Comments 1 - 40 of 68 Next » Last » Search these comments
A bit old since Mexico recognized same-sex marriages, but this graph says a lot.
In another thread, I mentioned that I call the former Soviet Union a conservative society. I'd add China to that. Conservatism doesn't necessarily prefer capitalism over communism. If you look at the countries in beige or shades of red, those are the conservative societies.
Put aside America for a moment and look at all those countries against gay rights; they aren't places you'd like to live. And that's why we don't want America to be like those places.
In the US marriage is regulated by individual states. If you want to get married, move to Hawaii.
And it's not about equal rights. It's about divorce lawyer's looking to cash in on the lucrative gay divorce market.
Well go to Mexico and get married if it's that important to you.
Go get married like a cheap bottle of Tequila, have them bake you cake, make a day of it.
Conservatism doesn't necessarily prefer capitalism over communism.
True, but the larger issue is primitive superstition vs enlightenment liberalism. The Russian revolution imposed Soviet communism on a vast, mostly primitive area. Stalin cancelled the effort to replace superstition, and his disciple Putin has made a pact with the Russian Orthodox Church, making himself a sort of defender of the faith against enlightenment liberalism. That pact keeps the Russian Orthodox preachers in power, and their followers loyal to Putin.
If you want to get married, move to Hawaii.
The 14th Amendment applies equally to all 50 states. If you want to live in a country that doesn't have the equal protection of the laws, move to Afghanistan.
And it's not about equal rights.
Yes, it is. There are also other benefits, including to the wedding business and probably also the divorce business, but those do not negate the fundamental rights to equal protection of the laws, freedom of religion, etc.
go to Mexico and get married if it's that important to you.
And after Florida's 2000 election debacle, go to Mexico and vote if having your vote counted is that important to you. Some people, for example most Americans, believe that the equal protection of the laws should apply in this country too.
Conservatism doesn't necessarily prefer capitalism over communism.
True, but the larger issue is primitive superstition vs enlightenment liberalism.
I think there's an intimate connection between primitive superstition and conservative culture.
Conservatism doesn't necessarily prefer capitalism over communism
The majority of Russians who supported communism over capitalism during the Cold War would in their own society have been considered conservatives although it was the left they favored. Conservatism also means the support of traditional values including marriage being between a man and a woman versus the progressive idea of anything goes as long as it doesn't scare the horses. It isn't often acknowledged by the left but African-Americans, steeped as they are in the Christian tradition, are also strongly opposed to gay marriage but you would not consider them conservative on most issues.
traditional values...
e.g. polygamy and slavery and all sorts of discrimination against women, just like it says in the Bible.
the Christian tradition
There are many Christian traditions, and many non-Christian traditions. You and the bigots with whom you share a Texas pew don't own a monopoly on the creation of the universe, as much as you'd like to extend your own delusions of grandeur that far.
Well go to Mexico and get married if it's that important to you.
Go get married like a cheap bottle of Tequila, have them bake you cake, make a day of it.
Captain, gay marriage is coming to your town sooner then you think. The world is changing right before our eyes, and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. Not even God.
are you saying the capt'n lives in a town full of dismal marriages???...??..?.*
Captain, gay marriage is coming to your town sooner then you think
Polygamy will probably soon be repackaged as a "progressive" idea too: there is no reason to discriminate against people who are polyamorous. LOL. Why should a woman deciding to marry a couple (i.e. becoming a second wife) be subject to discrimination and prevented from equal protection of law if both she and the couple as the counter-party entity voluntarily engage each other? then after this second union, why should a 3rd woman be discriminated against when she decides to engage the triple?
Reality, you're feigning stupidity there. Even marcus can tell you 2=2, and 3>2. Different numbers are not equal.
A marriage takes two operands. A man or a woman is an operand, now that specific gender difference is no longer a requirement; a couple is also an operand, so is a triple. Soon enough perhaps a dog, a cat, or a goat. LOL.
A woman marrying a couple still involve only two operands: the new woman, and the couple. Either of the two parties to the 2nd marriage can initiate divorce; either one of the original couple seeking divorce from the other member of the original couple would result in functional end of the couple as an entity to the 2nd marriage (i.e. death of an operand to the 2nd marriage).
I think gay marriage should be called "The Divorce Bar Revitalization Act."
@Reality, what is the point of that post? Mockery or serious paranoia? You think a couple are equal to only one person, so the couple should get only one vote between them? You think a goat is legally equal to a person now, so that if you kill a goat and eat it you should get executed? Goats don't even live to 18, so for that reason (among other really obvious reasons) they can't vote and they can't get married. You're grasping ever further for straws, and becoming absurd. I don't know what it is about this issue that causes certain people to become unhinged, but as a divorced guy yourself you're hardly in a position to lecture other people about the sanctity or "operands" of marriage.
