KO on Prop 8
POSTED BY: Khyron
UPDATED: Friday, November 14, 2008 13:30
VIEWED: 7790
PAGE 3 of 10
(Ok, I've had enough. Sorry for the rant, folks.)
"you think racism can be ended by ending affirmative action"...
Yes, I do. Make things equal for everybody, instead of trying to balance the scales against another group, we can finally end the bullshit, and just be folks.
"and you think that gays shouldn't be able to get married."
No, I don't think gays should get "married". They can have the same rights as married people under civil unions. But marriage is a religious institution.
"talk about natural inferiority of certain people"
I don't speak of "natural inferiority". People are people. Period. Cultures ARE different, however, and do I deny that some are more advanced than others? No.
I actually crave "real" equality. For all people, INCLUDING WHITE MEN.
That's really where you can't stand it, Rue.
You are so bitter at the way your life turned out, from the poor choices you made I might add, that you need a scapegoat. The "evil white males", are your "other" of choice.
And I'm sure, in your mind, that you make sense.
It the EWM that stopped you from getting that job. Not your own inexperience, ineptitude or attitude.
Can't buy that McMansion? Its the EWM that prevent women from getting a loan. Not, your bad credit.
No guys ask you out? EWM ALWAYS go for the pretty, stupid ones. Right? It has nothing to do with your attitude, your mouth, YOUR looks, or the idea that only Brad Pitt is good looking enough for you. Right? Not to mention that Brad Pitt also has to always agree with you.
So, you maybe go gay. EWMs AGAIN stand in your way. How dare THEY say you can't get MARRIED??!! Civil UNIONS ARNT GOOD ENOUGH, dammit. Sure, you would have all the rights and privileges, such as there are, from being married...but oh hell no!. You want a CHURCH TO HAVE TO MARRY YOU. After all, how would you walk your "bride" down the aisle?
But, its not just the EWM that contributed to Prop 8 is it? No, now it was those Hispanic men. Which, according to you and your belief structure, are just as bad. "They are too conservative and hold women down," you screech.
And, yes, I will even concede that Hispanic men are conservative. Its part of their culture.
But, Rue can't have that. Oh sure, you'll pule about disenfranchisement, and gentrification, and the white-washing of a culture...but that's only if you AGREE with said culture. Otherwise, you wouldn't mind getting rid of it.
Damn, Rue, you are really fucked up.
So, how about next time you think of opening your stupid Pollock mouth.... Don't.
You can spew your self-hatred somewhere else.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This is 100% wrong. Civil union, marriage, and domestic partnerships are very different from a legal standpoint. Has nothing to do with religion.
No, I don't think gays should get "married". They can have the same rights as married people under civil unions. But marriage is a religious institution....Sure, you would have all the rights and privileges, such as there are, from being married...but oh hell no!. You want a CHURCH TO HAVE TO MARRY YOU. After all, how would you walk your "bride" down the aisle?
First of all, civil unions and domestic partnerships lack MANY of the features of marriage, including portability across state lines, recognition for Federal tax purposes, instant status recognition at hospitals, legal difficulites in obtaining a dissolution etc. It would take a number of (expensive) legal documents to reproduce some of the SAME rights entailed by marriage, including durable power of attorney, HIPPA release, medical power of attorney, wills, etc.
Quote:
The General Accounting Office in 1997 released a list of 1,049 benefits and protections available to heterosexual married couples. These benefits range from federal benefits, such as survivor benefits through Social Security, sick leave to care for ailing partner, tax breaks, veterans benefits and insurance breaks. They also include things like family discounts, obtaining family insurance through your employer, visiting your spouse in the hospital and making medical decisions if your partner is unable to. Civil Unions protect some of these rights, but not all of them.
Secondly, only three states have even "civil unions" Vermont, New Jersey and Connecticut. California and Oregon do NOT recognize "civil unions", they have "domestic partnership laws".
I have absolutely no problem with the concept of gay marriage. I find it ironic that the same peeps who say gays are promiscuous libertines should then restrict homosexuals from expressing their love and commitment in the most durable way possible.
IMHO the only limits that should be placed on marriage are those that would prohibit marriages with inherent imbalances of power between the individuals. We all shrink from the idea of a neurotypical person marrying a "retard", an adult marrying a child, or one person to have many spouses because it allows an inherent imbalance of power. Other than that, I think governments should get OUT of the bedroom.
---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"And in CA, legally binding marriages are between 1 man and 1 woman."
And that is discrimination. Glad you see it my way.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
There's no discrimination here what so ever. You have no case.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That the people have spoken, is irrelevant when it comes to matters of equality. It saddens me that the people have spoken how they have, but it should not weigh on the duty of the court to declare the measure unconstitutional.
I'm sorry that so many out there, and so many on this board are not staunch defenders of the Spirit of the laws in the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. It is after all, the spirit of equality we are talkig about here. It is the message that is being sent, that "you are not one of us," "you do not get to have this thing that we have." It's so great apparently, that it must not be shared.
By the way, the 9th Amendment is part of the Constitution, and it essentially does give Gays the right to marry. All rights not enumerated in the Constitution should not be construed to deny or disparage others held by the people.
