Same-Sex Marriage ban no more.




Posted by WillisGreeny

Happened 2 weeks ago in Iowa:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295416,00.html


I love the fact this happened here, a state loaded with conservatives :D

I hope it holds.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Welcome to Canada four years ago, Iowa.




Posted by BLUNTMASTER X

Welcome to the UK in uhhhh

I can't actually remember when it became legal here.




Posted by The Hate

Why does the U.S hate same sex marriges so much. I really dont mind them.




Posted by Fate

I guess it's because the foundation is primarily composed of religious folks. This is a step in the right direction.




Posted by WillisGreeny


Quoting The Hate: Why does the U.S hate same sex marriges so much. I really dont mind them.


the southern/religious defence: As soon as a man can marry another man, then what is to stop him from marrying children? animals? trees? apple pies? eventually leading him to fornicate with Satan!!! It all leads to EVIL, I say. EVIL!!!



Posted by Omni


Quoting WillisGreeny: I hope it holds.


You got plans or something?



Posted by WillisGreeny

ofcourse, I'm opening up a hotel exclusively for same-sex honey mooners.... Problem is the location for such a resort. A nice, gay place would be great. I'll probably be in compation with whatever Rosey is doing with that cruise ship.




Posted by Last Fog

Why are straight people so happy when this happens. It's like a white person rejoicing over affirmative action.




Posted by Xeones


Quoting Last Fog: Why are straight people so happy when this happens. It's like a white person rejoicing over affirmative action.


couldn't put that one any better.

Im not really for or against gay people or their marriages...but they ****ed up a good thing. Nobody expected them to get married because it was illegal...and in most cases it still is. but now, in those select states...they cant just 'date' someone (if thats what you want to call it) without someone asking the most death deserving question..."When are you going to get married"




i say **** you...thats when.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Because people want equality. Nothing more, nothing less.




Posted by The Hate

Has anything changed in Canada when they first made it legal for same sex marrige?




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Negative. Actually, gay marriages get the exact same rights straight marriages do here.




Posted by Xeones


Quoting Vampiro V. Empire: Because people want equality. Nothing more, nothing less.


equality is nothing more than an unattainable dream...the only equalizer is death, and even still many people get the **** end of the stick on that one.



Posted by The Hate

I bet gay marriges long laster than straight marriges.




Posted by Xeones


Quoting The Hate: I bet gay marriges long laster than straight marriges.


you cant afford to go fishing too often when there is fewer fish in the sea.



Posted by WillisGreeny

I couldn't care less if a gay person gets married. What I care about is knowing they have the opition to, so they can be just as miserable as the rest of us who mistaken marriage. (or luck out, whichever)




Posted by The Hate


Quoting Xeones: you cant afford to go fishing too often when there is fewer fish in the sea.


Very true.



Posted by BLUNTMASTER X

Yeah, so civil partnerships became legal here around 3 years ago. I really don't see the problem with same-sex marriage. It doesn't infringe on any of my rights, and gives fags the same opportunities as the rest of us.

[quote]but they ****ed up a good thing45.8% of American straight marriages end in divorce. I'm pretty sure heterosexuals ****ed up the good thing first.




Posted by Omni


Quoting Last Fog: Why are straight people so happy when this happens. It's like a white person rejoicing over affirmative action.


You must be a racist homophobe or something. There's nothing wrong with equality.



Posted by Sable Wind

[quote=The Hate;748767]Very true.

Uhh... no? Since when are there suddenly less gay people FOR gay people?

I'm happy for this. It's really inspiring to see it happening, especially when gay rights in general are issues that are personal and important to me.

ALSO: To whoever said "it's like white people rejoicing over affirmative action": Ever heard of Martin Luther King Jr. ? Remember all those peace marches he did, with whites AND blacks working in tandem to achieve equal rights for all African-Americans? Yeaah.




Posted by Fate

What she said. I mean, what?




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: equality is nothing more than an unattainable dream...the only equalizer is death, and even still many people get the **** end of the stick on that one.


Unattainable? Considering how radically different our relationships with women and other races are today than they were a hundred years ago, we're a hell of a lot closer than ever. Still a ways to go, but that's a pretty lame attitude. There's nothing wrong with wanting equality.



Posted by WillisGreeny

I'm with Vamp.

"Just because we may never reach the stars, doesn't mean we can't follow them."




Posted by Xeones


Quoting Vampiro V. Empire: Unattainable? Considering how radically different our relationships with women and other races are today than they were a hundred years ago, we're a hell of a lot closer than ever. Still a ways to go, but that's a pretty lame attitude. There's nothing wrong with wanting equality.


im not saying that striving for equality is a bad thing...it certainly has bettered many peoples lives...im just saying, that no matter what...the scales will never level...true equality will never exist....and if you believe it will...well, then you are just blind to human nature....no offense.



Posted by BLUNTMASTER X

Things would be even worse if we upheld your outlook, though.




Posted by Iris

You're an idiot. Of course it won't exist, but striving for it and coming as close as possible is important. That's like saying you shouldn't bother learning because you'll never know everything.

Good job, Iowa.




Posted by Sable Wind

Just ignore him, he's trying to be different 'cause it's cool.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

kinda like being a ***** for no reason?

cool!




Posted by Last Fog

I knew you idiots would misinterpret my last post. That's not what I meant. I'm saying it's something that doesn't involve straight people yet everyone gets all excited when these laws are passed.




Posted by Iris

[quote=Last Fog]I knew you idiots would misinterpret my last post. That's not what I meant. I'm saying it's something that doesn't involve straight people yet everyone gets all excited when these laws are passed.

[quote=Sable Wind;748885]ALSO: To whoever said "it's like white people rejoicing over affirmative action": Ever heard of Martin Luther King Jr. ? Remember all those peace marches he did, with whites AND blacks working in tandem to achieve equal rights for all African-Americans? Yeaah.

[quote=Vampiro V. Empire]Because people want equality. Nothing more, nothing less.

Uh, looks like everyone understood you the first time. Maybe, perhaps, it was just a dumb statement? Yeah...




Posted by Omni


Quoting Last Fog: I knew you idiots would misinterpret my last post. That's not what I meant. I'm saying it's something that doesn't involve straight people yet everyone gets all excited when these laws are passed.


Yeah, and we figured you'd misinterpret our last posts and think we misinterpreted your last post. Everyone is in agreement with this because greater equality is a good thing, and it involves everyone. :cool:



Posted by Last Fog

Nope, they misunderstood me.




Posted by Omni


Quoting Last Fog: Nope, they misunderstood me.


No, because you said there was no reason for straight people to be excited about this, meanwhile there is, since a lot of people don't discriminate and look forward to a day when everyone of any race or sexual orientation has equal rights, and this is clearly a step in that direction. There's no denying it, unless you're a complete idiot, which is highly possible.



Posted by Last Fog

Haha this thread surfaces about twice a year and the same people get all bent out of shape and it never goes anywhere. It's funny because I haven't even said I was against it.




Posted by Iris

That's because same-sex marriages have been a pretty active subject in politics for quite a few years now. As for people getting aggressive and the thread not going anywhere, I've got to wonder exactly what you're expecting. People are pretty passionate about this and there's never any general consensus, here or throughout all of America, of what actions should be taken.

You should've just said your first post wasn't serious. Apparently the excuse works, and it wouldn't have made you look so silly.




Posted by Last Fog

My post was serious. I'm laughing because I make a non-argumentative statement that is countered with profound comments like "you're a moron" and "you're a tard." So much animosity when I don't even make a stance on the subject.




Posted by Iris

You're not stupid because of your stance, but because you apparently find it strange that heterosexuals can support gay marriage.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Seriously, it's not that difficult. jesus...




Posted by Sable Wind

Yeah, I don't think it's a thing on whether we care if you like gay marriage or not, but the fact that you seem to think it's stupid that someone like me can support it.

[quote][FONT=Tahoma]kinda like being a ***** for no reason?

cool![/FONT]I'm a ***** for a reason: I'm jealous and insecure.

It may seem like no reason to you, but then again, I'm a woman. I get bent out of shape over these things.




Posted by Xero


Quoting Xeones: Nobody expected them to get married because it was illegal...and in most cases it still is. but now, in those select states...they cant just 'date' someone (if thats what you want to call it) without someone asking the most death deserving question..."When are you going to get married"


How is that a problem? We didn't **** anything up. We're behaving like normal couples. If heterosexual couples can get married, then why shouldn't we? Because religion said so? Bull-****ing-****. Religion has been controling people for quite a while back then in Canada and I'm glad it has no influence anymore. There is nothing illegal about 2 guys or 2 girls getting married. We can have kids, we can build a family. It's just because it's still abnormal to a lot of people who tend to live in smaller towns, but in bigger cities, it's pretty much "You're gay? ah ok..."

And also, you take it for granted that a gay couple will most likely get married after the first dates. That's not usually how it goes. (as far as I know.)


Quoting Last Fog: Why are straight people so happy when this happens.


Perhaps because they support gay rights and are happy that society seems to be evolving instead of being restricted to what always "seemed" normal.



Posted by mis0


Quoting Last Fog: Nope, they misunderstood me.

I understand that you're an idiot!



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: It may seem like no reason to you, but then again, I'm a woman. I get bent out of shape over these things.


No logical reason. drr



Posted by Xeones

Look, appearently just because i didnt take the token "Oh yeah...yay gay people...go iowa" standpoint like most others ...doesn't mean im against the whole thing. like i said, i couldnt care less what they do.

