swordsbane:

Hmm.. I might be wrong here, but the constitutional ammendments passed (where they were passed) were not from voters, but from the legislatures,

You are.  Voters in the states voted on the issue.

The ammendments are unconstitutional and will no doubt be defeated in court,…

LOL.  You don’t understand the structural framework of law at a most fundamental level.  Furthermore, even in states with no consititutional amendments, all courts except one have failed to find a right to same-sex marriage.  The court stats are pretty stark.

Consi, I’m willing to bet that, for your own reasons, your views on gay marriage are fairly cemented, but nonetheless you might be interested in Ed Brayton’s takes on the issue. He consistently makes a very good case for same-sex marriage, and as an added bonus his knowledge of constitutional law is pretty impeccable. He also lacks P.Z. Myers’ often irritating “conservatives and/or Christians are all insufferable idiots” attitude.

Wow I had no idea about the poor thing Shelly.  That is too bad.  Thanks for the z table, I found one last night after much searching.  The trouble I had was finding one that could calculate the area past a z that high without giving me the value of zero.

Webs—oh wow. That’s really tiny, and to be honest I’ve never had use for one that would go that small, do you mind sharing? Just because I’ve never needed one, it doesn’t mean that it might not come in handy someday.

Apologies for the digression. . .

He also lacks P.Z. Myers’ often irritating “conservatives and/or Christians are all insufferable idiots” attitude.

I wish the non-bigoted Christians would distance themselves from the bigots, who call themselves “Christians” either because they feel that some sort of twisted interpretation of a book entitles them to be bigots, or because some Christian guy in Rome tells them to be bigots.  The Christian guy in Rome recently pissed off a whole bunch of other bigots, called Muslims—which has their own book.

I have been to Christian churches that do not teach bigotry and I have heard of other such churches.  The United Church of Christ, the Episcopal Church in the US, and Metropolitan Community Churches are some examples of Christian churches that do not teach bigotry (although I understand that a few Episcopal churches have chosen to embrace bigotry).

Yeah, I was gonna say, thanks itdontmatter. PZ’s position seems to rely on the idea that the moderates and those who disagree with the extremists of that political pole should be distancing themselves. I think PZ finds their complicity insufferable.

Sadie,

I don’t which link within the link I’m supposed to click on to read your referral.  I’ve read very well reasoned arguments in favor of same-sex marriage.  Euguen Volokh has the most persuasive presentation that I’ve seen to date.  Although I disagree with his conclusion, I have very few issues with how he reaches them.

I have been to Christian churches that do not teach bigotry

Proponents of gay marriage are all about dialogue.

This is the most common reaction from proponents of same-sex marriage.  Begin the “dialogue” with an ethical slur.  Nice.

I also meant to add that though I read PZ’s blog, I agree completely with this:

...P.Z. Myers’ often irritating “conservatives and/or Christians are all insufferable idiots” attitude.

Amazing z-table
The link above is what I found.  And yes there really is no application for knowing what area of the curve falls between a z-score of 5 and 9, but in my stats class there was a question that came up and I wanted to see what I could find.  Consequently the value is 0.00002866%.

I would argue the point further, but to be honest, I’m exhausted. As to the issue of my flags, well, I am an American, but I live in Sicily. Currently, I am a Master-At-Arms(MP Officer) in the United States Navy. That said, you’ve brought up several good points and I really would like to hash this one out, but I just spent the past 14 hours or so standing out in the sun wearing a kevlar helmet, a patrol belt with my pistol and work gear, a gas mask at my side, an M500 shotgun in my hands in half riot gear for a series of security drills we’ve had here. I’ll post again if I can, but tomorrow morning I’m taking the advancement exam for a possible promotion to petty officer third class. So if you’ll excuse me, the argument will have to wait. Sorry.

Good luck on the exam.

Ditto.

swordsbane:

Hmm.. I might be wrong here, but the constitutional ammendments passed (where they were passed) were not from voters, but from the legislatures,

You are.  Voters in the states voted on the issue.

Not here in Wisconsin they don’t.  We vote for the poly-ticks and they decide what laws to pass.  In California it was the initiative process which ushered in the idea of the voters directly passing or shooting down laws.  It took a long time before it caught on anywhere else.  I meant that I didn’t know how they do it in many other states.

The ammendments are unconstitutional and will no doubt be defeated in court,…

LOL.  You don’t understand the structural framework of law at a most fundamental level.  Furthermore, even in states with no consititutional amendments, all courts except one have failed to find a right to same-sex marriage.  The court stats are pretty stark.