Captain, gay marriage is coming to your town sooner then you think.
You might want to Google recent Florida news on the topic.
Captain, gay marriage is coming to your town sooner then you think.
You might want to Google recent Florida news on the topic.
Oh, we got trouble, trouble
Right here in River City.
Trouble with a capital "T"
And that rhymes with "G"
And that stands for gay!
Google recent Florida news on the topic.
From January 5, 2015: "Same-sex marriages began in Miami-Dade County half a day earlier than in the rest of the state."
I think the Captain meant it arrived already in January, with majority support already before then, rather than "sooner than you think."
True, but the larger issue is primitive superstition vs enlightenment liberalism. The Russian revolution imposed Soviet communism on a vast, mostly primitive area. Stalin cancelled the effort to replace superstition, and his disciple Putin has made a pact with the Russian Orthodox Church, making himself a sort of defender of the faith against enlightenment liberalism. That pact keeps the Russian Orthodox preachers in power, and their followers loyal to Putin.
The post 1991 Conservative Revolution in Poland resulted in the backwater abandoning progress and superstitiously banning abortion in a return to the Faith against Enlightenment Liberalism.
Unlike Russia, Poland has constitutionally banned Gay Marriage.
Putin is not Stalin's disciple.
Reading the US Press on Russia is like watching Fox News on just about everything. It will actually help you know less about Russia.
Conservative Revolution in Poland
This might be a definitional issue, but I think conservative revolution might be an oxymoron. It was a mostly Catholic revolution, during the reign of the Polish Pope. Poland had a mostly tragic 20th century: after a brilliant peak in the 1930s, it lost everything during the Nazi occupation, then endured more than 40 years of Soviet occupation. By 1991, hardly anything remained except Catholicism and submarines with screen doors.
Putin is not Stalin's disciple.
Putin didn't appear to be before, but that has changed. Putin's paternal grandfather worked as a cook for Stalin.
Putin didn't appear to be before, but that has changed.
One reason why reconciliation is complicated in Russia is that the Kremlin has not yet developed a consistent narrative of the Soviet past. Vladimir Putin has condemned the repressions, but has also held up Stalin as a strong ruler who led the Soviet Union to victory in the second World War and built his country into a superpower to rival the USA.
See also Presidents Jackson, Lincoln, and FDR, who did both amazing things for the people, and committed acts of oppression like initiating the Trail of Tears or putting Japanese-American citizens in camps. Putin acknowledges Stalin's terror, but also acknowledges he was in charge when Russia faced the most dangerous and deadly attack in history that would have resulted in the entire population murdered or enslaved.
Does the Jefferson-Jackson dinner celebrate the Trail of Tears, or the Roosevelt Institute celebrate the imprisonment of Japanese Americans? Are they obligated to remind people of these things every time they talk about Jackson or Roosevelt's accomplishments?
Well, that's it then. Byrd was once a member of the KKK decades ago, so Democrats Rascist... Obama is a follower of Saul Alinsky, so a communist... Walker Bush sold things to the Nazis, ergo, George and Dubya are Nazis...
Since Putin's granddad was a cook, and his father fought in WW2 as a footsoldier in an army controlled by Stalin...
Let me know when Putin rules by terror and sends a few million to the Gulag, and not when he asks for a light sentence to a bunch of pink-haired anarcho-feminists who shoplift Chickens to shove up their Vajayjay(NSFW), break into buildings and vandalize them; destroying ceilings and doors in the process, have an orgy in a public museum (Totally NSFW) , wielding shut the doors of Private Property Restaurants, burn Police Cars , and the final straw, disrupting a Church service.
That Putin! Punishing innocent, law-abiding artists!
The funny thing is that most of the deeds above except the last one, including the orgy in the museum, were largely unpunished by the authorities. I guarantee you that "artists" booking space in the Smithsonian and engaging in an orgy would not only be arrested, but Jon Stewart would laugh as they were tazed and dragged from the building and given lifetime sex offender status. To say nothing of breaking into an LAPD garage and burning a van.
JAMAICA AND THE CARIBBEAN
https://www.youtube.com/embed/F1XxeqOIBao
http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/london/lgbt_rights/caribbean.pdf
When do the Sanctions begin? When does the boycott of Carnival Cruiselines begin?
Georgia, the Country:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/pgVnmFjEZyY
I say nothing of Saudi Arabia, where Marco Rubio is happy to visit and would oppose any sanctions or even a statement with his very heart and soul (as would every just about every US Politician, Dem or Rep)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/saudi-arabia-beheads-gays_b_6354636.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia
Don't hold your breath for sanctions, or full press hand-wringing press secretary condemnations.