I never said gay people have the intention of getting married right after their first dates. I never mentioned religion. I was merely saying that by getting married, they have to put up with the usual bull**** that comes with it. Getting married isn't a bad thing, but at least you didnt have to worry about getting a divorce if you are gay. You didnt have to worry about paying alimony. You didnt have to worry about prenuptuals or any of that type of garbage. Its saddening that people always seemed to get tied up in words. what is marriage?...a piece of paper?...a legal document? a tax break and lower car insurance? Who the **** cares...it's not a ring on your finger, it doesnt generally change the way you feel about someone, after you get married things just dont magically get better. thats just how i feel about it. I think there are many more things to be worried about rather than being able to walk down the street and say "we're married". its just a word for christs sake.

also, i never said fighting for equality is a bad thing. of course im glad of the benefits that striving to be equal has brought. Im glad women, blacks and all minorities have gained the rights that they now have. All i was simply saying is that "EQUALITY" in the definition of the word...will never exist. Striving for equality is essentially striving for perfection, things generally do get better...but it will never be perfect or equal. Not in this country...not in any other. Is that a defeatist attitude...absolutely not. It's a realists point of view. its a bad analogy, but do i have any grandiose dreams of being able to survive in space with nothing but my flesh and blood? absolutely not. Just like i believe and know...true EQUALITY is a myth and will never exist. Now if you believe i wont stand beside someone fighting to stick a weight on thier raised end of the scale...well then you are just plain ingnorant.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: Sable Wind agrees: seriously... stop making fun of me. please?


I wasn't. nor have I ever. jeez



Posted by Xeones

****it...ninja'd




Posted by BLUNTMASTER X

[quote=Xeones;749270]words
Sounds like you're more opposed to marriage in general, not just same-sex partnerships.

[quote]"EQUALITY" in the definition of the word...will never exist.Well, if we'll never reach true equality, we might as well make black people our slaves again, right? It's not like they'll ever be our equals, so I don't see why not. Evolution is a gradual process, and it'll be after our lifetime that everyone is considered truly equal.




Posted by Omni


Quoting Xeones: "EQUALITY" in the definition of the word...will never exist.


If everyone had the same attitude and amount of apathy towards reaching it as you, then you would be currect. That's not the case, however.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: All i was simply saying is that "EQUALITY" in the definition of the word...will never exist. Striving for equality is essentially striving for perfection, things generally do get better...but it will never be perfect or equal. Not in this country...not in any other. Is that a defeatist attitude...absolutely not. It's a realists point of view.


This is essentially the part of your post most people will have a problem with. No one expects true equality, as said a few times already, nor does anyone expect perfection. The point of striving for equality is to get as close to perfection as possible. It's the same reason anyone does anything well. It may be a "realists point of view" but it's also painfully limited and ignorant, if you ask me.

I mean, this is a perfect time to say "drr drr drr." Seriously...



Posted by Xeones


Quoting The X: Sounds like you're more opposed to marriage in general, not just same-sex partnerships.

Well, if we'll never reach true equality, we might as well make black people our slaves again, right? It's not like they'll ever be our equals, so I don't see why not. Evolution is a gradual process, and it'll be after our lifetime that everyone is considered truly equal.


im not opposed to marriage or same sex partnerships...im just simply defending the side that says "maybe not being able to get married really isnt a bad thing".

Now if you think that never reaching true equality automatically merits making black people slaves again...thats just plain retarded, no offense. I feel like im just repeating myself, but oh well. Never have i said striving for equality is bad. It has brought about many wondrous and necessary changes to many societies. Im just simply saying that everyone should know that true equality will never exist. Social equality?...perhaps for a short period of time. But what happens when...*** forbid...the U.S. falls, or Canada...or the UK...or many other countries that boast freedom and equality. Well, then we will just be back at square one. Also, remember this goes without saying that economic equality is essentially impossible to achieve in a capiltalist society. Someone...and likely most people, will always be trying to make a buck or gain an advantage on someon elses labor or misfortune. Doesn't sound very equal to me now does it? Striving for perfection and equality is a good thing...only morons would be satiated striving for mediocrity, im simply saying that we well never get there...that is all.

and yes vamp...by this

"Evolution is a gradual process, and it'll be after our lifetime that everyone is considered truly equal."

someone obviously does 'EXPECT' true equality.



Posted by Omni


Quoting Xeones: im not opposed to marriage or same sex partnerships...im just simply defending the side that says "maybe not being able to get married really isnt a bad thing".


So, explain why it would be a good thing? I can't think of any reasons.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post:
"Evolution is a gradual process, and it'll be after our lifetime that everyone is considered truly equal."

someone obviously does 'EXPECT' true equality.


I can't speak for him, but I doubt as a society anyone really expects perfection. True equality is possibility, just very unlikely.



Posted by BLUNTMASTER X

Sounds ridiculous to us, but I bet our ancestors would have **** bricks at the thought of having black people around for anything other than slave labour.




Posted by Xeones


Quoting Omni: So, explain why it would be a good thing? I can't think of any reasons.


well...again im repeating myself, but you dont have to worry about divorces or alimony. that is certainly a good thing. not that i give in to peer pressure often, but you wont have a thousand people asking you "when are you going to get married", not to mention your 'partner' would be expecting it at some point.

there are both good and bad aspects of marriage...i just simply enjoy playing the devil's advocate to present another point of view, i couldnt honestly care less whethere they get married or not.



Oh, and X...thats called progress not perfection, you and i both know there is still a fair share of bigotry in this country...slaves or no slaves.



