At some point these arguments all boil down to social control and the extent to which we want religion implicated in our policies. The reason we are even talking about this is because most ppl now find it mostly socially tolerable to cohabitate, have open marriages, divorce, and have children out of wedlock so why not same-sex marriages? If they suggested criminalizing divorce and cohabitation and enforcing the traditional stigma of bastardy, I could see why same-sex marriage would be a threat because they'd be saying that they want traditional Judeo-Christian mores to be expressed democratically as laws and codes and ordinances. They'd still not be stoning adulterers or pig farmers or lobstermen, so I'd still say they were stupid shits...
― Love Max Ophüls of us all (Michael White), Tuesday, 12 June 2012 16:38 (eleven years ago) link
The bilogical complementarity route is pure horsefeathers
Then there's this study, which NRO is making much.
― a regina spektor is haunting europe (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 12 June 2012 16:39 (eleven years ago) link
Pretty sure he just means big spoon-little spoon.
The quote I read earlier was "I think this is the church trying to uphold our traditional teachings and understanding about marriage and trying to avoid a sudden and rapid redefinition of marriage for everybody at a time when many marriages are in difficulties and where it is very unlikely that, within just a few weeks, a universally acceptable new definition of a fundamental social institution can emerge."
Which appears to be going "Hey look, traditional gender roles are breaking down with catastrophic results for marriages and you want to expand it to people who don't even have different gender roles? You're juggling with dynamite!"
― Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 12 June 2012 16:42 (eleven years ago) link
It's far easier to study outcomes than it is to study the effect of pervasive and indisidious prejudice against homosexuality. All the gay parents I've known in SF have pretty predictably normal types of children. That might not be so much the case in Mississippi or wherever.
xpost
― Love Max Ophüls of us all (Michael White), Tuesday, 12 June 2012 16:49 (eleven years ago) link
So very sick of the whole false argument that mixed-sex marriage = mixed-sex parenting
― Autumn Almanac, Tuesday, 12 June 2012 21:33 (eleven years ago) link
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-16/christian-leaders-unite-against-gay-marriage/4074612
The Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, has written a letter to all his parishioners saying that for the good of society, the definition of marriage should not be changed.Archbishop Jensen told Saturday AM he decided to act after the Catholic church told him it would be circulating anti-gay marriage material on Sunday."We ought not to feel that the whole matter is being inevitably going in one direction but that we ought to make our voices known so that we make it clear that the Christian faith opposes this for the good of all," he said.In his letter, Archbishop Jensen says it is beyond the power of parliament to change the definition of marriage.He says legalising gay marriage would have a "bad impact" on society."If for example the Federal Parliament were to change the definition of marriage in the Marriage Act, it would be a symbolic victory for those who think that it is possible for two men or two women to be actually married," he said."That symbolic victory would play itself out in the classrooms of the nation; as from then on it would be impossible to teach in the classroom that marriage is exclusively for male and female."It would have a bad impact, even though it's attempting the impossible."I would say, following the teaching of the bible, that although friendship and fellowship is a great thing, the sexual relationship between two males or two females is something that's not for our good."For those who take that line; which I think is the truth, this will make it very difficult, if not impossible to keep saying that."He says it is not an issue which can simply disregarded by the Anglican church as it affects all of society."You may notice that we're not talking about Anglicans. I'm talking about all of us. This affects you; it affects me. It affects our society," he said."My children and your children go to school and - this is just one illustration, let me say - and we will be taught that the sexual relationship, as symbolised in marriage itself, between two men, is just as authentic and just as true and just as good for us as a relationship between a man and a woman."Now, all down through human history and in the majority of places in the world today, people don't think that's for the good."
Archbishop Jensen told Saturday AM he decided to act after the Catholic church told him it would be circulating anti-gay marriage material on Sunday.
"We ought not to feel that the whole matter is being inevitably going in one direction but that we ought to make our voices known so that we make it clear that the Christian faith opposes this for the good of all," he said.
