Gay Marriage to Alfred: Your Thoughts

The problem is a semantic one. Sure there need to be benefit-related unions recognized by the state -- at least til we get a more mature state in about 2000 years -- but calling any of them "marriage" brings religion into it, mistakenly.

So if "unions" are approved that bring the same benefits, let them have their word.

Fuck that. Except for all the airy-fairy imaginary crap, I don't think we should let religion try to exercise a monopoly on any word or concept, especially if that concept exists exclusive of religion.

The first problem with civil union laws is that they create institutions that are "separate but equal" to marriage, i.e., not equal at all. Marriage is too deeply interwoven into the laws and culture of the US to be mirrored in law without language that makes "civil union" an apparent synonym to "marriage", language that upsets the fundies just as much as "gay marriage" and which would never see the light of day at the federal legislative level. The second problem is that marriage is a civil union already! Nobody's arguing that anyone's church should have to agree (against what the proponents of prop 8 say). There's simply no good reason to have a ludicrous synonym for "marriage" written into federal law just because a bunch of bigots hate gays.

No, nobody's arguing that anyone's church should have to agree. But we're up against ppl like McCain's "Obama's an Arab" woman. They'll never get it.

They'll never get it.

dick?

hay pterodactyl know what u and the thing u like to have sex with have in common? they're both dicks!!!

I thought someone said that pterodactyl is a lesbian.

Not to be openly contradicting you or nothing kool aid.

hay pterodactyl know what u and the thing u like to have sex with have in common? they're both cunts!!!

good save

I think we need more words that mean basically the same thing as marriage, to make the issue confusing. Right now the positions are all but clear-cut between moderates, liberals and conservatives. That's unhealthy for our discourse and endangers the job security of the bench.

for those who came late, Human Rights Campaign is useless:

"You will notice that the website of the biggest gay rights group in the country has one single mention - it's a blog about a celebrity, of course - of the massive protests that occurred for marriage equality across the country yesterday. (A letter from Joe Solmonese tells us to be nice.) You will also notice that a handful of young non-professionals were able to organize in a few days what HRC has been incapable of doing in months or years.

"You will know from brutal experience that in the two decades of serious struggle for marriage equality, the Human Rights Campaign has been mostly absent, and when present, often passive or reactive. Here's a simple statistic that might help shake us out of complacency: HRC claims to have spent $3.4 million on No On 8. The Mormon church was able to spend over $20 million, by appealing to its members. Why are non-gay Mormons more capable of organizing and fund-raising on a gay rights measure than the biggest national gay rights group? I mean: they claim (absurdly, but bear with me) 725,000 supporters and members. In the summer, the major problem for No On 8 was insufficient early funding. If HRC had led, they could have thrown their money weight behind it. If every supporter had given $20 - chump change for the biggest ever battle yet for civil rights - they could have delivered $14 million overnight. So why didn't they?

"They will argue that this was a state, not a federal, measure. Sure - but its implications were obviously national, as protests in almost every state revealed. They are supposed to have "expertise" - but the ads that ran in No on 8 were the usual fearful, focus-group driven, conviction-free pap. So in the biggest national struggle in the history of gay civil rights, this organization - which has vacuumed money from the gay community for years - were by-standers. Why is that not a scandal?"

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/11/the-useless-hum.html

The protest in SF on Saturday was a little disorganized but in an almost spontaneous, fun way.

Anyone watch Jon Meacham, Dan Savage, my local rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and, er, Ashton Kutcher on Bill Maher's show? Kutcher was pretty effective, and I was reminded of why I voted for Ros-Lehtinen over the Democrat despite her love of war and Israel.

yes, i watched. Kutcher was 'pretty effective,' yes, and also 'kinda crazy,' if you disagree with him. also, not quite as informed as he might appear. were you aware that R-L's district went for Obama and is that consistent with your take on the cuban vote?

"Pretty effective" in this context means "cut through the bullshit." But he can be Dan Savage's cumboy.

were you aware that R-L's district went for Obama and is that consistent with your take on the cuban vote?

Not only did my district go for Obama, but the Cuban-American vote went overwhelmingly (by forty points in some districts) for McCain.

The speeches at the end of the rally in Seattle (including Balliet) were deadly boring and sucked the energy out of the crowd. The next thing ("Day without a Gay"?) is supposed to be on 12/10, with the idea being 10 months of events on the 10th of each. It was fantastic to see the huge number of people streaming down Pine St. from Capitol Hill though.

The Mormon church was able to spend over $20 million, by appealing to its members.

Why aren't people burning down the Mormon temples right now?

There would be complaints.

I'm proud we (Seattle peeps) were able to get about 6000 people together spontaneously, tho. I make a point to avoid podium protest speeches though.. sorry, Jaq.

A small but spirited bunch at South Coast on Saturday -- around 300 to 500 total, a lot of support from passerby.

There would be complaints.