Consi… nice to know you’re still in the top of your game.  Last I heard, all contracts that are legal in one state must be honored in all states.  And according to the Feds, if you allow two willing participants to enter into a legally binding contract, you cannot pick and choose because of race, sexual preference or religion.  In my book, that means if you take religion out of it, any two people are constitutionally guaranteed the right to be endowed with all of the legal benefits and responsibilities of marriage.

And if you DO bring religion into it, if I can find a priest or captain to perform the ceremony (and I can do that in almost any state) then I can get married to any other person I choose “In the eyes of God”, but as things stand now, that will not carry any legal weight (which is as it should be)

The blocks to same-sex marriage have not yet been challenged using these arguments.  Barring a Federal constitutional ammendment (which has failed twice so far) the states don’t have a legal leg to stand on if they want to ban same-sex marriage.  It is still way early in the game.  The religious right can’t hold on forever simply saying “no” Once all the religious crap is out of the way, in the end, marriage is a legal contract.  A legal contract cannot be barred to people based on sexual preference unless they take civil rights backward several decades and that means changing existing laws.  The fallacy of the opposition is that they think they have to keep new laws from being made, but it will only take a good lawyer in the right court to shut down most of the opposition to same-sex marriage.  The only way to head that off is at the source of the rights guaranteed to all people; the United States Constitution.

Consi: This is the most common reaction from proponents of same-sex marriage.

Oh, come now, Consi. Surely you don’t really think that much of the opposition’s dialogue-- blather about “the sanctity of marriage” or “the sake of the children” [often stretching that last word into three syllables]-- constitutes any more meaningful discussion or argumentation.

Although I do agree that, in order to make inroads on this issue, proponents may have to become better versed in the inner workings of constitutional law (and less reliant on ideology alone) so that they can more formidably fight institutionalized bigotry.

Repeatedly using “the sanctity of marriage” or “the sake of the children” is a proganda tool used by the religious right in an attempt to justify bigotry (generally against gays at this time).  Similar propoganda tools were used when the religious right was trying to justify radial bigotry.  In what way is using the word “bigot” inaccurate in describing the religious right’s current attitude toward gays or it’s past attitude toward people of color?

swordsbane:

Read your Wisconsin Constitution.  Specifically, Section XII, Article 1.  It provides that the voters do indeed have to vote on a constitutional amendment.  It appears that registered voters will weigh in as constitutionally provided for in November of this year. http://www.madison.com/wsj/mad/top/index.php?ntid=74489&ntpid=1

Last I heard, all contracts that are legal in one state must be honored in all states.

You heard wrong. I don’t have the time to explain the intricacies of the full faith and credit clause and a law that is repugnant to state public policy, but that is it in a nutshell.

In my book…

Therein lies the rub.  We aren’t working from your book.  We work from each state’s Constitution.

As to your proposed argument, frankly I don’t see how swordsbane says so is going to carry much weight. 

Sadie:

Surely you don’t really think that much of the opposition’s dialogue…

But I do.  I think that it leads to dramatic change in how society organizes itself.  But we’ve been here before.

IDM:

I’m not sure how snow tires entered the conversation or the history of opposition to said snow tires.

Consi: But we’ve been here before.

We have? You must have gone without me, then--I really don’t remember. Anyway, we’ll have to agree to disagree, because I for one see some strong parallels between the Christian Right’s use of dialogue and pre-WWII Nazi propoganda.

And yes, I have heard of Godwin’s Law, and no, I’m not engaging in hyperbole to make a point.

And yes, I have heard of Godwin’s Law, and no, I’m not engaging in hyperbole to make a point.

Really?  Okay, I’ll take you at your word.  Let’s see, oh say 10 examples of pre-WWII Nazi propoganda that are mirrored today by the Christian Right in their dialogue.  This should be interesting.

Consi: I think that it leads to dramatic change in how society organizes itself.

I know it’s outa context and you could be right but I think most of the drama is caused by theists wanting their own way because it is somehow enshrined in their religion much the same as slavery is (not was).

SB: It’s simply a case of the christians feeling threatened by something someone ELSE is doing with their life, so they want to stop it.

If gays get married I certainly won’t have a drama. I don’t care what other people do unless they harm me or infringe on my rights.
And that’s where we’ll have to agree to disagree, Consi.
You believe it’ll be all doom and gloom for society if gay marriage is sanctioned by law and I believe the sun will still shine tomorrow and we’ll still be friends. 

