protections under the law are identical), you end up painting one group as "lesser" than the other.

[BlueIris]

70. Nice post, Midlo. nt

[treestar]

72. Nothing whatsoever

I cannot see that the fundies will lose anything, either. I suppose they think they will lose the last bit of control they think they have over others or the last bit of the right to be superior to someone else, legally, that they seem to crave. It would be bad for them that way. Poor fundies. :sarcasm: :nopity:

[gollygee]

76. It will make the lives of my gay friends and family better

therefore it will make my life better.

[LostinVA]

79. An excellent OP, Midlo

The answers should be illuminating.

Thanks for bring this up for discussion -- and, hopefully, educating.

[itsmesgd]

84. my marriage lasted less than two years, if GLBT people wanna get married, go for it

I must caution that it will have an adverse effect on their sex lives.

I'm a "live and let live" kinda guy myself. As long as you dont hurt me, knock yourself out.

[Midlodemocrat]

86. "I must caution that it will have an adverse effect on their sex lives."

:rofl:

I'm sure you're the only one. That made me LOL. Thanks.

[yurbud]

90. When I talk about gay marriage in class, I tell my students it's the best way to curb gay sex

cause who has less sex, people dating each other or married?

[itsmesgd]

95. if you want to stop sex (of any kind) make them marry

My wife thought that "I do" meant, "not anymore".

I say, have fun people, but think real hard if you want to get married. I think I'll just live in sin if there is a next time.


Overthrow the rich fat white people.
Freaks Unite!

[Martin Eden]

88. Letter from a Vermont mother

This LTTE (which appeared in DU some time ago) sums up my "straight" opinion on the issue:


Letter to the Editor

by Sharon Underwood, Sunday, April 30, 2000
from the Valley News (White River Junction, VT/Hanover, NH)

As the mother of a gay son, I've seen firsthand how cruel and misguided people can be.

Many letters have been sent to the Valley News concerning the homosexual menace in Vermont. I am the mother of a gay son and I've taken enough from you good people.

I'm tired of your foolish rhetoric about the "homosexual agenda" and your allegations that accepting homosexuality is the same thing as advocating sex with children. You are cruel and ignorant. You have been robbing me of the joys of motherhood ever since my children were tiny.

My firstborn son started suffering at the hands of the moral little thugs from your moral, upright families from the time he was in the first grade. He was physically and verbally abused from first grade straight through high school because he was perceived to be gay.

He never professed to be gay or had any association with anything gay, but he had the misfortune not to walk or have gestures like the other boys. He was called "fag" incessantly, starting when he was 6.

In high school, while your children were doing what kids that age should be doing, mine labored over a suicide note, drafting and redrafting it to be sure his family knew how much he loved them. My sobbing 17-year-old tore the heart out of me as he choked out that he just couldn't bear to continue living any longer, that he didn't want to be gay and that he couldn't face a life without dignity.

You have the audacity to talk about protecting families and children from the homosexual menace, while you yourselves tear apart families and drive children to despair. I don't know why my son is gay, but I do know that God didn't put him, and millions like him, on this Earth to give you someone to abuse. God gave you brains so that you could think, and it's about time you started doing that.

At the core of all your misguided beliefs is the belief that this could never happen to you, that there is some kind of subculture out there that people have chosen to join. The fact is that if it can happen to my family, it can happen to yours, and you won't get to choose. Whether it is genetic or whether something occurs during a critical time of fetal development, I don't know. I can only tell you with an absolute certainty that it is inborn.

If you want to tout your own morality, you'd best come up with something more substantive than your heterosexuality. You did nothing to earn it; it was given to you. If you disagree, I would be interested in hearing your story, because my own heterosexuality was a blessing I received with no effort whatsoever on my part. It is so woven into the very soul of me that nothing could ever change it. For those of you who reduce sexual orientation to a simple choice, a character issue, a bad habit or something that can be changed by a 10-step program, I'm puzzled. Are you saying that your own sexual orientation is nothing more than something you have chosen, that you could change it at will? If that's not the case, then why would you suggest that someone else can?

A popular theme in your letters is that Vermont has been infiltrated by outsiders. Both sides of my family have lived in Vermont for generations. I am heart and soul a Vermonter, so I'll thank you to stop saying that you are speaking for "true Vermonters."

You invoke the memory of the brave people who have fought on the battlefield for this great country, saying that they didn't give their lives so that the "homosexual agenda "could tear down the principles they died defending. My 83-year-old father fought in some of the most horrific battles of World War II, was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart.

He shakes his head in sadness at the life his grandson has had to live. He says he fought alongside homosexuals in those battles, that they did their part and bothered no one. One of his best friends in the service was gay, and he never knew it until the end, and when he did find out, it mattered not at all. That wasn't the measure of the man.

You religious folk just can't bear the thought that as my son emerges from the hell that was his childhood he might like to find a lifelong companion and have a measure of happiness. It offends your sensibilities that he should request the right to visit that companion in the hospital, to make medical decisions for him or to benefit from tax laws governing inheritance.

How dare he? you say. These outrageous requests would threaten the very existence of your family, would undermine the sanctity of marriage.

You use religion to abdicate your responsibility to be thinking human beings. There are vast numbers of religious people who find your attitudes repugnant. God is not for the privileged majority, and God knows my son has committed no sin.

The deep-thinking author of a letter to the April 12 Valley News who lectures about homosexual sin and tells us about "those of us who have been blessed with the benefits of a religious upbringing" asks: "What ever happened to the idea of striving...to be better human beings than we are?"

Indeed, sir, what ever happened to that?

[Midlodemocrat]

97. God. That brings me to tears. My daughter has a friend who just came out

and her parents told her she was going to Hell as a result.

Can you imagine telling your own child that? That s/he will go to Hell because of a biological result?

I told the kid she could live with us. We're fucking nuts, but we're not homophobic.

And, so far, she hasn't given TeenMidlo the gay.

[yurbud]

89. You have to convince righties being gay isn't contagious.

And that tolerating or even being aware of something doesn't mean you have to do it.

It's a bad analogy, but smoking is legal, and that doesn't mean I feel inexorably drawn to smoke.