In his letter, Archbishop Jensen says it is beyond the power of parliament to change the definition of marriage.
He says legalising gay marriage would have a "bad impact" on society.
"If for example the Federal Parliament were to change the definition of marriage in the Marriage Act, it would be a symbolic victory for those who think that it is possible for two men or two women to be actually married," he said.
"That symbolic victory would play itself out in the classrooms of the nation; as from then on it would be impossible to teach in the classroom that marriage is exclusively for male and female.
"It would have a bad impact, even though it's attempting the impossible.
"I would say, following the teaching of the bible, that although friendship and fellowship is a great thing, the sexual relationship between two males or two females is something that's not for our good.
"For those who take that line; which I think is the truth, this will make it very difficult, if not impossible to keep saying that."
He says it is not an issue which can simply disregarded by the Anglican church as it affects all of society.
"You may notice that we're not talking about Anglicans. I'm talking about all of us. This affects you; it affects me. It affects our society," he said.
"My children and your children go to school and - this is just one illustration, let me say - and we will be taught that the sexual relationship, as symbolised in marriage itself, between two men, is just as authentic and just as true and just as good for us as a relationship between a man and a woman.
"Now, all down through human history and in the majority of places in the world today, people don't think that's for the good."
― Autumn Almanac, Saturday, 16 June 2012 21:27 (eleven years ago) link
Trying to draw any straight line from "gays marrying" to "societal breakdown" is crazy.
If society is breaking down (uh, is it?), it is not because gays can marry, because, not to put too fine a point on it, all the 'alarming trends' anyone can point to began back when gays could not marry and they seem to be continuing on their merry way, regardless of gays marrying in a few states and foreign countries. So, any connection is simply via the observer's prejudice, and not any discoverable connection in real life.
― Aimless, Saturday, 16 June 2012 21:41 (eleven years ago) link
hence all his vague 'not for our good' crap
― Autumn Almanac, Saturday, 16 June 2012 21:46 (eleven years ago) link
the house of reps releases its same-sex marriage report tomorrow, so all the bigots are in overdrive atm
― Autumn Almanac, Saturday, 16 June 2012 21:48 (eleven years ago) link
Somewhere Maggie Gallagher weeps:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/23/opinion/how-my-view-on-gay-marriage-changed.html
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 22 June 2012 15:42 (eleven years ago) link
if by "weeps" you mean "purses her lips and narrows her eyes"
― Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Friday, 22 June 2012 15:42 (eleven years ago) link
Don't you dare discuss her mating rituals in public, sir.
Roffle at this part:
And to my deep regret, much of the opposition to gay marriage seems to stem, at least in part, from an underlying anti-gay animus. To me, a Southerner by birth whose formative moral experience was the civil rights movement, this fact is profoundly disturbing.
Took ya long enough there, buddy.
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 22 June 2012 15:45 (eleven years ago) link
guys we're only like 18 mos away from destroying western civilization. it's gonna be so awesome!
― goole, Friday, 22 June 2012 15:45 (eleven years ago) link
I plan to make s'mores over the ashes of Billerica
― Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Friday, 22 June 2012 15:46 (eleven years ago) link
Rod Dreher is shook.
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 22 June 2012 16:28 (eleven years ago) link
This is not a retreat, it’s a surrender. He surrendered for strategic reasons, but this is a surrender. Waiting to see what Maggie’s reaction is…
scanners.gif, I hope.
― Biff Wellington (WmC), Friday, 22 June 2012 16:43 (eleven years ago) link
Crossed fingers!
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 22 June 2012 16:46 (eleven years ago) link
Here we go:
My friend and mentor and one-time boss David Blankenhorn has just published a New York Times op-ed in which he gives up on opposing gay marriage. I haven’t yet read it carefully enough to respond, except to say that “the argument from despair” is the single most powerful argument gay-marriage advocates yield. I wish you well, old friend.