Consi: Let’s see, oh say 10 examples of pre-WWII Nazi propoganda [sic] that are mirrored today by the Christian Right in their dialogue.

I know you weren’t after 14 Points of fascism per se but Fascism seems to work extra well in xian (Catholic) countries - no reason why it can’t work in America - oh hang on - much of it is. 
This one might work better.
I just know you’re gonna shoot me down - I’ll stand perfectly still. 

Sadie: for your reading pleasure, here is where we’ve been before with Consi.  Have fun!

Swordsbane- I agree with you about the morality of same-sex marriage.  But Consi knows wherefrom he speaks about the law.

Consi- yes, we’ve been through this before.  When you talk about how the legal process works in this case, I have no doubt that you’re right.  But when you say of same-sex marriage

I think that it leads to dramatic change in how society organizes itself.

then you’re indulging in wild speculation.  LJ was right to call you on this:  what evidence is there to make you think that anything dramatic will happen?  You think everyone will become gay and the human race will die out and then go to hell?  Pulleeze.

Speaking of teenagers, I have just been flipping back and forth between SEB and Yahoo Answers.
To make a long story short although I don’t always agree with every one on SEB I certainly respect 99% of the comments I read here.
As for Yahoo answers the kids questions, I just removed them from my “favorits.”
I won’t ever go there again, I promise Mommy!

Consi: Let’s see, oh say 10 examples of pre-WWII Nazi propoganda [sic] that are mirrored today by the Christian Right in their dialogue.

Examples extracted from http://www.hatecrime.org/subpages/hitler/hitler.html

“At the beginning of the twentieth century, the Jews sit at the junction of the world financial markets. They are an international power. Although only one per cent of the world’s population, with the help of their capital, they terrorize the world stock exchanges, world opinion, and world politics. New York is today the center of Jewish power.” - Nazi propaganda film, “The Eternal Jew,”

“Homosexuals display political control far beyond their numbers. A tiny fraction of the population (about 1 percent), homosexuals have one of the largest and fastest growing Political Action Committees in the country (The Human Rights Campaign) and give millions of dollars to candidates”. - Robert Knight, Family Research Council, testifying before the US Senate Labor Committee hearings on S.2238, July 29, 1994.

“Fifty-two out of every 100 doctors were Jews. Of every 100 merchants, 60 were Jews. The average wealth of Germans was 810 marks; the average wealth of Jews 10,000 marks.” - Nazi propaganda film, “The Eternal Jew,”

“Homosexuals are among the most economically advantaged people in our country. Research by marketing firms shows that as a group homosexuals have higher than average per-capita annual incomes ($36,800 vs. $12,287), are more likely to hold college degrees (59.6 percent vs. 18 percent), have professional or managerial positions (49 percent vs. 15.9 percent...” - Robert Knight, Family Research Council, testifying before the US Senate Labor Committee, July 29, 1994.

“In this way, they (the rats) spread disease, plague, leprosy, typhoid fever, cholera, dysentery, and so on. They are cunning, cowardly, and cruel, and are found mostly in large packs. Among the animals, they represent the rudiment of an insidious and underground destruction - just like the Jews among human beings."- Nazi propaganda film, “The Eternal Jew,”

“The disgusting details of the homosexual lifestyle explain why so many diseases are present in the homosexual community.” - American Family Association, Homosexuality in America: Exposing the Myths.

“The Jew is interested instinctively in all that is abnormal and depraved. He seeks to disrupt the people’s healthy judgment.” - Nazi propaganda film, “The Eternal Jew,”

“Ellen [Degeneres] tries to sanitize immorality with a lesbian lead character who is perfectly normal, healthy, and just like everybody else, even as she becomes more and more shrill in promoting an abnormal lifestyle,” Leslie Carbone for the Family Research Council, “WILL HOLLYWOOD EVER GET IT?”

“What he [a Jew] calls ‘art’ must titillate his degenerate nerves. A smell of foulness and disease must pervade it. It must be unnatural, grotesque, perverted or pathological.” - Nazi propaganda film, “The Eternal Jew,”

“what are considered unnatural sex acts, sex between members of the same sex.” - 700 Club, 12-24-93 (source: People for the American Way Foundation)—“[gays have an] attraction to unnatural acts” - Paul Volle, Chairman, Christian Coalition of Maine, “The Gay Agenda,” October 1998. --- “Chief among those lies is the claim that homosexuality is a healthy, natural and fixed ‘identity’ - as opposed to a harmful, immoral and changeable behavior.” - Americans for the Truth About Homosexuality, run by Peter LaBarbera --- “To throw out morality is to bring in every perversion: Adultery; Homosexuality; Exhibitionism, Incest, Prostitution, Pedophilia, Bestiality, Sadism, Masochism, and Necrophilia.” -"The Gay Agenda”, published by Paul Volle, Chairman, Christian Coalition of Maine, October 1998 --- “The practices of those people is appalling. It is a pathology” - Pat Robertson, 700 Club, 6-6-88

“What does the ancient Talmud law teach? Let us hear some quotes....[now supposedly quoting the Talmud] Praise to the Lord who has set apart the holy Israelites from other people. The heathen, who do not keep the law, will be destroyed.” - Nazi propaganda film, “The Eternal Jew,”

“Militant homosexuality is fundamentally opposed to religion, family, and anything that presupposes a natural moral order, a transcendent God, or something else higher than ourselves. The activist homosexual agenda and worldview are fundamentally incompatible with Christianity or any form of true religion, because homosexuality is ultimately narcissism” - THE ASSAULT ON CHRISTIANS BY THE MILITANT HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT, by Steven A. Schwalm, Family Research Council

“Wherever rats appear they bring ruin, by destroying mankind’s goods and foodstuffs. In this way, they (the rats) spread disease, plague, leprosy, typhoid fever, cholera, dysentery, and so on. They are cunning, cowardly, and cruel, and are found mostly in large packs. Among the animals, they represent the rudiment of an insidious and underground destruction - just like the Jews among human beings.” - Nazi propaganda film, “The Eternal Jew,”

“They are like rats, skulking in their closets, copulating in mad frenzies, unable to control their appetites, sniffing around the doors of school classrooms for fresh prey. Young prey. They are perverts and hedonists and will make fine kindling in Hell. But before then, before God gives them what they really deserve, they must be stopped here on Earth.” - Fundamentalist TV preacher, quoted in “The Gay Agenda: Talking Back to the Fundamentalists.”

“The Jew has always known how to assimilate his external appearance to that of his host...Under this mask he increased his influence more and more in Aryan nations and climbed to higher-ranking positions. But he could not change his inner being. “ - pamphlet handed out at “The Eternal Jew,”

“Necessarily, much of the U.N. effort to advance homosexual ‘rights’ has been covert in nature....U.N. proponents of so-called ‘gay rights’ consequently employ a variety of definitional subterfuges.” -
HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT A “UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHT”, by Tom McFeely, Family Research Council Web site

And the examples go on, there are several more than the 10 requested by Consi.

I just noticed that Dr. Paul Cameron proposed a right wing Christian solution to the gay problem which perfectly mirrors the Nazi solution to the Jewish problem:

“At the 1985 Conservative Political Action Conference, [Dr. Paul] Cameron announced to the attendees, ‘Unless we get medically lucky, in three or four years, one of the options discussed will be the extermination of homosexuals.’ According to an interview with former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, Cameron was recommending the extermination option as early as 1983.” - Mark E. Pietrzyk, News-Telegraph, March 10, 1995. (FYI - Cameron’s now-debunked research forms the foundation of most religious right anti-gay ‘studies’

Not that I disagree about the danger and unappetizingness of the Christian Religious Right; but I must agree with Consi here that comparisons with Nazis are a bit exaggerated.  At least so far.  I know (at least by hearsay) whereof I speak, living in a former Nazi country, and knowing former Nazis and current Neonazis: while there may be parallels, we have a long way to go before any comparison with Nazis is justified.  This is not to say that there’s no danger that America will head in that direction; eternal vigilance is necessary, as Jefferson said.

I believe that the main difference between the Religious Right and the Nazis is that they would have “love in their heart” as they herded homosexuals into Zyklon-B “showers”. 

Cameron has advocated the tattooing of AIDS patients on the face—the Nazis required that homosexual men wear pink triangles on their sleeve and the the Nazis tattooed the forearms of homosexuals and Jews in concentration camps.  I find it interesting that Cameron would advocate the tattooing of AIDS patients (who were predominantly gay at the time) when many right wing Christians consider tattoos to be forbidden: 

Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.  Leviticus 19:28