Posted by S

Chalk it up to belief, Vamp. I mean realistically, yes, there is a chance but it'd be considered a mathematical improbability. We're talking 1x10^30+ or something along those ridiculous lines, which in of itself is an understatement I'd bet. True Equality is Society's ultimate goal, but a Utopia is far from human grasp. The only real way I can personally see it being an option is by means of force.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: Sounds ridiculous to us, but I bet our ancestors would have **** bricks at the thought of having black people around for anything other than slave labour.


I know what you're saying, but true equality? Doubtful. You'd have to create a society with no ill thoughts towards anyone of lesser intelligence, beauty; no rich, poor, etc etc. Definitely not in our lifetime, and likely not in the next couple centuries. Too much would have to change.


Quoted post: The only real way I can personally see it being an option is by means of force.


Equally unlikely, if not more so.



Posted by Omni


Quoting Xeones: well...again im repeating myself, but you dont have to worry about divorces or alimony. that is certainly a good thing. not that i give in to peer pressure often, but you wont have a thousand people asking you "when are you going to get married", not to mention your 'partner' would be expecting it at some point.

there are both good and bad aspects of marriage...i just simply enjoy playing the devil's advocate to present another point of view, i couldnt honestly care less whethere they get married or not.


Yeah, but just because you have the right to do something, that doesn't mean you're being forced into doing it. There's good and bad aspects to straight couples being married, but it's legal for them, right? People are allowed to make their own choices, for good or bad. Your whole argument is completely flawed and, quite frankly, incorrect.



Posted by Xeones

[QUOTE=S




Posted by BLUNTMASTER X

Considering that a mere 100 - 200 years ago, the only people with rights were straight white males, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think the race/sexuality/gender divide will keep on closing. Old attitudes will die out.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: it wouldn't be unreasonable to think the race/sexuality/gender divide will keep on closing.


Still not true equality. ie class system, rich/poor, etc. Even having a boss means you're not truly as equal as someone else, right?...



Posted by Xeones


Quoting The X: Considering that a mere 100 - 200 years ago, the only people with rights were straight white males, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think the race/sexuality/gender divide will keep on closing. Old attitudes will die out.


i understand that. believe it or not, i did pay some attention in history class. all i have ever said is that the "divide" as you call it, is never going to completely close. It will certainly get better, but...equality will never be reached prior to the decline of our society...especially economic equality.





Ninja'd by vamp...but glad to see that he understands what im getting at.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: especially economic equality.


Bingo. Race/gender/etc will likely be equal a hundred years from now, but that's only part of it.



Posted by S


Quoting Vampiro V. Empire: Equally unlikely, if not more so.


Respectively speaking, yes. I'm just saying that, according to my personal view on current day society, I'd believe force before people just "getting along".

And no Xeones, equality does not merit free will. Equality merely means you are treated exactly the same as every one of your peers, and every human may be different physically (Or otherwise.), but still equal. Still of the same weight and worth.




Posted by Xeones


Quoting Vampiro V. Empire: Bingo. Race/gender/etc will likely be equal a hundred years from now, but that's only part of it.


precisely my friend. that is what ive been getting at this entire time.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: Still of the same weight and worth.


Not gonna happen.



Posted by Xeones

[QUOTE=S




Posted by S


Quoting Vampiro V. Empire: Not gonna happen.


And isn't that what Xeones has been trying to point out this entire time?

[quote=Xeones]there is a difference between being forced into equality and accepting it willingly. just by virtue of someone forcing you to accept equality implies that you are inherently unequal.

Ninja'd, so round two. Equality inherently assumes that someone will willingly step down from power to become an equal. There is no way to move forward to equality, based on the perspective you're adhering too, without first starting on an equal slate. Being that we've never been, it would then be impossible without regression.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: And isn't that what Xeones has been trying to point out this entire time?


I was never disagreeing with him on that point.



Posted by S

You weren't, but others were so I had to point it out.




Posted by Xeones

[QUOTE=S




Posted by S

Actually, I wasn't referring to Communism. Marx had it right, but only because there's really no other way for any form of equality to come into existence once power has been established (Referring to the descension of power here. Not Communism.). Those in power must willingly concede their power to a form of system that requires no leader or parliament/congress. True democracy would be similar in design, for instance.

Speaking on a similar plain, in order for equality to truly exist, everyone must be happy with their profession. If someone is unhappy with being a farmer, they wouldn't be in that profession to begin with - or there would be a social structure in place to deal with said problem.




Posted by Xeones

unfortunately, i hardly believe everyone would ever be happy with thier profession. i honestly dont think that choosing your job would really be an option. you would most likely have some lopsided professions out there...




Posted by S

I just said that's how it'd need to be. Not saying it'd work by any means.

My opinion? We're ****ed. Buy a helmet.




Posted by Omni


Quoting Xeones: Also, how is my arguement flawed.

A good example would be when you go and say something like this:

[quote]I may have been slightly drastic in saying that they "****ed things up", but that was just an attention grabber. I was just pointing out a few negative aspects of marriage.


Gee, lemme say something that isn't actually what I mean to get attention, and then wonder why people disagree with what I say. That should get people to see things my way.