Not from me!

I used this quote elsewhere, but any entity that spends at least $20 million dollars to help take away rights from people whose presence doesn't affect it at all must, in its inner core, hate itself -- severely. At this point, should people help allow it to implode? Or should it be left alone. /rhetorical.

The Mormons have made history with this, and it's a history they'll* eventually regret.

*"they" in "they'll" being those who stand to benefit most within the church. I'm leaving the pawns out of this.

lolz protests. the time to protest was BEFORE the election guys

ppl are saying this (ditto fundraising)

Shakey, you're right but you're sooo wrong as well

protests aint gonna do shit at this stage. now it goes to the courts.

I wonder if the missing chapter in the Book of Mormon ordered all residents of Utah to procure catamites.

we protested by voting no. not enough apparently.

I was trying to cast it as a Marriage Equality rally, rather than a protest against Prop 8 - I mean regardless of how much time I've spent in Orange County, I can't vote there. Still, my favorite slogan was "Keep Your Magic Panties Off My Civil Rights".

I liked the sign that said, "Do You Want ME Marrying Your Daughter?"

shakey, if you think the post-election protests aren't doing shit right now, please step up and explain, or step off, seriously.

Enough waiting for the fucking courts.

i think the el coyote protest/boycott is stupid -- one person gave $100 to the "yes" effort and the entire business has to go down with the ship? granted the restaurant sucks, but FIGHT THE REAL ENEMY etc.

Enough waiting for the fucking courts.

Well, it looks like the fucking courts will probably deal with it next.

shakey, if you think the post-election protests aren't doing shit right now, please step up and explain, or step off, seriously. Enough waiting for the fucking courts.

Not sure what course of action you're advocating here, exactly...? what are the protests accomplishing? how will marriage rights be guaranteed without the legal process? Prop 8 has passed. There is no un-passing it (at least not until the next election). The only way it will be struck down is through legal challenges.

Look, this is the civil rights challenge of our generation, and it took the Warren court to give steel to the legislation.

Dan Savage on Colbert was spot on about old people. It's a shame that bigotry has to die out vs. people getting mellow and enlightened in their last decades.

what are the protests accomplishing?

A whole helluva lot of publicity that's keeping the issue in the news... which is exactly what it needs as long as possible, especially now that we know Obama has been elected.

Yes, nothing can't officially change until the courts or a reverse initiative passes, but you can't just tell people to shut up and be quiet about it, then just wake up before the next call, which was EXACTLY the fucking problem BEFORE Prop 8 passed, right?

(Savage has been great on this issue btw)

Dan Savage on Colbert was spot on about old people. It's a shame that bigotry has to die out vs. people getting mellow and enlightened in their last decades.

i agree with this. but it's true that every time attitudes change en masse, it's because of one generation dying off and a new generation being born that can think for itself. unless they become born-again xtians. but i think the fundie youth is a vocal minority.

and for the record I'm not telling people to "shut up" I'm just noting that protests at this particular juncture aren't going to accomplish anything beyond giving people a forum to vent their anger. which is all well and good. but not exactly crucial to developing and implementing an effective legal strategy.

also don't expect anything from Obama on this on a federal level. while I take him at his word that he believes gay couples should have equal marriage rights, his position is to let the states' and the courts fight it out.

I'm just noting that protests at this particular juncture aren't going to accomplish anything beyond giving people a forum to vent their anger. which is all well and good. but not exactly crucial to developing and implementing an effective legal strategy.

With that attitude, white males would still be the only ones allowed to vote.

xp - Old people *can* change once they find out their loved ones -- friends, family -- are gay or have close friends who are gay. Not all of them do, but I don't completely buy the "old people have to die out before we get anywhere" meme.

*sigh*

if you think protests now have the same PR effect as civil rights protests in the late 50s and early 60s you are sadly delusional

I think it's incredibly toxic to label civil rights' protesting as something that has missed its window of opportunity.

Having said that, if your protest does not have focus and organization, I do believe it is less likely to be successful. All of these things should really be linked and, where possible, feed into a larger machine, preferably one using the legal system to cement its case. That lack of organization is precisely what makes protests turn into venting sessions or out-and-out riots.

my "favorite" argument among the yes on 8 guys is that being gay is "not natural" -- but all the artificial crap you put in and on your body every day, all the toxic chemicals in your household products, all the synthetics in your clothing and furniture, that you CHOOSE to buy, that's all god's will.

HI DERE completely on the money. I'm rarely a pro-protest guy, but the concurrent Saturday protests was definitely a step towards the organized and angry protests that can make a difference, as Dan notes. As far as I know, none of them turned into riots. I might agree that the venting sections are past their prime.

As Mark Leno pointed out on Saturday, here in SF, Prop 8 won 52%-48%. Prop 22, in 2000, won 61.4% to 38.6% with the same wording.

Michael, surely you mean California voted that way, not San Francisco?