Maybe a better analogy would be country music.

[Midlodemocrat]

99. Let's ask them why would gay be contagious when straight isn't?

And do you honestly think that someone chooses to be a second class citizen just to be a pain in the ass?

That's what I say down here in red state Hell.

[yurbud]

110. I say that too. If sexuality was contagious, there would be no gays since they are surrounded by

straights most of the time.

[Cabcere]

92. Right on!

:applause: Thanks for posting this, Midlodemocrat - you've expressed it much better than I could have. :)

I never have been able to understand how on earth gay marriage would screw up straight marriage, or "destroy the family" or any of that other rubbish. It's like that bumper sticker that says: "Against Gay Marriage? Don't Marry A Gay!" I can understand certain religious groups believing that homosexuality is "wrong" - they're within their rights to believe whatever they choose to - but that shouldn't mean that homosexuals who don't belong to that religion or subscribe to those beliefs are denied the right to marry.

And as for "destroying the family" - how, exactly? :shrug: This is the 21st century. There are all kinds of families that don't fit the "traditional" image, and yet many of them get along fine. The argument I hear most is about "kids need a mother and a father to have a normal, healthy life!!1111!1," and, well, that's a load of rubbish if you ask me. I love my mom and my dad, and I'm very thankful that I've grown up around them both, but that doesn't mean that if I had been raised in different circumstances I wouldn't have felt the same way about my single parent, or same-sex parents, or whatever. If kids can be raised by a single mother or a single father and grow up to be normal, healthy adults, then what's the problem with a kid having two mothers or two fathers? I really don't get it - it's not like somehow "teh ghey!!11!" will be transmitted to the kid automatically. :eyes:

Anyway, that's just my take on the issue. I'm sure I could think of more, but Midlodemocrat pretty much said it all already. Peace!

[Bassic]

94. Nothing is the answer.

It will cost us abolutely nothing, and indeed when that happens, then all of society will be that much richer. I agree with your post completely.

[krispos42]

98. Nazis riding dinosaurs will conquer the earth

other than that...

um...

nothing

[mentalsolstice]

101. K&R

As always, :yourock:!

[johnnie]

105. What will it cost me?

It will possibly cost me more chances of buying wedding gifts for people. :)

Seriously, I have no problem with it at all. To be completely honest here, "traditional" marriage has a less than spectacular track record itself, I have a feeling that gay marriage would boost the percentages of successful marriages.

In saying that, I think if anybody wants to give marriage a shot, they should be allowed to and go for it.

[EFerrari]

106. What a terrible thing it would be for this culture if we supported

stable, committed relationships. Why, whole communities might be changed forever FOR THE BETTER.

We can't have that, now, can we?

Can we? :)

K&R

[JackBeck]

107. You know what I'm tired of?

I'm tired of registering for domestic partnerships/civil unions/gay marriages each time I move.

We've been together for almost 10 years, and we have a domestic partnership in NYC, got "gay married" in San Francisco, had a marriage ceremony when we returned to Brooklyn, got a second domestic partnership when we moved to New Jersey, and now have the option of getting a civil union in New Jersey.

While this is all well and good, all of these things has cost us a boat load of money. While the civil unions in NJ are a step in the right direction, when the inevitable civil union morphs into gay marriage, we will then AGAIN have to march down to City Hall, pay the fees, in order to get the marriage certificate. Let's just call it marriage and stop this ridiculous waste of my time and money, OK?

[ScreamingMeemie]

109. ...

:applause:

It shouldn't be that way.

[marmar]

112. It's a no-brainer. Until gays and lesbians enjoy the full benefits of citizenship...

then the citizenship of all the rest of us is tainted.

[roguevalley]

121. It won't cost me anything. More power to you, my friend.

[sakabatou]

125. Won't effect me what-so-ever

[Warren DeMontague]

136. Civil Rights for all. Equality for all. Marriage Rights for all.

This straight DU'er has got your back. :patriot:

[IronLionZion]

139. Well, I want the government out of the marriage business

and civil unions for all consenting adults who want them.

I want quality affordable health care including dental and vision for every man woman and child in America. I want fair labor/trade laws. Fair wages, reduced dependency on foreign oil and fossil fuels, more public transportation, better planned communities that are walking safe and close-knit, safe and healthy food, kindness and compassion for the poor sick and elderly, fewer abortions but every child is born into a family who loves him and can take care of him, individual freedom, fiscal responsibility, no more unnecessary war, respect from the rest of the world, clean environment, and a population who gives a shit.

yeah, make it happen and let me know how I can help. :patriot:

[Midlodemocrat]

143. You and I have had this conversation before.

I want marriage for all consenting adults for the reasons I indicated.


BTW, OT, but how did your defending of your dissertation go?

[IronLionZion]

145. ??? You must be thinking of someone else. nt

[Midlodemocrat]

151. Aren't you the poster who just finished his dissertation?

On some sort of entomology? If not, sorry. I thought you were. Mea culpa.

[IronLionZion]

152. Nope! Cheers Midlo! nt

[Midlodemocrat]

156. Sorry!

Cheers to you, too! :blush:

[Sapere aude]

140. It costs more to deny people equal rights. It makes for wedge issues and we don't debate what

else is wrong in this country. National elections can be won or lost on so called "values" issues. I look forward to the day when being gay means nothing more than being not gay.

[ninkasi]

142. Wonderful post

From this hetero woman, the idea that some people can be denied equal rights because of their sexual orientation is wrong, and immoral. We shouldn't have to keep fighting this battle. I was born heterosexual, and I'm normal. Some people are born homosexual, and that's normal. I believe that society benefits from having stable, loving relationships, and that by being sure that everybody is free to marry, or live with the person they love, will free us to tackle other problems in society.

It's absurd that people who view homosexuality as sinful, or wrong, are allowed to dictate to other people how they can live their lives. They shouldn't have that right. If they don't believe in same sex marriage, then they can stay single, or marry somebody of the opposite sex. If the fundies worried more about solving the problems of poverty, making sure every citizen has universal health insurance, and a host of other things, then we'd all be a lot better off.

If I'm sick to death of listening to these self-righteous pricks preaching their hatred and venom toward people they don't approve of, I can only imagine how traumatic it must be for my gay brothers and sisters.

[ArbustoBuster]

150. Anybody who doesn't believe that GLBT people should have equal rights...

...should not be considered a real American.

Any politician who claims that GLBT people are in any way bad, should be hounded from office.

In other words, we should treat homophobia like we treat racism: It is an evil, and it must be destroyed. Anyone who doesn't agree with this is self-evidently a bad person.

I look forward to the day when homophobia is dead. I also look forward to the day when racism is fully dead. These sorts of evils do long-lasting damage to our nation and to ourselves.

[etherealtruth]

153. I am

[liberalEd]

155. Nope, no cost to me in any way

I was quite pleased when San Francisco started issuing marriage licenses to all couples in the same office where my wife and I got our marriage license years ago. If anything, it made me feel better about my marriage, not worse.

Civil rights are meaningless if they are not for all. I agree with you 100% Midlodemocrat.

[More Than A Feeling]

157. You're right that you can be an extremely conservative Democrat and still support gay marriage.

That used to be me. Now I'm a uber-liberal Democrat, and I still support gay marriage, and yes, "marriage" is the key word.

[Midlodemocrat]

159. Thank you. To me, the key word is "Democrat".

Big tent and all that.

And, FWIW, if you are a democrat and you don't support equal rights for the GLBT community, it wouldn't be a crime if you didn't work against those rights. It would be more than okay, actually.

[Pacifist Patriot]

160. I don't see any costs. Only benefits.

Same with equal rights for any group. When the exercise of power is bi-lateral rather than oppressive we all win.

[B3Nut]

161. Mrs. Nut and I are totally on board

and were greatly angered by the passage of the gay-marriage-ban amendment here in WI (as if that was anywhere close to being a legitimate reason to screw with the state constitution!) I'm still disappointed in my state for that. If the fundies don't like gay marriages, they don't need to have one. :)

It's past time for the GLBT peeps to have the same rights as everyone else. Enough bullshit already...full civil rights goddammit.

(Oh, and re: some peoples' fears of being hit on...get over yourselves. Hell, if a guy hit on me I'd thank him for the compliment! :D )

Todd in Cheesecurdistan

[TahitiNut]

417. You betcha, cousin!

Us Fruits and Nuts need to stick together. :silly:

[kwolf68]

166. I don't care what Gays and Lesbians

Do with their lives...i dont care if they get married, it doesn't affect me one way or the other. I'm not versed enough on the issue to really have a definitive opinion either way.

When asked about it, I tell people it's no big deal to me, leave gays and lesbians alone, they don't ever bother me (I only know 1 that I know of)...

Im OK with gay marriage, but I am not for forcing religions to adopt gay marriage. If gays/lesbians want to get married by the justice of peace or from a ship captain on a high sea go for it.

[cgrindley]

167. To be honest, I support the GL part but not the T

and that's as much as I want to say about that.

[Maven]

169. What?

Why?

[Name removed]

170. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bicentennial_baby]

171. Bingo

:applause:

[cgrindley]

185. No it isn't

that's a false analogy

[Midlodemocrat]

191. Actually, it is a spot on analogy.

[cgrindley]

192. No it isn't

Without even considering the separate issue of transgendered people, and only considering your comparison of Lesbian and Gay people to people of different "races", you are making the fundamental error of comparing social absolutes against arbitrarily constructed racial identities not to mention conflating issues of race and ethnicity.

[LeftyMom]

196. You're asuming sexuality is a social absolute

First of all, there's really no such thing. Very few rules and concepts are true across all of humanity- the only real examples I can think of off the top of my head are this- incest is almost universally considered a bad idea, but definitions vary widely, and killing other people is generally frowned upon, with a lot of exceptions that vary by culture.

For example, in most of the classical Mediterranean world, sex between older, more powerful men and young proteges was considered normal and not a sign that one was sexually abnormal, provided a man also had sex with women. What would be considered abnormal would be for an adult, established man to be the receptive party or to eschew women entirely. In many modern societies a similar idea, that men who engage in voluntary receptive sex are effeminate but that a healthy male can fuck anything he wants as long as he's on the giving end, and that doing so is highly masculine, persists.

As for "conflating issues of sex and ethnicity" I'd like you to look up the following phrase "argument by analogy." Don't debate people if you don't understand the rudiments of how argumentation works, the results are embarrassing.

[cgrindley]

223. Wow

You're the one who does not understand analogies. You presented a false analogy and I called you on it.

[JackBeck]

228. And you continue to not answer our questions on why you don't support

the transgendered community. Do you think that the transgendered community should enjoy marriage equality?

[cgrindley]

235. I told you upfront I wouldn't

So there.

[Name removed]

239. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cgrindley]

247. Ad hominem will get you nowhere

I am a thrill to be around.

[Name removed]

250. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cgrindley]

252. I respectfully disagree

I don't think that my position is one of bigotry.

[JackBeck]

328. Since you won't elaborate

Many here must come to the conclusion on their own.

Is it transphobia?

[cgrindley]

345. No, it's not transphobia

I just don't happen to think that homosexual men and women and the people who suffer from gender identity disorder make for a good comparison.

[JackBeck]

357. There's no comparison.

We are part of the same community. Transgendered are a part of my community so I fight for their rights as much as my own.

Should multi-racial individuals be shunned from the communities they identify with?

[LeftyMom]

317. No, I presented an analogy you said was false

You gave reasons you thought it was a false analogy, and since it was based in both a misunderstanding of human behavior and an apparent misunderstanding of the concept of analogy I told you why you were wrong.

Homophobia and transphobia aren't defensible with logic or evidence, but if you want to keep annoying DUers and torturing electrons you're welcome to continue until the mods get tired of it, as I plan to be up late this evening anyhow.

[cgrindley]

341. Your analogy was false

You tried to compare the treatment of lesbians, gays and transgendered people (already a grouping that doesn't exist, as unlike lesbian and gay people, transgendered people are pathologized), with Asians, Blacks and Mexicans (two arbitrarily constructed racial identities and national identity comprised of a diversity of races and ethnicities).

It was a false analogy any way you want to look at it.

[LeftyMom]

369. Transgendered people would beg to differ, as would most experts.

I'm actually pretty current on issues of sexuality and psychology, as I had a course on the issue last semester. The general response to transgendered individuals is to have them live a trial period in their identified gender and then to do as little or as much surgical or hormonal change to bring their bodies into line with that identity as is practical and desired.

My guess would be that most of the diagnoses given to transpeople won't make it into the next DSM.

Remember, not too long ago, being homosexual was a DSM listed mental illness as well. When we try, our understanding eventually does trump our bias

PS As for the racial thing, it was a paraphrase of something I've heard from more than one dumbass out here in CA. It helps to understand that in California Moran Parlance "mexican" is how one designates any person from south of the rio grande and north of tierra del fuego who isn't exceedingly dark complected. And my point wasn't that sexuality and race are entirely analogous, it's that the bias you exhibited was similar to that of people who think they're decent people because they're only bigoted toward certain racial or ethnic groups, and I stand by that.

[cgrindley]

414. The DSM IV tr reflects the opinion of most experts

If the next edition changes GID, I will happily recant. Until then, I'm siding with the science. The DSM IV tr currently rules the roost.

[LeftyMom]

193. I'm swayed by your well thought out argument.

:rofl:

So, why isn't it bigoted to be biased against transpeople? You also left out the B part, do bisexuals bother you as well? How about intersex people, since they're often also included in the acronym?

I want you to clear up who it is you think shouldn't have equal rights, and I want you to explain why.

[cgrindley]

194. B people are not an issue with marriage

You're either married to your own gender or to the other gender.

I didn't know that GLBT included intersexed people. I honestly don't know what to think about intersexed people but I'm sure that they're discriminated against pretty routinely and that they need protection against it.

[LeftyMom]

204. That's not the question.

1. Do you believe bisexual people deserve equal rights? (and yes, they have their own concerns.)

2. Why don't transpeople deserve full rights in your eyes?

3. I'll give you a pass on intersex people based on ignorance.

[cgrindley]

232. The original question

rambled on about marriages in San Francisco and so on... "death do us part" etc. Unless I misread it entirely, it was only marginally interested in equal rights for all before it got caught up on marriage...

Bisexuality is NOT an issue with marriage. One biological woman either marries one other biological woman, or she marries one biological man. How is any discussion of bisexuality even remotely relevant? Unless you're asking for plural marriage, and that's just so wrong. You're not asking for plural marriage are you?

[bicentennial_baby]

263. Ok, first of all...

Where other than Massachusetts can a woman actually marry another woman? Um, nowhere...

But what I really take issue with is "Unless you're asking for plural marriage, and that's just so wrong"...

Please, let me hear why...please.

[cgrindley]

342. Why is plural marriage wrong?!

Did you just ask why plural marriage is wrong? Really? Seriously? Like, for real? Is this a matter of trying to wind me up or are you actually asking for a list of objections to plural marriage?

[bicentennial_baby]

344. No, I'm dead f'n serious...

Just ask my boyfriend and girlfriend...Dead serious.

[cgrindley]

346. Okay

I positively don't think that plural marriages should be tolerated by any human society. It is an affront to human dignity.

[bicentennial_baby]

353. How so? Details...

[sniffa]

405. oi vey

quite a few of your posts in this thread are an affront to human dignity.

[cgrindley]

410. So you're also defending plural marriage?

Plural marriage is always wrong. Always. To support it is to support misogyny and child abuse.

[bicentennial_baby]

412. I think you're confusing polygamy with what we're talking about

Sniffa is my bf. He's also Mrs Sniffa's bf. Mrs. Sniffa is my gf. And I'm her gf. No misogyny there, bud. So, I'm still waiting for my details...I'd like to know how my relationship is an affront to human dignity, please...

[Name removed]

413. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bicentennial_baby]

172. Oh, please, expound on that, would you?

[cgrindley]

182. Sure, I'll expound

I support the rights of gay and lesbian people to enjoy the joys of marriage. It should be legal nation-wide.

[JackBeck]

187. Shouldn't transgendered people also enjoy that right?

Makes me long for the day when our continent's original inhabitants were in charge.

[cgrindley]

258. Which ones?

There were at least 4 distinct migrations across the Bering Land Bridge.

[JackBeck]

359. I'm specifically referencing the ones whose land we took from them.

The ones who celebrated same-sex relations. It's ashame that a bunch of puritanical Brits invaded this continent to escape religious persecution, only to impose their religious beliefs and persecute those who didn't follow their lot.

[cgrindley]

382. So the second ones?

Not the first or the third or the fourth?

[Name removed]

173. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Midlodemocrat]

Oh, dear God! What a horrific thing to say.

[LeftyMom]

178. Speaking as a rape survivor

I hope he gets his wish.

That's like saying "I'd rather die than get in a car accident" or "I'd rather die than get robbed and beaten," but nobody ever says those things, because there's no stigma about those misfortunes. Saying that death is preferable to life as a rape survivor is saying that one is so defiled, so ruined, that life is no longer worth living. And promoting that idea is both tied into archaic notions about women's value based on their reproductive role alone and absolutely lethal to victims who can't cope with a society that blames them as much as or more than their attacker.

[Midlodemocrat]

183. LM. I'm so sorry. I didn't know.

:hug:

[LeftyMom]

208. It's not something I bring up a lot.

:hug:

[JackBeck]

175. Looks like you might have to say more about it.

Inquiring minds wanna know WTF you mean.

[Midlodemocrat]

176. I can't understand that, frankly. Your post troubles me.

I worked with some transgendered folks back in the 80s when I was practicing (this was around the time of the whole Rene Richards public relations disaster) and they were so sad. So sad to have been born into the wrong body.

Can you imagine waking every day and feeling that your body is a costume you can't take off? That parts of you should have never been there?

I can't imagine denying someone the right to fit comfortably in their own body, so your post troubles me greatly, in all honesty.

edit: I had the wrong name.

[bicentennial_baby]

180. Hey Midlo

"the whole Rene Russo public relations disaster"

Can you fill me in on this? I was a kiddo in the 80s

[Midlodemocrat]

181. I just read an update on her in People. She was the professional

tennis player who had sexual reassignment surgery and then wanted to compete professionally as a woman.

The press had a field day. Said she had an 'unfair advantage' because she had been born a man.

She's in her 70's now. Lives quietly with a friend somewhere in the NE I think.

She said in the article in People that she very much regretted pushing to play professionally because it hurt her son so much. She obviously didn't regret the surgery, as she was most definitely not happy in a male body, but she felt badly about the toll her lawsuit et al took on her son.

It was sad, actually. She seems like a really nice person and I feel badly that she had to endure that. It should never have been in question whether or not she could play. It's not fucking life or death for cryin' out loud. Let the lady play tennis.

[Maven]

186. self-delete

[Midlodemocrat]

189. D'oh. Yes. Thanks, I'll edit.

[Maven]

190. .

:hug:

[Zuiderelle]

324. Just when I thought this thread couldn't get any worse.

:eyes:

[NMMNG]

372. So you're only a partial bigot then?

I suppose there are worse things to be.

[kdpeters]

436. If you want to go around making assertions you don't want to support .. you're in the wrong place.

They call this a discussion forum for a reason. Since we don't know who you are, your pronouncements are meaningless no matter what the issue. If you want to state your opinion, be prepared to likewise state your case. Otherwise, don't presume that we care.

[The Count]

168. IT COSTS ME IF THEY DO NOT GET COMPLETE &TOTAL EQUAL RIGHTS

All the price that there is to pay in an unjust society - which is far from being just theoretical.

[k_jerome]

174. this post is in exactly the right place targeting exactly the right people....

many of the responses point to: not anytime soon.

[Midlodemocrat]

177. Well then the posters who agree with me will have to work that

much harder.

I honestly can't understand not being on board with this. Not agreeing with me, per se, but not being on board with complete civil, err, human rights for everyone.

As my friend Kathy told me recently, "I have more control at the vet's with the dog than I do at the hospital should Julie get sick".

That sickens me. After what I went through with my husband's bypass, I can't imagine the additional stress of not being the 'contact person' or the 'family member' and instead having our relationship reduced to a piece of paper and me reduced to a bystander.

[k_jerome]

179. sorry, but from my perspective, posters can agree yet still cause harm....

when they are delusional regarding the obstacles to rights.

[Midlodemocrat]

188. I don't necessarily think it is delusion.

This is uncharted ground. Attempting to achieve Civil Rights for the GLBT community when there are people who believe homosexuality is a 'choice' or an 'abomination' isn't going to be easy.

That's why we need all of us, the progressives to be on board. Maybe we're the ones who will finally make this right.

A girl can dream, right?

[k_jerome]

222. i see the same delusion here as i have seen in past threads....

not your OP, but the responses.

focus on opening eyes to the real obstacles is what is needed.

[Cobalt Violet]

200. As an unmarried asexual Massachusetts resident, ever since gays could marry...

there hasn't been change in my daily life. I do like that gays can now marry since the majority of my friends over the years have been gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender and I happen to think we are all better off with more equal rights than less.

[davhill]

237. A marriage licence is just a piece of paper

It is a relic of ancient inheritance squables and has no place in modern civilization. If two people love each other they should make their commitment in private. The government has no business getting involved. If you believe that marriage is a sacred union for the production children by all means get married in any church that will marry you. Otherwise just work for the abolition of obsolete laws that treat married people diferently than single people.

[yurbud]

207. Sarah Silverman has the right idea: the gay guys on her show are plaed by dumpy, nerdy asexuals

If that was the public image of gays, no one would care whether they get married or not because they couldn't imagine anyone being attracted to that.

[druidity33]

234. actually

It cost me my health insurance. My girlfriend was working for the Union on campus, which by the way has a fantastic health-care plan that pays for Domestic Partner benefits (we've been together 5+ years). Even though we weren't married, i was allowed to get health insurance (dental too!) because the DP bennies had to apply to both gay and straight couples. But i live in Massachusetts and when the law changed and everyone could marry, that meant that everyone lost their DP benefits. The category doesn't exist anymore. I got married several months later so that we could all continue to be insured under the Family Plan. I'm not sweating it, and i'm not blaming gay people. I'm sure there weren't too many people in my situation. Besides, we were going to get married anyway, just wanted to be able to plan it better. And actually, we eloped, but are having a "real" wedding this April so we can invite family and friends from far away. But i think anytime you change any little thing inside of a beaurocracy, you'll end up with glitches in the system. Paperwork snafus especially. And of course it's better that anyone can marry anyone they want!

Again, i'm not complaining or being critical... but you did ask the question.

[smalll]

242. I support you 100%, but I will go no further -

Meaning, I do support gay marriage. The anti-gay marriage people want to shut it off with a constitutional amendment, defining marriage as between "a man and a woman." I don't support that, but I do want a constitutional amendment maybe to define marriage as between "two people only and exclusively." So I guess my only quibble is I worry (sorry) that gay marriage will eventually lead by the workings of law into polygamous marriage as well. I don't oppose polygamy or poly marriages of any sort out of moral reasons or any revulsion at all, I just think they're bad for civilization. (If anyone would like to object, I'll do a history lesson, I think it has something to do with the history of the West, the Enlightenment, and the belief in the equality of all human beings.)

[Spazito]

248. Well, speaking as a straight Canadian, I can affirm that

those of the GLBT community in Canada DO have equal rights, including the right to marry, and, gasp, life has gone normally for me, my family, my friends (gay and straight) and, even more unbelievably, for Canadian society as a whole.

Equal rights for one means equal rights for all, full stop, imo. All the arguments that are currently being forwarded against equal rights for the GLBT community in the United States were used here and they FAILED and they FAILED because we have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms and a Supreme Court that practices law and NOT politics.

[malaise]

251. K & R n/t

[B Calm]

253. Right-Wingers fear there will be small groups of happily married gays

roaming the streets late at night looking to pounce on a innocent straight guy. After they gang rape their victim, the straight guy will turn into a flaming homosexual, so on so on..

sarcasm...

[Name removed]

254. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karlrschneider]

292. How nice for you.

:puke:

[Deja Q]

259. Marriage is a definition of a religious institution.

"civil union" is a logical alternative condition, as it affects ALL couples who do not believe in religion or are not in the religion but wish to declare themselves as a couple.

I see where you're coming from, but the other side has a point too. If one side wishes to convince the other they are no threat, is it better to hijack their word (and yes it is just a word, but it's their word - every group has its own special words they don't want others using...)? Or to show parallels, with the sole exception the couple is composed of two people of the same gender rather than one of each?


People say it is better to capture flies with honey than with vingear.

People say it is better to win people over with kindness than with in-your-face tactics.

That's all I've got to say; in this world I've always been an outsider, observing. I have no need to do more than merely state what I have observed.

[Maven]

265. Marriage is a legal institution.

It is not their word, it is everyone's word. Or it will be, when GLBTs get the equal rights they should have.

I presume you won't be helping us there.

[LostinVA]

272. Yeah, don't hold your breath, Harvey

[LostinVA]

271. Marriage is a legal institution -- it's not the least bit religious

[gollygee]

277. I'm married and not religious at all

didn't get married in a church. No religious person or religious expression was involved.

And yet, here I am, 9 years later, still married.

[Midlodemocrat]

350. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

HT, I have friends, and indeed family members who hve forgone the religious ceremony.

They still say "Yeah, so and so and I have been 'married' for xyz amount of time"

That's the difference. It's like saying you're having a Coke, when you mean a cola. It is ingrained in the American pscyhe.

[karlrschneider]

260. Well put. Happy to give the 38th recommendation!

:toast:

[electron_blue]

264. Near as I can figure, the anti-glbt laws are to keep hetero's straight.

I wish I were joking, and of course, I don't believe that. But it's the only thing I can think of that makes sense that explains why so many people are against it. They must think, in their heart, that this is one reason they don't stray to the "other side", which scares the hell out of them.

I suppose they would deny this of course.

[gollygee]

274. I think they're afraid

that their kids might "become" gay if homosexuality is seen in this country as OK. *sigh* I get that from some family members who are beyond clueless. I hope their kids are straight for the sake of their kids because the way they talk about homosexuality in front of their kids makes it pretty clear they won't be supportive if the kids are gay. :( They've got their aunt's number thought if they need me I suppose. :(

[rasputin1952]

279. It will not affect me in the least...I will still be straight, I wills till be

fighting for equal rights for all Americans, and if the GLBT segment get to have the same rights and privileges that other Americans have, I am 100% behind it. These are NOT second class citizens, they are human beings that find love and companionship just as "normal" people do. To me, that is as normal as a human can be.

GLBT weep when a loved one passes on; they feel remorse when they argue, they are as human as I am, and I refuse to give up my humanity, my dignity, and I will fight for their acceptance, their humanity and dignity.

There are no other options.

[VOX]

289. I want my gay brother to be able to marry his partner!

My wife and I frequently hang out with my brother and his partner. We all go places together, and visit other family members together.

Why shouldn't my brother have the same right to marry as I do? I'd love to have my brother's partner as a brother-in-law.

There's absolutely nothing unusual about this configuration at all, **except** that my brother can't marry the person with whom he has the closest bond. That's just plain crazy! :crazy:

The way the laws stand right now, it simply isn't fair, and things need to change.

Now.

[Bluebear]

376. What an awesome guy you are.

Your brother and brother in law are lucky to have you :)

[WindRavenX]

300. Everytime I read these threads, a little bit of my soul dies

There are some very hateful and ignorant people here :(

[Bluebear]

375. I love your soul.

:hug:

[jmm]

307. I'd like to think of it as more than a coincidence that

the first state to legalize gay marriage has the lowest divorce rate in the nation.

[Midlodemocrat]

384. Yup. Something to think about, isn't it?

Divorce is tearing the fabric of this country apart a lot faster than gay marriage is.

[Oeditpus Rex]

309. Wouldn't cost me anything; in fact, it would *add* to my life

Because rights for one, or a few, are rights for all.

But don't go thinking all 50 states or even the entire planet recognizing marriage between gay people will end a problem. It'll also give the fundies and Freepers more reason to wail and wring their hands and gnash their pointed teeth.

(Now, before somebody jumps on me because they think I'm saying that's a reason not to pursue it, that's not at all what I'm saying. I'm just saying it ain't gonna shut 'em up.)

[LifeDuringWartime]

310. DU?

are there really people here who don't support GLBT rights?

[LostinVA]

330. Appalling large amounts, yeah

[Spazito]

318. I can't help but wonder, sadly, whether those who would deny

the GLBT community equal rights would have voted against women getting the vote, voted against African-Americans getting the vote and, even have voted for secession rather than free the slaves. The same arguments being put forth to deny the GLBT community equal rights are the same as those put forth throughout history to deny some the rights they, the majority, had.

After reading this thread, I have seen nothing in the excuses put forward by those who would deny those rights, reduce those rights, etc, that would cause me be comforted and lessen my "wondering".

[uppityperson]

319. It would affect me by letting couples get the rights they deserve

Rather than tieing up stuff in court, or people not being able to access each others retirement accounts, or people not being able to be notified when their partner was in the hospital, equal rights would save a lot of time, money, headaches, hassles and be really good for me, my friends, my community, my world.

[Rex]

322. Basic human rights.

The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Really, how much more clear can it be. I don't see the words death, oppression and the fleeing of misery. Where is that written? Who made that law? That must be the first words in the BFEE pre-amble;

To crush, kill and destroy for revenue. Death, oppression and the fleeing of misery. By most.

[Prophet 451]

332. Not straight

I'm actually bisexual but since most of the world has a problem remembering we exist (that wasn't directed at the OP), I maintain the right to answer both as a gay and straight person.

I live in England. We already passed same-sex marriage in all but name (our civil unions carry the exact same legal rights and responsibilities as marriage, even the same paperwork) and what did it cost me personally? A few pence extra on my taxes to cover the additional Widow's Pension. What the hell, it's not like I can do much with the extra seven pence a month.

That said, I don't think gay marriage is the most important issue right now. I think that's global warming. If the planet becomes unliveable, who can get married becomes pretty much a moot point.