Posted by WillisGreeny

[QUOTE=S




Posted by misogenie

The biblical story of Satan deceiving Adam and Eve has lead to homosexuality to become normal. Our Lord Father created Eve with an attractive female body with more curves and less hair. Our Lord Father did not want to bore Adam with a partner with the same body. It's like having sex with someone that looks like your body. Now Satan's power over sex is making bisexuality and homosexuality normal. Men can think like women. Women can think like men.





Posted by Fate

I don't think your Lord Father cared whether or not He bored Adam.




Posted by Speedfreak

My feelings on the subject can be summed up with:

"."




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

I agree with speedfreak. There are more important things, which actually PERTAIN to me, that I am concerned about. Additionally, this is one of the most retarded "equality" arguments I've ever heard. Nobody's taking into account societal influences upon a person's mindset into what they regard as "equal" or upbringing, pre-existing poverty situations, etc etc etc. You can't just argue the word "equality" by arguing what people perceive as "equal" and "forcing" it upon them without taking the whole picture into account. Quit being so narrowminded with your attempts at psychoanalyzation.

And "equality" does not mean "perfection". I consider myself a feminist. Why? Because I feel that women should be treated the same as men in all regards. Does that mean that women and men are equal? No. Men are (typicallY) stronger, more linear in their thinking, than women. Women are (typically) more able to . . . cook and clean. I JOKE. Regardless, this "equality" that we are talking about is not some universal "communist" ideal (stupidest thing I have ever heard). It's people treating eachother FAIRLY. AS EQUALS. A boss can treat an employee as an equal. The boss respects the employee and values his opinion but acknowledges that his opinion carries more weight simply because he is higher in the heirarchy than his employee. If situations were reveresed, that's how it would be as well. That is STILL equality. The issue at hand is that the government, which is supposed to be THE neutral governing figure, devoid of biases and religious hangups, is to treat all people fairly. These people aren't picketing in front of "joe mcbubba"s house because he hates fags. They're lobbying for civil unions, a GOVERNMENT supported ideal. THAT is the equality people want. People don't want to change anybody else's mind. they just want the government to protect them like EVERYBODY ELSE.
And you know you'll never be perfect? Then why try? Sounds to me like you're running in a hamster wheel with your not-quite-spartan workout routine and new age postmodernist outtake on life. I strive for perfection because I feel it is the ultimate achievement. If I don't reach that. . . well I tried. I won't be complacent because (insert all that crap about perfection and fairness and eventual death you said before, but make it sound not retarded).
And my lengthy argument above has been on "equality". But I will address the topic now. I don't see why people are making a big huzzah over this. If it directly affects you (you live in Iowa, and/or are gay, or believe homosexuality is the devil and it's dooming us all) then fine, raise yo hands in da aiyuhh. If not why don't you just don't cayuhh? You'z a true playuuh? Who made you the champion of homosexuals, Johnny Onthespott? I think it's kind of PATERNALISTIC of you and UNEQUAL of you to play the happy helper figure with them like you think they aren't capable of getting equality on their own terms. If you're not a lawyer or lawmaker, what good are you but another bleating mouth and body in the way? Fascist.




Posted by S

Let's also not forget that not all gays are fighting for civil unions. Many of them want Marriage. They want the word, they want the church, they want whatever the hell goes with it. Not all of them are in it for so-called equality, they want what the straight person has - unconditionally. There's no "Different but equal", they want "Alike and the same."




Posted by Pit

I love how open minded VGC is. It's disgusting.




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

sol, they can want all they. .. want... but that's a religious issue. The government stays out of religious issues, and there is no way the government will EVER be able to tell a church who it can and cannot marry. I will burn my passport the day that happens.

edit: keep in mind, civil marriage and religious marriage are two different things. YOu have to go to the court house to be "married" as far as the gov is concerned, and to the church to be "married" in a religious sense. The two act independently, and i feel that neither should be able to tell the other what it can and cannot do. Hence, I support gay civil unions, but marriages? That insinuates that the government is telling a church what to do, and aside from telling scientology to go f*** itself, I feel that is never a good thing.




Posted by S

Actually, my point is similar to yours although slightly detached. I'm making the point that they aren't asking for equality, they are asking for that which is not necessarily equality in the face of government, but then persecuting the government for its inability. Not all gays are the victims here, some are in fact the aggressors; and in some cases, wrongfully so.




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

you find me proof of gays demanding that the government step in and tell churches to marry them, and I'll believe you. Until then I think it's crap. Every pro-gay-marriage argument I've heard FROM gay people ANYWHERE has been for the government to give them civil unions, because the majority (there might be a few idiots out there, like in every political movement) don't want the government forcing churches to do anything.




Posted by WillisGreeny

to Bj: I see what your saying, that this gay marriage thing doesn't effect most of us directly, and there's plenty of other things to deal with. I don't believe that streight and gay relationships being equal is a utopian ideal, just a better one than the norm.

It's a big deal because it's so simple what should be done, and it's obvious why it isn't being done. The bible says no, so we must say no, the paradox of our country's church and state ideals. Maybe it doesn't really matter to most homosexuals whether they get married or not, that's not the point. It's the paradox were fighting to abolish, and for some gays it IS a big deal in persuing their happiness.




Posted by Fate

Gays getting married in a church sounds blasphemous and I'm not even religious. :/




Posted by S

It happens, its just not universally accepted.