Psaki or Herf or Obama would never say "The killing of gays is unacceptable, and all economic options are on the table to prevent these human rights abuses."
Great, now it's time to impose sanctions on Saudi Arabia.
After all, the US acts to defend FREEDOM(tm) and Human Rights.
Welcome to our world....
Indeed, one may fairly describe equality as a mixed blessing, but the equal protection of the laws is a requisite of being a whole person within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. Arlo Guthrie joked in "Alice's Restaurant" about how two guys together could avoid the draft without fleeing to Canada, but that wouldn't work anymore. It reminds me of Winston Churchill on democracy being "the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."
I have wondered why religious "conservatives" fight against equality so strenuously, and I think it comes down to the question of whose world is it: they believe in a hierarchy where their personal imaginary friend (really an extension of their own ego) makes the rules, and the government follows them, and they can look down on anybody they say their imaginary friend doesn't like. As Lyndon Johnson said, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."
warm welcome - finally
BAO, EsC is the new screen name of the commenter formerly known as sbh. The actual person is probably happy about today's decision. As is Grumpy Cat, "because everyone deserves the right to be married and miserable."
Laughing my ass off at Scalia. Since when does Scalia give two shits about "Democracy"?
I'm straight and I got married at the JP, there wont be any happy joyfull song and dance with a crap cake center piece and any family gay weddings funded by me.
You're talking about another moron.
If I got married at the JP without needing the popes blessing, then damn it you and Bruce can do the same.
I got married at the JP without needing the popes blessing
That's been the point all along. Religious "conservatives" claim that the only real marriages are the ones the Pope or their imaginary friend would bless, regardless of what our Constitution says, because they hate America and are in love with their imaginary friend (aka their own ego). Frankly, even though you came from South Carolina Baptists, you should know better, having got legally married to a Catholic. You know from your own experience that in America people have a right to get married without the Pope's blessing. You should be celebrating, or at least you should try to find something nice to say.
After all, the US acts to defend FREEDOM(tm) and Human Rights.
Oh wait, hold on a minute there. Impose sanctions on our King?
Hmm 3 wives and me...no more I've got a headache ...and my costs go down to 25% of gross...what's not to like? I'll give the libbies their due on this one...
Polygamy will probably soon be repackaged as a "progressive" idea
“I support gay marriage. I believe they have a right to be as miserable as the rest of us.â€
― Kinky Friedman
Didn't Ted cruz say the last 24 hrs were the most darkest in American history-thou dost protest too much-what is he hiding?
“I support gay marriage. I believe they have a right to be as miserable as the rest of us.â€
― Kinky Friedman
This is evidence God hates heterosexuals, not Gays.
This SCOTUS legislation is really scary. Next, they are going to authorize hunting licenses to Immense Hirsute Lesbians to bag anything with testicles for one week of the month.
Hmm 3 wives and me...no more I've got a headache ...and my costs go down to 25% of gross...what's not to like? I'll give the libbies their due on this one...
Polygamy will probably soon be repackaged as a "progressive" idea
Depending on a person's income level. My personal cost of living is much less than 25% of my gross income. The reason why I'm not taking on 3 girlfriends at the same time is because I don't have the time to deal with 3 women simultaneously in addition to supporting my ex-wife and kids from marriage. OTOH, dealing with one girlfriend at a time then rotate her out after about 3-5 years and support my child with her for the next 20 years while entertaining a new girlfriend will be quite manageable. In fact, more kids will give me the incentive to work harder and be more productive. I can see some other high income individuals might be able to manage time more efficiently than I do or just prefer spending more time on girls than on work.
I'll bet you large money polygamy will not be on even the most ardent Fundie Mormon's legal mind for a while. It took this long for a sliver of the conservatives to realize they had gay friends, family and that it might be something they might have to kinda stop using as their personal vote-rousing whipping boy. They're still maggots in the remarkable process of becoming flies. Let's let them savor their defeat.
I was not aware of the AmericanThinker article, but thanks for bringing that cogent article/argument.
Comments 1 - 40 of 68 Next » Last » Search these comments
Update June 26: "Gay Marriage Backers Win [USA] Supreme Court Victory." You can read the full decision online via the SCOTUS website.
"Mexican Supreme Court Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage"
"How Mexico Quietly Legalized Same-Sex Marriage"
Same-sex couples have been getting married in Mexico since at least 2010, when Mexico City began officiating same-sex weddings. Now, same-sex couples will be able to get married at any city hall in Mexico, without needing to travel to the federal capital.
Same-sex couples have been getting married in Canada since at least 2005.
The June 26 decision by the Supreme Court brings unanimity to continental North America, though as thunderlips11 pointed out below, that leaves out some of the islands on the continental shelf.