[Danger Mouse]

333. I'm straight, but I'm behind you all the way.

but you already knew that, right? :)

we ALL need to be on board with this, and it should be one of our primary issues...i'm sick of the rightwing religious types (and sadly, some not-so-right wing religious types) putting gay people down because they think their religion tells them to.
fuck that. no religion that tells you to hate another group of people for any reason is worth following, or even bothering with.

[StrictlyRockers]

334. K&R well said

[aaronbees]

336. As Martin Luther King, Jr. said ....

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." - Letter from a Birmingham Jail

I'm with him, and people seeking the equal rights I can enjoy. Pretty simple question and equation really. :)

[otherlander]

337. $19.75

Oh, wait, that's how much a pair of jeans would cost me. Gay rights wouldn't cost me anything. Never mind.

[snot]

338. Agreed --

though I consider marriage overrated.

[bettyellen]

343. where are those gutless "back of the bus (just for now) with your gay rights" DUers showed up...

to advise we have to shut up about this issue or it's going to cost "us" "more important" things....
well, i guess with their heightened sense of pragmatism, it's not wonder they are hiding under their beds instead of posting her.
gutless wonders.

[Colobo]

348. I'm all for GLBT rights

But I personally don't care about marriage. It's not the government's business. I say civil unions for all of us. If you want to "marry", go to the religious institution of your preference...

[Name removed]

354. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Midlodemocrat]

385. Dude. That is just flat out offensive.

And, read the OP. I AM married. Have been for almost 18 years.

Gay marriage isn't about fucking anymore than straight marriage is. And, FWIW, No one has ever 'watched' me and my husband.

:eyes:

[buzzard]

356. It won't affect me at all I am sick of hearing how it denigrates those in the "straight community"

I couldn't CARE less about that and only wish that we could live and let live.

[ananda]

358. nothing

It costs me absolutely nothing for others to have equal rights and privileges.. and it gains me everything.

If one person is oppressed or discriminated against, everyone is.

[jberryhill]

363. It Will Cost Me Plenty

...because I'll probably end up paying for a lot of the cost of my daughter's wedding.

[Dastard Stepchild]

365. I've felt the effects of not being able to marry...

I'm bi, so I have been able to partake in marrying the male partner that has brought me such joy, but also experienced the destruction of a relationship with an beautiful foreign lass that I could not have here with me because I could not marry her.

This isn't an issue of "wouldn't it be nice?" The inability to marry, and the struggle and expense of the long-distance relationship because of it, was the ONLY reason my former relationship ended. A beautiful thing cast aside because of a stupid policy. It burns me to no end.

[fortyfeetunder]

367. It;'s all about the legal stuff

Something is fundamentally wrong In a country where an individual can leave an entire estate to a dog or cat without much controversy, but not to a same-sex partner.

[The Doctor.]

368. You mean Nazis won't start riding on dinosaurs?

OMG! My wife and I are still Married... and we went to Massachusetts!

[newsdude]

370. I'm afraid to say it, but gay marriage and adoption rights

May cost me another four years to eight years of war, misery and everything else that the Republicans love to inflict on straight and gay Americans.

The Gay rights movement is losing the PR battle.
Republicans are the ones who are putting these questions on ballots because THEY KNOW it will bring out the Pavlovian Christian Right to defeat the measures and, as a byproduct, throw electoral votes to the republican candidate.

Whatever. Americans are being completely unreasonable. You can't reach these freakin RW Christian zombies.

Personally, I'm thinking we should ban the institution of marriage. We should have civil unions. marriages can happen in church and will be recognized as civil unions legally,

However, civil unions should be allowed to have as many consenting adults participate as possible.

Also, with regard to benefits. Eliminate spousal and family benefits. Instead, companies that have benefits should just say, okay, we allow you to cover up to four people, or whatever number.
And then the employee can cover any four people they want, family or not.

But whatever.
I'm sleepy.

[LostinVA]

404. Yup, because the NJ ruling really cost us the 2006 Election

Oh wait, IT FUCKING DIDN'T.

I am soooo tired of this stupid, irrational argument.

"Rights delayed are rights denied!" -- MLK, Jr.

[Zuiderelle]

407. "Rights delayed are rights denied!" -- MLK, Jr.

Exactly. I'm tired of anyone telling me that I need to be patient, to accept civil unions instead of marriage, to be grateful to have domestic partner benefits even though they are taxed, to create fucking TV ads (for cripes sake) to sway bigots. How long do I wait? Until I die? Until generations after my death? I'm amazed that there are people on this site who think it's ok for us to live our entire lives fighting for something we may never have, since, after all, there is ALWAYS something more important than gay rights.

[Tigress DEM]

371. Equal Rights, YES! Prosecute Hate Crimes, YES!

I simply think demanding that one word "marriage" is a fight we can't win.

I still think all other rights should be fought for on this issue.

To win in all other ways and give up only the semantics of the word.

[The Traveler]

373. Insofar as I can determine

not a damn thing.

It is my observation that when the rights of any human being are unjustly denied, then my own rights are in jeopardy. For this reason, securing GLBT rights is pretty high on my list of issues.

[leftofthedial]

379. it is the denial of equal rights to anyone, for any reason

that costs me. Without liberty for all, there is no liberty.

I support full and equal rights for everyone.

[TheBaldyMan]

380. I think I can shed more light than most on this matter as a UK resident

Living as I do in a Godless state that has 'civil unions' for a coule of years now I can safely say that our civil society has not collapsed.

In fact I feel far more comfortable living in a society that does not discriminate legislatively against gay people.

btw civil unions are marriages by another name. Nobody in the UK uses the term, it is ubiquitous to use the term marriage instead.

[Jasper Kent]

381. We ALL must work together

I absolutely agree with the original post.
I've never understood how someone ELSE's marriage could somehow make MINE less "sacred."
The sanctity of MY marriage is based on MY marriage...not anyone else's: straight, gay, bisexual, or whatever.

Before posting, I scrolled down to see the subject headings of the various replies and saw what I feared I'd see. A lot of energy-wasting, self-defeating infighting. Already.