Posted by Fate

I don't really know about religious stuff, but seeing as how religious folks get up in arms about gays I'm guessing it's against their religion. With that being said, the gays that do get married in churches from a religion opposed to it sounds terrible and I'd be upset if I followed that religion.




Posted by S

The fact of the matter is this: People argue the validity of passages against gay marriage. Some people believe, for instance, that ***'s making an example of Sodom (He made them go boom.), was timely based and seclusive to just those people, rather than a lesson for all humanity. So it's argued within the religion itself, whether or not its acceptable. The general consensus is no, I'd say, but that doesn't stop people from making a fuss.




Posted by Sable Wind

From what I know, they don't necessarily want a religious marriage. I think it's getting a marriage over a civil union, because you get all the rights of a marriage--as you should. Whether it's common law (is that what it is? I dunno. I just know it's the non-religious service one) or whatever, I'm pretty sure that's what they're pushing for. I know many homosexuals who are Christian, and I also know many who are not, so it wouldn't make sense to push for something like that when there are ones who aren't religious in the first place.




Posted by Fate

The problem with that is a lot of people think marriage is between a man and a woman, most likely stemming from beliefs in religion. Marriage has become a legal thing instead of some holy matrimony, and that's the biggest problem I have with dissenters of the legal aspect of gay marriage.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: Whether it's common law (is that what it is? I dunno. I just know it's the non-religious service one) or whatever, I'm pretty sure that's what they're pushing for.


Civil union? Common law is cohabitation after a given length of time.



Posted by Sable Wind

That's what I figured it was. No, not civil unions. They still don't have the same rights as a marriage. I think I mean a marriage, with all the benefits, but not the religious connotation to it. I am pretty sure that exists.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Yeah, in Canada. It's called marriage. The legal status and everything else is exactly the same. I believe only Spain has the same system.




Posted by Xeones


Quoting Xeones: im not saying that striving for equality is a bad thing...it certainly has bettered many peoples lives...im just saying, that no matter what...the scales will never level...true equality will never exist....and if you believe it will...well, then you are just blind to human nature....no offense.



Quoting Xeones: i never said fighting for equality is a bad thing. of course im glad of the benefits that striving to be equal has brought. Im glad women, blacks and all minorities have gained the rights that they now have. All i was simply saying is that "EQUALITY" in the definition of the word...will never exist. Striving for equality is essentially striving for perfection, things generally do get better...but it will never be perfect or equal. Not in this country...not in any other. Is that a defeatist attitude...absolutely not. It's a realists point of view.



Quoting Xeones:
Never have i said striving for equality is bad. It has brought about many wondrous and necessary changes to many societies. Im just simply saying that everyone should know that true equality will never exist. Social equality?...perhaps for a short period of time. But what happens when...*** forbid...the U.S. falls, or Canada...or the UK...or many other countries that boast freedom and equality. Well, then we will just be back at square one. Also, remember this goes without saying that economic equality is essentially impossible to achieve in a capiltalist society. Someone...and likely most people, will always be trying to make a buck or gain an advantage on someon elses labor or misfortune. Doesn't sound very equal to me now does it? Striving for perfection and equality is a good thing...only morons would be satiated striving for mediocrity, im simply saying that we well never get there...that is all.

and yes vamp...by this

"Evolution is a gradual process, and it'll be after our lifetime that everyone is considered truly equal."

someone obviously does 'EXPECT' true equality.



Quoting Xeones: ...equality will never be reached prior to the decline of our society...especially economic equality.



alright Bj...first of all, you need to chill the hell out...and i quoted myself multiple times so you dont accuse me of saying some more **** that i clearly did not.

Secondly...i am going to address the fact that somehow you assumed that i have a "why strive for perfection?" attitude. It is painfully obvious that you read only a tenth, at best, of any of the posts that i made, either that or you have some severe reading interpretation deficiency. Like i said before, if your goal is mediocrity...it's not only moronic, but it is ultimately and obviously what you will become...mediocre. Personally, i am not satisfied with being mediocre...and if you think that i am, well then...thats just ignorant, and by judging where you advertise you are from...well, lets just say im not suprised. (by me saying that i imagine you think that i'm ignorant, but understand...its just a joke, i just have a severe disliking of the southeast.) Thus, thats why my goal, like yours, is perfection. But, unlike you...its not an "if i dont reach that"...i understand that I, nor anyone else, will ever reach perfection...hamster wheel or not, at least i'm constantly bettering myself. To me, perfection isn't some delusional bull**** "Achievement" thats supposed grant me another 40,000 points on my gamer score...no, it's simply a tool that i use to improve the quality of life for me and those few around me that are effected by my actions.

And lastly, i dont believe...nor did i ever say equality is perfection. I was associating equality with perfection solely to display that they are alike regarding the fact that both of them are endless races. Oddly enough, i do agree with you that everyones idea of equality is different. HOWEVER, simply being treated 'fairly' is not the state of being equal. How is it equal that the boss can order someone to a task? Somone is forcing another person to do something, no necessarily by physical means, but likely by penalty of reprimand, demotion or unemployment. How is that equal? Your whole 'fairness' idea of equality is a capitalistic point of view, which is fine...i enjoy capitalism...hell i love it. I love selling my services, air traffic-wise that is, to other people. Im a commodity, i have a boss...and i have people i am in charge of. I treat the people under me fairly, but i can tell them what to do...and they cannot do the same, and that isnt equal. True equality cannont accept a heirarchy.