Being that prop 8 flies Directly in the face of the Constitution, which says right at the top that our more perfect union is meant to secure the blessings of liberty,
and being that the law disrespects the 14th amendment which states,
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,"
then it is obvious to me that those of you who would defend this vote, are either ignorant of the Constitution, or uninterested in Protecting the Spirit of our fundamental laws.
I'm not going to call you unamerican, because that's patently ridiculous. You all believe in America, but sadly, you apparently don't know what it is that America is supposed to be, and your thoughts on this issue, do a disservice to us all.
Sure, thoughts are great, and this topic has forced me to do some boning up on my Constitutional understanding, but you have helped to deny rights to your brothers and sisters, you have made us feel less whole as a people, less unified in a common belief in liberty.
This is no different than previous bans on interracial marriage. It helps nobody, and hurts those who would be in love, and would like to demonstrate that love the way the rest of us get to.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, BTW Wulf... I was also kept from jobs because of my gender. I rememeber being in a very distinct minority in university chemistry. When I worked for a source testing company I was prohibited from doing field work for over a year "because we've always had a woman in the lab". I got so pissed I started looking for another job, and started nagging my boss for field-work, which I finally got. I was sexually harassed at work and threatened with termination because I wouldn't knuckle under to an *sshole boss. When I outlasted the jerks and got a promotion, some peeps wouldn't talk to me for months because I was a woman.
It's not a theoretical problem. Both Rue and I are old enough to remember outright, verbally-expressed discrimination. Please get over your hurt feelings as a "picked on" white male. Most of us have suffered some form of discrimintation or another, some of us more so than others. I recognize your suffering, but you're so wrapped up in YOUR story that it seems to blind you to the problems of others.
---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wulf - oddly enough, I'm not bitter, but you do seem to be - as one of those typical 'angry white men' who have it in for anyone who's not a white male.
I have a good job that I enjoy that pays (very) well, I have a loving family who I love very much, and I have good friends. The only thing I worry about is what happens to my disabled family member should I die first, a possibility I've been preparing for nearly two decades.
If you think affirmative action is the CAUSE of discrimination you're seriously, and sadly, mistaken. Discrimination of all types started well before affirmative action (remember slavery ? remember women not having the right to vote or own property ? doesn't that all sound vaguely Taliban-esque ?), and will continue should affirmative action be eliminated.
"You are so bitter at the way your life turned out, from the poor choices you made I might add, that you need a scapegoat. The "evil white males", are your "other" of choice."
BTW
I'm not wrong about the fact that 1) I was the only female in those lines of hundreds of men and 2) I was denied the chance to SUBMIT AN APPLICATION simply because I was female. I was TOLD that but the people at the desk. I never expected a guaranteed apprenticeship - and looking at the line I knew my chances were very poor - probably as close to zero as you can get. But I did expect to be able to at least submit an application.
No matter - I already was accepted to college. I just didn't want to go to college at that time and would have preferred an apprenticeship.
And I'm not wrong about the fact that I was TOLD to not bother submitting the medical school applications, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T ADMIT FEMALES. Now, they didn't say it was b/c females were inferior, what they said was that they didn't have facilities for females. (That dodge lasted well into the 90's when the Supreme Court ruled it was illegal discrimination.) That was more consequential than the first overt instance of discrimination, but considering that I'm happy with what I do, it didn't make that much of a difference.
As for the rest of your diatribe, it's so stupid it's not worth replying to. But you really need to work on your hatreds.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I just posted a whole laundry list of LEGAL differences between marriage and civil union/ domestic partnerhsip and you breeze right past it? If it's a fact you don't like, you ignore it?
There's no discrimination here what so ever. You have no case.
---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"then it is obvious to me that those of you who would defend this vote, are either ignorant of the Constitution, or uninterested in Protecting the Spirit of our fundamental laws.
I'm not going to call you unamerican, because that's patently ridiculous. You all believe in America, but sadly, you apparently don't know what it is that America is supposed to be, and your thoughts on this issue, do a disservice to us all."
The "Spirit of the Law" is always up to interpretation.
Which is why, even though it clearly states that the right to have a weapon "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED", is still being "debated". Its "SPIRIT" is questioned.
If we truly followed the LAW, not some fake ass "spirit", we wouldn't even be having these conversations.
Gays could join in civil unions, I could carry a gun wherever I wanted, and we would never have entered into a war without the approval of Congress.
"you apparently don't know what it is that America is supposed to be.."
FUCK.
YOU.
I know that America is NOT supposed to be a PC Nazi state. Where I am forced to follow rules/laws that break my back and spirit.
Its NOT supposed to try and control my thoughts/feelings/words/ideas.
Its not a supposed to be a place where the ruling mafia can force its belief structure down my throat.
MY GOD! Germany is more free than us! Doesn't this ring any alarm bells?!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, and BTW Wulfie
You hate blacks, gays AND 'Pollocks' ? It just gets better and better, doesn't it ?
Just sayin' ...
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Neither the 9th or the 14 amendments give Gays the right to marry. You're seeing rights there which simply do not exist.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME