*claps* Kudos to you Les! I spent most of yesterday pissed off about this issue. The most insane thing I heard in the conversation was that government rewards the marriage of only man/woman couple because they are able to reproduce and add children to the society thereby insuring the continuation of society. I just have a difficult time with government being involved in marriage at all. I am in a committed long term relationship and we have every intention of being together until death do us part. We just simply chose not to jump for that legal document. Yes the insurance bit would be nice, especially since I am considered uninsurable due to pre-existing health conditions. But the rest can and will be dealt with with other legal documents, a will and a living will. I don’t care if I have any tax break or not.

I am curious to see if anyone really CAN justify this nonsense without dragging religion into it. I am outraged at the Vatican (not surprised, just outraged) with their latest “we’re right, everyone else is wrong, so everyone needs to be like us” document. It not only opposes marriage between same-sex couples, it opposes adoption of children into such a union. Because oh yes, it’s so much better to let kids get lost in foster care and our horrible system than to place them into a home where they will be loved and cared for. ARGH!

Between Bush and the Pope, you’d think we were living about 4-500 years ago.

It’s surreal.

It just amazes me how weak and pathetic their arguement against gay marriages are.
Sounds like some states will allow it soon
like New Jersey, then let the fireworks fly.

Check this topic as well.  I’d love to hear your ideas on it, as well.

(Hrm.  One too many “as well"s there, huh?)

I keep praying someone will show up to “protect us” from the Republicans:-)

Without playing the religion/morality card, the ban can’t be justified.
When my now ex-wife and I got married we had a civil ceremony performed by a judge.
The judge gave us copies of ceremonies he performed and allowed us to “cut and paste”.
We had zero references to god or religion.
Unlike some ceremonies I’ve heard about that wanted it the same way, our judge was cool and “stuck to the script”.
I know several gay couples that have been together longer than most of my straight friends.

Les, check out my friend Mike’s posts about this same subject at http://www.insignifica.org

President Bush, in a recent question and answer session at the Allentown, Pa. Yankee Doodle Day Care Center fielded questions from way in the future voters. The subject most, not surprisingly, had on their minds was gay marriage.

One purple-headed youth wondered why gays would want to marry anyway, adding that �That is so gay, dude.�

The often confused, but determined to not show it, leader of the greatest nation on earth appeared to ponder this question carefully before responding; his deep consideration made apparent by a furrowed forehead, a prolonged stare and a quick dismissive huff of a laugh.

�I don�t really know the answer to that one. If you had asked me that a couple of months ago I would have said I don�t know the answer to that but that we are confident the Supreme Court will rule responsibly on the Texas sodomy case. Marriage is a fabulous promise a man and a woman make to each other. Your daddy gets down on one knee and invites your mommy to share his life. It�s just so special and so, well, fabulous and it is the beginning of a special phase of his life that he will never equal with any other fabulous thing he does. Having said that, it seems sinful somehow for anyone to want to cheapen this nuclear [pronounced awkwardly] union by frivolously trying to mimic the fabulousness of it.�

The next question from a little red faced four-year-old girl seemed to anger and frustrate the president momentarily.

�My daddy and my daddy want to move to Canada so they can get married. Why can�t they stay here and marry instead?�

�Well, because we don�t do silly stuff like that in this country, honey. Let me ask you; do you read your bible? Because if you did, you would see it doesn�t teach us that homosexuals [pronounced awkwardly] are fabulous. In fact it calls them sinners and while I recognize that we are all sinners, homosexuals [pronounced even more awkwardly] are actual sinners. The bible teaches us to love everybody but it�s kind of difficult to love� er, gays, don�t you think?
�Uh, not really.�
�Sure it is. Trust me, you�ll come to recognize your daddies as perverts soon enough. Have you ever seen two men have sex? I can tell you it is a sickening sight; not fabulous at all.�
�Johnny, Mike and then Susie and then I really have to go run the country.�
Johnny: �Are any of your relatives gay Mr. President?�
�Johnny� with a withering stare �let me answer that by saying �what? What?� Can we have only serious questions here please?�
At the end of the Q and A the president smiled insincerely and upon departing, instructed the children to vote republican as soon as they were old enough.

Brock,

Is that for real, or did you write it yourself as a feasibility exercise?  If real, I’ve gotta get it! Is it on a web-site?

After Bush’s “I am mindful that we are all sinners” intro the gay marriage topic at his (cough)press conference I expected intense media outrage (I never learn, do I?). Sinners? Is this a viable concept for governance in the 21st century?!?  What’s next..Scapulamancy?  (Oh yeah, Poindexter’s “Terrorism Futures Market” was a close form of divination - relying on the Omnipotent Market instead of animistic spirits).

I’ve known a number of homosexual couples who have been together for 20 -30 years, who are dignified model citizens, and who conscientiously involve themselves in the community.  But our leaders call them sinners who don’t deserve the rights accorded to any Las Vegas one-night stand.

My wife, an ICU RN, has frequently dealt with situations in which one member of a gay or lesbian couple is dying, but the couple has never gotten around to legally establishing power of attorney.  Generally, there is some antagonistic member of the dying partner’s family whose zealous objections to the lifestyle override everyone else’s grief, and the bereaved partner is cut out of any contact or decision-making.

So much for family values.

One more thing…

I keep hearing opponents of gay marriage stating emphatically that it was God’s intent that marriage was to reflect procreation between men and women.  Does this mean that people who can be demonstrated to be sterile should not be allowed to marry?

And if it is simply a matter of procreation who needs marriage at all? Just about any girl of 13 can manage that astoundingly common ‘miraculous’ feat and a lot of them do. It is just one more form of control, a carrot/stick scenario punishing the outsiders and rewarding the good little followers of convention. Yay government....our eternal parental control.

Ken, I wrote it, wanting to poke fun at Bush’s desperate attempt to get the greater GOP behind him on a single issue. I thought of having even one-year-olds ask relevant questions but realized even Bush wouldn’t bother to indoctrinate someone that young. Is it on a web-site? Yeah, this one. Heh heh.

My first thought when I heard him say “I am mindful that we are all sinners” was that he’s right about himself at least. It angered me and I expected the remark to turn around and bite him on the evening news. What was I thinking? The optimist in me expects that it yet will, eventually. After all, christians love to call out others’ sins but hate to be accused of sinning themselves. 

Goodness Brock, you scared the hell out of me!  I thought Bush really said that crap!  I was just hooking the hose to my car’s exhust pipe when I decided to come back in and read one more post.  I could not bear to live with the thought of such a moron with his finger on the “new-cew-ler” button

the only legit reason to keep gays from marrying is Tab A fits in Slot B (or theoretically could).

Penis fits in Vagina.  That’s it.  That’s the only viable reason to deny gay folks marriage.  That’s the grand special sanctity of it all.  And to be fair to those who have been injured or born differently, “theoretically penis fits vagina”.
If under normal circumstances the couple would have a working penis and vagina, then they’re cool.

It’s not about procreation, We let sterile couples get and stay married all the time.

It’s not about raising kids, we let couples get away with never having kids and never adopting.

It’s not about love.  We let Britney get married and nobody stopped that.  People have marriages of convenience, and while we may not like it----we can’t do dick about it.

So if love, raising kids, race, class, libido, and fertility don’t matter

Gays should not be allowed to have kids or get married becuase, they are not good parents or moral examples for the youth of america. The amercian public has already gone to hell, why destroy the little integrity that we have left, by allowing these creatures to dominate our views. It is wrong. Plain and simple. How does a two year old explaint that she has two fathers? She cant.

Snotty rich kid, you’re an ass. I don’t think that needs any explaination.

Snotty Rich Kid, you asked,

How does a two year old explaint that she has two fathers?

She shouldn’t have to.  That question is a varient of the previous “How does a two year old explain that one of her parents is black and the other is white?” Will you now say that interracial marriages should not be allowed?  The only reason the two year old would have a problem is when other two-year olds are raised to be bigots.  Besides I think having to deal with tauntings of one’s parental lifestyle infinitly more preferable to not having any parents and being raised by the state.

I keep hearing the marriage thing tossed about. I was surprised it got any traction. But just like most things it is made messier then it is.

‘Marriage’ is a joining of two complentery contrasting things for the purpose of creating a result that has value beyond the sum of the two parts. Not just sticking two things next to eachother.

A good analogy is concrete and steel. EACH has widely recognized excellent properties in a huge variety of applications. Both are often used individually. Mostly in structural applications. But when married together they each strengthen the weak properties of the other and are FAR stronger then each could ever acommplish indivdually. This is unversily accepted as how to make a foundation. The least noticed, yet most vital part of any sound structure.

Human marriage is a complimentary contrast of genders. Each becomes more by the joining with the other. This base provides a child a sense of security in the world untill they can become self sufficient. This is how children learn about men and about women. This is HOW they BECOME self sufficient. To call anything OTHER then a joining of a man and a woman with PERMENANT intentions and the anticipation of bearing children is not a marriage it is something else. Relationships have a huge variety of forms, from friend, mentor, partmer, trusted acuaintence, profesional, etc. But if you throw a football at a batter you are NOT playing baseball. No matter how much you cry that it ‘SHOULD BE’ or that you have the ‘RIGHT’ to baseball like the other players.

snotty rich kid, a 4 year old shouldn’t have to explain it, but it is taboo and “disgusting” to so many people that it’s painful for the children of homosexual couples. if people wouldn’t think of it as so bad, that 4-year old would be a lot better off.

maybe a bit of open-mindedness is in store? i know it’s scary for someone like you, but can make the world a much better place.

Well, your’1 good reason.....’, we’ve had the argument from physiology (slot V, tab P), the argument from genetics (homosexuality is not reproductively fit), the argument from the Bible (homosexuality is evil), and now we have the building contractor’s argument (heteros are like concrete and steel).  At least this is a new twist.  Not really an argument, however.  Analogies can be dandy to try to make something clear, but they don’t prove anything.
You say:

To call anything OTHER then a joining of a man and a woman with PERMENANT intentions and the anticipation of bearing children is not a marriage it is something else.

Wow, this is restrictive as it gets.  So men and women who are too old, genetically incapable, or simply not interested in having children should not be allowed to marry?  Or if they are married, these marriages should be annulled?  Even the fundies don’t go that far.

But if you throw a football at a batter you are NOT playing baseball. No matter how much you cry that it ‘SHOULD BE’ or that you have the ‘RIGHT’ to baseball like the other players.

This is the same kind of argument, as in not an argument.  You might as well say:

But if you give a ballot to a woman you are NOT engaging in politics. No matter how much you cry that it ‘SHOULD BE’ or that they have the ‘RIGHT’ to vote like the men.

Following the argument from Bob the Builder, there will be a feature presentation of the argument from Dora the Explorer. Stay tuned for tomorrow’s episode of the argument Barney’s Clues Blues.

zilch, elwed, you guys maketh me to laugh much.

On a completely separate topic, but one that I just have to share, the wife and I just got a little dalmation/labrador mix puppy.  He’s so damn cute.  He looks like a dalmation with a black saddle on his back, and a long black glove on his front left paw.

I’ve never had a puppy before!  They’re cute!

Some optimism in an otherwise nasty debate.  The story of Michael Hendricks and Rene LeBoeuf. The two men that lead the fight for equal rights for gays in Canada
Story here

.... Both men became AIDS activists, fighting for rights, medical treatment and understanding for their dying friends. The experience inspired the fight for marriage, they say.

As partners fell ill, survivors had no rights and were often left with no say in medical treatment.

“Doctors would seek the opinion of some old aunt rather than asking the lover,” says Hendricks, who still works with sufferers of HIV and AIDS.

“When you’re in a hospital, the most powerful words in the world are ‘I am the husband’ or ‘I am the wife.’ When those words come out, everything else stops.”

When a partner would die, the survivor often had no rights for benefits or property. Vindictive families who did not approve of homosexuality would sometimes clear out homes, leaving the survivor with nothing.

“In the AIDS world, we would see people who would go home to an empty apartment,” Hendricks recalls. “It just added to the horror.

“It was a nightmare. The family could take anything because there was no clarity.”

Anecdotal support of exactly what you were talking about Les.  They seem to be a whole lot like everyone else.  What in the world could be so threatening about this?

Yesterday I watched an interview with one of our Provincial Premiers.  He is from Alberta and a staunch rightwing anti gay marriage advocate.  He was being questioned by a reporter and she finally asked the question I’d been asking all along.  She asked him what did he find so objectionable about Gay marriage.  He said “I find nothing objectionable about it.  It’s just wrong” then went on to talk about the sanctity of the institution and what not. The comment which leads me to believe that in Canada at least, some poiticians will give it lip service if it suits their constiutency.  Knowing full well that it will be made law next year and there is little, if anything they can do to stop it.  And they have excepted the fact that they are now in the minority.