I mentioned communism earlier because it is the form of government, or non-government rather, that in theory would best support EQUALITY in EVERY aspect of the word...in my opinion at least...and no, i dont want to live in a communist country

anyways, im ****ing sick of talking about equality. I get treated 'fair' enough...so life is nothing but parallel hyphens for me.



Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

*** I'm going to have fun with that tomorrow




Posted by Trigger

Good for Iowa.




Posted by G-Sides

i just want to take this time to point out that whoever said earlier "the bridge between races and genders etc is closing" is pretty far off :/ people are still terribly racist, ie the case revolving around the 'jena 6'.

as for gay marriage..
louis ck has it on the dot: http://youtube.com/watch?v=KhHyy1dk4gw




Posted by S

I still don't understand the case of the Jena 6. Mind elaborating G-sides? Of the article or two that I've read, it's ridiculously thrown out of proportion - but that's possible the bias of the writers.




Posted by G-Sides

in a nutshell, one black kid sits in a spot at this highschool that was primarily "for white people" (****, it was called the WHITE TREE) as a kind of silent protest and the next day, 3 nooses show up in school color hanging from the tree :s
the kids were expelled but it got overturned cuz one of the people in charge says it was just a prank. to protest that, a group of black kids all sat under the tree a few days after.
skip ahead a few days to some party; a group of white guys jump a black guy. days after, one of the white guys who took part in the beating was jumped by the same black guy he helped beat along with a few of his friends. he was taken to the hospital with just a few cuts and bruises and even went to a football game that same night, so you know he was fine.

but.
the black kids were all arrested and charged with attempted 2nd degree murder while nothing happened to the white guy and his friends, or the people who hung the nooses. :/ they're being tried by an all white jury.


EDIT: **** i forgot to mention; while the tension was building leading to the final beating, 3 black teens got a shotgun pulled on them by a white clerk at some gas station. they disarmed him but were charged with attempted theft
...

idk man, it's just ****ing stupid. i never ever understood racism.




Posted by S

In three paragraphs, you put it well. I read like three pages of bull-**** news articles and didn't understand a thing or in what order said events happened.




Posted by Iris

That sounds terrible.

Yeah, you're right about moving forward. It's never going to all shift one way. There's always going to be a lot of events pushing against it.




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

I will clarify, because G-Sides did a terribly slanted job.

ahem

The case of the Jena 6 is IRRELEVENT to the nooses. I'm sure it would be IRRELEVENT to pull up cases of blacks provoking fights at the school with whites, as it would be the other way around. The principal expelled the students in question, and a city school official overturned the decision. THE LAW HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS AND WAS NOT NOTIFIED (If anything, it could possibly be considered vandalism, but it isn't illegal to be a racist. sorry :( ) The fact of the matter is, the District Attorney looked into that case and there IS NO LAW GOVERNING HANGING OF NOOSES ON TREES. I am sorry, all of you idiots getting up in arms over this, but you cannot expect an ATTORNEY to CREATE a law for this case. Hell, a JUDGE can't even do that. It is unconstitutional to CREATE a law SPECIFICALLY to try someone for an incident, and even so a mere DISTRICT ATTORNEY cannot create ANY laws. Attorneys are KNOWLEDGABLE of EXISTING laws. They are not expected to create any. Judges INTERPRET the laws and the examples of such and such law presented by such and such attorney. They are to go by what is already WRITTEN DOWN. They cannot veritably make up **** on the fly because "it's not nice to make racist nooses on trees". That's supreme court territory. Get off the guys' nuts.
The case of the Jena 6 is an example of an issue being blown out of proportion. Frankly, the usual clowns Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and their crownies have come screaming race, when the legal issues have all been by the book and straightforward. Six (as in SIX) teens jumped and beat another teen. The races aren't an issue. They assaulted him and he was hospitalized (for details, they beat him unconscious, then stomped and kicked him WHILE he was unconscious). I don't care what races are involved, that is assault. Period. I don't care if he made a racist remark. I don't care if he insulted yo mama. I don't care if he asked you if you want to go to an airport bathroom for a blowjob. Assault is assault is assault. That's what they're being tried for. Originally, they were charged with assault, and then the charges were raised to attempted second degree murder by the District Attorney. Bad move. People got ****ed. When Bell, one of the defendants, went to trial, the DA reduced the charges against him again to aggravated second degree battery (the aggravated coming from the tennis shoes he used to stomp the victim being labeled weapons). Bell was found guilty and sentencing was scheduled for Sept 20. The batteryconviction was overturned (and a conspiracy conviction dropped prior) by the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeals because he was tried as an adult instead of a juvenile, being only 16 at the time of the incident. But as it stands, he must remain in jail until the mistrail.
The others, all 17 years old and (ACCORDING TO LOUISIANA LAW) adults, did not have any discrepencies in their cases (theirs were reduced back to second degree aggravated assault and conspiracy) concerning their treatment, and their trials have yet to be heard.