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 22 June 2012 17:33 (eleven years ago) link
"You're off the Christmas card list BTW."
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 22 June 2012 17:34 (eleven years ago) link
VV cover story on the "Gay Inc" corporatized activist culture (HRC, GLAAD, the usual suspects) and their intolerance of dissent during 'wartime.'
In March, the coffeehouse chain said it supported same-sex marriage. The National Organization for Marriage called for a boycott of the chain, and HRC told everyone to shop there.
It appeared to be a win for both gay rights and overpriced coffee. But that's only if you see gay people just as consumers and not as workers. As Daniel Gross, executive director of the food and retail group Brandworkers, says, "Advocacy organizations celebrating large companies like J.C. Penney and Starbucks, without challenging the impoverishment of tens of thousands of LGBT employees at those businesses, do a disservice to all working families. In our corporate-dominated society, it's certainly easier to get along when it comes to companies that interfere with economic rights, but working-class LGBTers and especially the many queer youth of color in retail deserve better."
Like GLAAD with J.C. Penney, HRC was less interested in LGBT workers at Starbucks.
"As a queer person, I find it upsetting that they tell queer people to shop at Starbucks," says Liberte Locke of the Starbucks Workers Union. "It's one thing to say congratulations to Starbucks, but when encouraging people to support a business, various things should be considered. Unfortunately, HRC felt the need to push queer people to spend money at Starbucks while neglecting other issues—the fact that most of their coffee isn't fair trade, the fact that they routinely fire people trying to organize."
Locke notes, "People actually came in saying, 'Hey, I've never come in here before, but I heard Starbucks supports same-sex marriage, and I want to support you guys!'" But the PR move, she finds, "has nothing to do with Starbucks supporting queer relationships. It has everything to do with [CEO] Howard Schultz finding another group of people to spend their money there. If Starbucks cared about queer relationships, they'd pay their workers a fair wage and give them set schedules, so that queer partners could develop their relationships. They'd pay us enough to pay our rent and to raise or adopt children."
http://www.villagevoice.com/2012-06-20/news/gay-inc-free-speech-rights/
― Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Friday, 22 June 2012 17:44 (eleven years ago) link
Tuck in that bottom lip before you trip over it, Maggie.
― Biff Wellington (WmC), Friday, 22 June 2012 17:46 (eleven years ago) link
michael lucas is the fucking worst
― radical ferry (donna rouge), Friday, 22 June 2012 17:56 (eleven years ago) link
good piece - thx for the link morbz
― a dense custard of infinity (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 22 June 2012 18:00 (eleven years ago) link
Darth Vader's daughter married
― a dense custard of infinity (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 22 June 2012 18:05 (eleven years ago) link
hey! is Maggie wearing a woman?
― a regina spektor is haunting europe (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 22 June 2012 18:16 (eleven years ago) link
maggie short for Magorium
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Friday, 22 June 2012 18:18 (eleven years ago) link
or Magnus
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Friday, 22 June 2012 18:19 (eleven years ago) link
Meanwhile in Illinois.
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 22 June 2012 22:31 (eleven years ago) link
Need a clip of Nancy Pelosi dancing to ZZ Top's "Sharp Dressed Man" at Bahney Fwank's wedding?
― a regina spektor is haunting europe (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 11 July 2012 15:21 (eleven years ago) link
Like a nylon lemon peel.
― the new dire homonormativity (Eric H.), Wednesday, 11 July 2012 15:25 (eleven years ago) link
Entertainment -- Rod Dreher gets tripped up by his crunchy-con spirit guide Wendell Berry. Between that and Blankenhorn he must be feeling a little sadder now.
