no marriages there
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 16:31 (twelve years ago) link
A Dem prez almost as evolved as Dick Cheney; who could ask for anything less?
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:22 (twelve years ago) link
That joke was pretty fresh a few days ago
― polyphonic, Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:24 (twelve years ago) link
wonder what James Buchanan would've said
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:31 (twelve years ago) link
he'd have been pissed about king county, washington
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:34 (twelve years ago) link
don't worry poly, I'm sure Bam will be fresh enough to croon the entire Atlantic soul catalog before the campaign is o'er.
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:38 (twelve years ago) link
holding out for stax/volt tbh
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:46 (twelve years ago) link
Hoping for "Tighten Up" myself, except he'd be using it to explain why he's caving to GOP budget cutters.
― improvised explosive advice (WmC), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:49 (twelve years ago) link
Mr Big Stuff would be a winner imo
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 01:05 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/19/health/dr-robert-l-spitzer-noted-psychiatrist-apologizes-for-study-on-gay-cure.html
not sure where to put this
― twittering spinster (k3vin k.), Friday, 18 May 2012 22:34 (twelve years ago) link
btw, i now search for this thread by querying "gay alfred"
funny -- that's how tricks search for me
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 18 May 2012 22:37 (twelve years ago) link
don't they usually get the Batcave?
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 19 May 2012 00:35 (twelve years ago) link
Stonewall Was a Wedding?
http://jacobinmag.com/blog/2012/05/stonewall-was-a-wedding/
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Monday, 28 May 2012 04:29 (eleven years ago) link
in a city where 40% of homeless youth are LGBT.
You know, every time I read things like this, I flash back on how happy those gay youth seemed to me in Paris is Burning. They were up at midnight, drinking orange Crush, just hanging out, summertime. Awesome.
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Monday, 28 May 2012 04:43 (eleven years ago) link
And then, of course, I think about how unhappy they must be now, all grown up and domesticated and hitched and bored and boring.
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Monday, 28 May 2012 04:44 (eleven years ago) link
don't be a player haterbeing domesticated is rad
― he bit me (it felt like a diss) (m bison), Monday, 28 May 2012 04:45 (eleven years ago) link
Gay marriage proponents feed us two flavors of justification for their crusade. For the romantics they supply fantasy — the notion that legal inclusion brings social justice; for the cynics, they tout the thousand individual rights that a marriage certificate bestows.
And for the lunatics, a third flavor: You were never going to be normal anyway.
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Monday, 28 May 2012 04:50 (eleven years ago) link
hi! who wants to get married?
― go down on you in a thyatrr (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 28 May 2012 04:54 (eleven years ago) link
I do!
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Monday, 28 May 2012 04:58 (eleven years ago) link
So long as it can be loveless, sexless and sheerly totemistic.
/Gay marriage proponents feed us two flavors of justification for their crusade. For the romantics they supply fantasy — the notion that legal inclusion brings social justice; for the cynics, they tout the thousand individual rights that a marriage certificate bestows./
― that's not kewell (Autumn Almanac), Monday, 28 May 2012 05:00 (eleven years ago) link
surely it's easier to not come up with any of that dumb shit and just let people get on with it
No, it's true. Marriage is going to make rich gay people start to want to buy stuff from Crate & Barrel and Room & Board and god knows what else. Better to keep them from marriage and force them to continue in their ascetic but charitable tradition.
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Monday, 28 May 2012 05:04 (eleven years ago) link
gay + marriage = rich gay
― that's not kewell (Autumn Almanac), Monday, 28 May 2012 05:06 (eleven years ago) link
well if teh gays get all this money then the rich straight guys won't be able to get the buttsecks in subway bathrooms from poor rentboys. I mean, it's simple math really. it's so much more romantic when they stay poor and desperate.
FFS
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 28 May 2012 06:10 (eleven years ago) link
Stonewall was to let the world know that gays are employable. Oh and human. AND THAT'S IT.
I get romanticising the struggle but this is really kinda ridiculous.
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 28 May 2012 06:14 (eleven years ago) link
never mind, there's a p healthy supply of closeted conservatives prepared to get their same-sex rocks off in cubicles xp
― that's not kewell (Autumn Almanac), Monday, 28 May 2012 06:16 (eleven years ago) link
lol
I can't paste it from my iPad but commenter "Tarzie" does a pretty good job of telling her to STFU
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 28 May 2012 06:18 (eleven years ago) link
Look no further than Argentina for real leadership in queer politics. While we were busy patting ourselves on the back, the Argentine legislature passed the Gender Identity Law, arguably the most gender-affirming bill in any country, to date. Argentineans can now change their legal genders without having to demonstrate any medical treatment, and the public and private healthcare systems in the country are banned from charging extra for gender-related therapies or procedures. These changes may not have the comforting ring of wedding bells, but they address administrative inequalities that present huge obstacles to trans people in accessing basic services.