Folks, if we expect to have any chance whatsoever, we've got to learn to get along amongst ourselves.
ALL of US. Obviously, there are many kinds of Democrats and not all of them see eye to eye. But for the sake of the party and for the sake of the country, we MUST put aside our differences and focus on working together.

The greatest weakness of the Democratic Party could be our greatest strength. We are made up of many factions, we appeal to a wide spectrum of people. We embrace many important issues. GREAT!
What we lack is cohesiveness. We can't be splitters. We gotta work together. We must FOCUS.

Thanks.


Peace&Love,
Jasper Kent

"He not busy being born is busy dying." -- Bob Dylan

[terrya]

386. Kicked, recommended, and bravo.

This gay DU'er thanks you for speaking up about us and our lives and the problems we, as GLBT people, face in this country.

:thumbsup:

[Chulanowa]

387. Wow, what a headache...

Give homosexuals all the rights everyone else has. Ain't no skin off my back. Hell, the way I figure it, I'm actually on the losing end, so long as they're (if you'll pardon hte term) getting the shaft. If homosexuals can legally be denied their rights because of their orientation, then ANYONE can be denied hteir rights over ANYTHING just as legally. Skin color, language, religion, number of toes, whatever. So long as some of us have their rights denied, it's the same as all of us having them denied. It's a trick of conservaticism to tribalize everyone and make us think that one group "deserves" more or less than another.

And to the Backlash Cometh, I don't think anyone cares about a "backlash". Sticks and torture didn't stop the sufferage movement. Hoses and dogs didn't stop the civil rights movement. What on earth makes you think Rush Limbaugh spewing more of his putresence is going to give pause to homosexuals seeking their rights?

Lastly, to foreigncorrespondant...

I'm a straight guy. This does not make me a hateful chauvanist rapist out to demean women. I do hope you realize that this applies to the majority of straight men while you're using the term as a perjorative.

[Triana]

391. I think it will cost our society MORE if we DON'T

... have full and total equal rights for GLBT folk - except a little narrow-mindedness and a lot of hate and exclusion. It won't cost ME personally, anything.

[Thor_MN]

392. Time. That's the only thing that is really going to change anything,

Well, maybe not the only thing, but change doesn't happen on a dime. I figure it takes at least three generations to effect change or many more to fully get rid of a concept. I loved my Grandmother, she was one of the nicest people I've ever known - wouldn't intentionally hurt a flea. But she was clearly a closet racist against people with skin tones other than her's. I've never really noticed my parent being racist and I sincerely hope that I am not - but the fact that I even think about it means that at some level, I am. Until the concept of racism draws widespread questions of "what does that mean?", it still exists.

That said, sexism of all sorts needs to become unacceptable, most probably by law. Eventually, church leaders will stop pushing a hatefull concept - justifying slavery based on the bible is no longer mainstream. At some point, those that continue to hate will become labeled as extremists and shoved to the fringes of society. They will continue to cling to the few phrases in their bibles that support their hate - but most kids will grow up without knowing it.

[LeftishBrit]

397. UK-er here

We don't strictly speaking have gay marriage; but we do have civil partnerships, and the line between the two is much fuzzier here than in the USA, as this is a far less religious country and 'marriage' is seen much more by most as a legal, and less as a religious, type of commitment. Civil partnerships carry all the rights and responsibilities of marriage, and gay couples tend to refer to their 'marriages' and 'weddings'.

And no, it hasn't caused any problems for me or for anyone else, except that they might perhaps have to buy a few more wedding presents.

I have come across people who were finally able to formally commit to their partners of 50 years, and I think it is great! (Well, not great that it took 50 years.) I think everyone should have equal rights.

[noonwitch]

400. It wouldn't change my life at all.

It would be good for wedding planners and reception halls, though.

[myrna minx]

411. Midlodemocrat, you're the greatest.

:hi:

[Connonym]

415. There is no personal cost to straights. That's the most infuriating part of it

It won't have any negative impact on my life whatsoever. I whole-heartedly endorse the notion of gay marriage. It's infuriating that it even has to be an issue. I hope that before long the idea of gays not being allowed to marry will seem as ridiculous as the idea of separate drinking fountains.

[Madspirit]

419. Midlodemocrat is so cool!

...and this is one of the few threads defending gays that hasn't been locked. Most of the homophobic threads stay open for forever but the ones fighting homophobia get locked. Good on you Midlodemocrat!

On a board that claims to be progressive, "Rights" should be assumed. It should be the default. As Bicentennial_Baby pointed out yesterday, anything else is actually completely against the rules.

DU should be shelter from the storm, a sanctum from the bigotry, not another place to feel marginalized.

Thank-you Midlodemocrat.
Lee

[Midlodemocrat]

427. Aw, thank you. Very nice of you.

I think this discussion has been pretty civil, which is nice.

Unlike the troll fest earlier. :scared:

[bicentennial_baby]

428. I tried....

and failed. BS, imho, but it is what it is... *sigh*

[Madspirit]

431. You did not fail!

You succeeded. You're heroic. People listened and read. Even one mind changed, counts. Don't discount what you did.
Lee

[Hosnon]

429. Count me in. The area is not exactly one in which I am extremely active

though.

I need a good leader here (Mississippi).

[bonito]

434. I agree It shouldn't even be an issue. k&r

[Jed Dilligan]

435. I'm with you on this (straight male here)

I have a cousin whose parents are ultra-freepers. He's epileptic and he's never had any independence. Brilliant guy and obviously gay... The way his parents have limited his life to prevent his coming out is appalling, like what you'd imagine under the Taliban. So I know how oppressed gay people are on a day-to-day basis.--not the fabulous, fashionable stereotypes from "Sex and the City," but ordinary Americans, like my obese nerdy cousin, who happen to be gay. It's up there with the struggles of immigrants and the homeless as one of the great civil rights issues of our time. If you don't accept this you are neither progressive nor liberal.

I hope people across "Middle America" are coming out and showing their communities that they're the same as anyone else. Instead of fleeing to New York, SF or LA, I hope the new generation of gay Americans considers standing and fighting for their rights where they are. We didn't end Jim Crow sitting up in nightclubs in Harlem... And we won't end homophobia hiding out in the Castro. But that's just a tactical note.