― Ned Raggett, Monday, 16 July 2012 15:34 (eleven years ago) link
Pobrecito:
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/San-Francisco-archbishop-elect-in-DUI-arrest-3818542.php
― Ned Raggett, Monday, 27 August 2012 22:26 (eleven years ago) link
well at least he wasn't molesting children amirite
― The Radioheads are massive in the Man community (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 27 August 2012 22:30 (eleven years ago) link
Meanwhile, something quite nice happens:
http://fishingboatproceeds.tumblr.com/post/30254767825/my-friends-meg-liffick-and-joe-ball-got-married
― Fiendish Doctor Wu (kingfish), Tuesday, 28 August 2012 01:00 (eleven years ago) link
marriage equality passed first reading in nz parliament by 2:1 margin, tasmania's lower house just passed it ~40 seconds ago (no link yet)
― * The "no hands" rule can be compared to socialist tax policies (Autumn Almanac), Thursday, 30 August 2012 08:52 (eleven years ago) link
Nice!
― Ned Raggett, Thursday, 30 August 2012 12:42 (eleven years ago) link
looking into the numbers on a scary poll:
http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2012/07/new-marriage-poll-results-dramatic-change-voters-views-%E2%80%94-or-fluke
A June poll showed support for the effort to amend Minnesota’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage eroding rapidly, with 49 percent of those surveyed planning to vote against the measure, vs. 43 percent in support.
A poll released Sunday, however, shows 52 percent voting yes vs. 37 percent no.
― Newgod joins this board, and quickly he's some dude (goole), Tuesday, 4 September 2012 20:33 (eleven years ago) link
Can absentees vote on that?
― ella fingerblast hurls forever (suzy), Tuesday, 4 September 2012 22:10 (eleven years ago) link
idk but it'd be messed up if not
― Newgod joins this board, and quickly he's some dude (goole), Tuesday, 4 September 2012 22:50 (eleven years ago) link
Absentees meaning expats - foreign residents can't vote on Governor races...
― ella fingerblast hurls forever (suzy), Tuesday, 4 September 2012 22:58 (eleven years ago) link
so liberal, minnesota
― k3vin k., Tuesday, 4 September 2012 23:21 (eleven years ago) link
someone stole our NO yard sign but left the obama one
― j., Wednesday, 5 September 2012 00:44 (eleven years ago) link
this is the most awesome thing ever, i want a posterhttp://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/309233_10151925021655656_87099082_n.jpg
― This cad needs a cordial introduction to Eugene of Oxbow. (forksclovetofu), Saturday, 8 September 2012 06:22 (eleven years ago) link
Support "Gay" Marriage? Liberalism Opens The Door
― This cad needs a cordial introduction to Eugene of Oxbow. (forksclovetofu), Saturday, 8 September 2012 06:25 (eleven years ago) link
http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2012/09/minnesota_marriage_amendment_supported_by_50_percent_opposed_by_43_new_poll_says.php
― Ham Lushbaugh (Eric H.), Tuesday, 11 September 2012 14:31 (eleven years ago) link
Silent majorities don't die out. They are merely replaced with identical successive silent majorities.
― Ham Lushbaugh (Eric H.), Tuesday, 11 September 2012 14:35 (eleven years ago) link
sick
― goole, Tuesday, 11 September 2012 16:53 (eleven years ago) link
The amendment is favored in all regions of the state, with the closest margin in the Twin Cities metro area where the "yes" vote is ahead just 46 percent to 44 percent. The amendment is also supported by voters in the 18 to 49 age group by a margin of 48 percent to 42 percent. "Likely voters" over the age of 50 support the amendment 51 percent to 44 percent.
call me blind but some of these numbers i find hard to believe.
― goole, Tuesday, 11 September 2012 16:54 (eleven years ago) link
In the media and in every public sector, the message couldn't be more one-sidedly anti-amendment in MN. That said, I'm talking mostly about the Twin Cities. That said, the Twin Cities account for about 2/3rds of the state's entire population.
― Ham Lushbaugh (Eric H.), Tuesday, 11 September 2012 17:43 (eleven years ago) link