Argentina managed to make both the Gender Identity Law AND gay marriage realities.
xp - VG OTM re "Tarzie"( + others)
― Pita Malört (Je55e), Monday, 28 May 2012 06:25 (eleven years ago) link
on the other side of the coin
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3sj5yPIiJ1qace89o1_1280.png
― The Reverend, Monday, 28 May 2012 06:38 (eleven years ago) link
Gay marriage doesn't "infuriate" most ppl who raise questions about current 'progressive' attitudes toward it. They are mostly saying it's not the end of the rainbow.
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Monday, 28 May 2012 12:24 (eleven years ago) link
"Raise questions" is an awfully rainbow-tinted way of putting it.
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Monday, 28 May 2012 12:31 (eleven years ago) link
dunno, rainbows don't mean shit to me
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Monday, 28 May 2012 12:57 (eleven years ago) link
motherfuck them and john wayne
― jump them into a gang - into the absurd (forksclovetofu), Monday, 28 May 2012 14:33 (eleven years ago) link
"Don't Worry Be Happy"
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Monday, 28 May 2012 14:41 (eleven years ago) link
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/05/31/boston_court_us_gay_marriage_law_unconstitutional/
― Ned Raggett, Thursday, 31 May 2012 14:26 (eleven years ago) link
Namely:
An appeals court has ruled that a law that denies a host of federal benefits to same-sex married couples is unconstitutional.The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled Thursday that the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, discriminates against gay couples.The law was passed in 1996 at a time when it appeared Hawaii would legalize gay marriage. Since then, many states have instituted their own bans on gay marriage, while eight states have approved it, led by Massachusetts in 2004.In 2010, a federal judge in Massachusetts declared the heart of the law unconstitutional in two separate lawsuits. The judge found that the law interferes with the right of a state to define marriage.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled Thursday that the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, discriminates against gay couples.
The law was passed in 1996 at a time when it appeared Hawaii would legalize gay marriage. Since then, many states have instituted their own bans on gay marriage, while eight states have approved it, led by Massachusetts in 2004.
In 2010, a federal judge in Massachusetts declared the heart of the law unconstitutional in two separate lawsuits. The judge found that the law interferes with the right of a state to define marriage.
― Ned Raggett, Thursday, 31 May 2012 14:27 (eleven years ago) link
awesome
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:14 (eleven years ago) link
Two of the judges are Reagan and Poppy Bush appointees, respectively.
― go down on you in a thyatrr (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:15 (eleven years ago) link
*tut tut* such activist judges
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:19 (eleven years ago) link
So, I'm really rusty on law, et al, but angling on state-by-state arguments means tough titty for the 30-odd states that have written gay marriage bans into their constitutions, right?
― Björk lied (Eric H.), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:21 (eleven years ago) link
not if it goes to the Honorable Anthony Kennedy
― go down on you in a thyatrr (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:24 (eleven years ago) link
discriminatory state laws will be struck down as well if the SC rules that discriminating against same-sex couples is unconstitutional. it's the same basic legal principle used to strike down Jim Crow laws.
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:26 (eleven years ago) link
so it depends how broad the SC ruling is. If SC strikes down DOMA just on grounds of it being an infringement on states' rights, then yeah those state laws will still stand.
But that ruling reads as a federalist argument against the Feds not against the States defining marriage.
― Love Max Ophüls of us all (Michael White), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:28 (eleven years ago) link
well yeah
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:29 (eleven years ago) link
Part of me is all "well, it's the state's faults for voting the way they did in the first place," but my state's (belatedly) in the same boat this cycle.
― Björk lied (Eric H.), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:34 (eleven years ago) link
It should take, like, 80 percent of the eligible voting body to write stuff into the constitution anyway. ¯\(º o)/¯
― Björk lied (Eric H.), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:35 (eleven years ago) link
A traditional federalist conservative would view marriage as something best left to the States (or the ppl) to play around with. It's a viewpoint that lost a lot of lustre when used to defend racism and segregation but which retains a certain appeal when I think about a host of other issues like whether a county wants to be dry or allow marijuana use or, as our DA is suggesting, reducing all drug personal possession crimes from felonies to misdemeanors.
― Love Max Ophüls of us all (Michael White), Thursday, 31 May 2012 16:40 (eleven years ago) link