That's the case. Here are the issues:
The student who was beaten is alleged to have been bragging about a black student getting beaten up by one of his friends. That is why he was assaulted.
The student who was assaulted had numerous head traumas and an eye swollen shut. Yes he did attend a school function that night, but it was a Ring function, in which they receive their class rings. He went, stating he'd been waiting 11 years to get his ring, and left early due to pain. It wasn't a school party or trite little ceremony like the Rev keeps hinting at.
Keep in mind it was SIX students who assaulted him, having planned this prior. SIX.
Is there racism in the city and school? Probably. Definitely. Has the justice system handled this properly? I believe so.
Bell, the ringleader and supposed "victim" of this whole debacle has a juvenile record of violent crimes as long as my arm. Frankly, he's a peice of garbage. Yet people keep screaming to release him, as if he'd been treated unfairly, with numerous assault charges already on his record.
Bell's trial WAS in front of an all-white jury. 150 people were summoned to the trial, out of which 50 were black. None of the black summoned showed up. They can blame themselves if they think it was unfair. Lesson learned: if you are selected to a jury pool, show up.
The rest are being tried as adults according to LOUISIANA law. Frankly, I think there's nothing wrong with trying 17 year olds as adults, if they are CONSIDERED adults in that state. They can also sign contracts, lease vehicles, emancipate themselves from their parents, get married, etc, so there are pluses AND minuses to having such a law. Deal with it.
"Free the Jena 6"? And go against justice and fairness by releasing guys who assaulted and battered (I woulda thrown that in there too) a man, because of their race? That sounds like discrimination to me. Imagine if the races had been reversed, and a black guy was assaulted and brutally beaten by six white guys. I'm pretty sure the good reverends and their halfwit syncophants would be marching and protesting that those six whites didn't get at least 20 years in jail and be forced to make a public apology.
**** Al Sharpton. **** Jesse Jackson. **** all these morons swept up in hysterics and thinking this is a new "civil rights" march. Martin Luther King Jr didn't get beaten and arrested and harassed so that his people could become thugs and "jump" people, only to be released from jail because they were black and living in a racially divided city. MLK is spinning in his grave right now because of where his people have gone, and the strutting dickheads who are leading them into ignorance.

THINK. It's not illegal, yet.

edit: one other of the six was 14 at the time and is being tried as a juvenile as well. The black student who was beaten up by the victim's friend during the bragging rant WAS Robert Bailey, Jr, who was one of the Jena 6 tried as an adult




Posted by S

The only thing I find odd about this entire thing is as follows: Why was the charge upped to attempted second degree murder? I still don't understand where they got that. Were they interrupted or did they leave him after they were finished?




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

I think it was a knee-jerk reaction by the DA in trying to be a hardass. Was it racially motivated? Possibly. Hell, I'd be tempted to do it just knowing that SIX guys jumped ONE guy and beat the everliving **** out of him. I (this is a personal reaction, and it of course is up for criticism) feel that it is a moot point, because when they came to trial he immediately rescinded that and reduced it to second degree aggravated ASSAULT (put battery, my bad). I think that the "shoes as a weapon" thing is, honestly, reaching and kinda off, but nobody cares about that. The issue here, to most people, is that they're being treated unfairly because they're black. I think they're being treatedy fairly (the shoe didn't fly either, because that charge was overturned and now it's just waiting for another trial, which is STANDARD JUDICIAL PROCEDURE), and even coddled, considering I think they're nothing but thugs and vagrants. I know white kids who got charged with second degree assault in high school for fighting on and off school property. I didn't call anybody and raise a fuss. They were thugs.




Posted by Iris

I'm not saying legal action should've been taken on the victims. Of course not. There's obviously a lot of racism in the school though, and the incident at the school is a prime example of race struggles not moving forward.




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

but you can't FORCE people to come to terms here. That's what people don't get. You can't create classes and programs to make people accept one another. That's bull**** if the parents are racist as all get-out. It doesn't do any GOOD and just wastes money. What's the use? You have to change people's minds, and only time can do that. Do I have a solution? No. Am I therefore any good? No, I'm not worth jack. But I will tell you this much, there IS a racial divide in that town, as well as MANY across the South. It goes BOTH ways, whites hating blacks, blacks hating whites (I have personally experienced both, working in a black neighborhood), and there should be no fingers pointed, unless pointed both ways. The blacks at that school are just as at fault as the whites. The incident, not mentioned here, where the black students attempted to address the school board about the nooses IS wrong. I see that as wrong. I don't know if it's racist or not, because it could just be good ol beuraucracy playing out. I know when I was in high school, the school board didn't give two squirts of **** about anything ANY student had to say. That's how it works. Does that mean they were discriminating against us? who knows. If you're not sure, don't make accusations though, ya know?

edit: it was vague. The incident in which the school board refused to hear the black students in regards to their concerns about the nooses is wrong. --- that's what I mean to type




Posted by Iris

I agree completely. Of course you can't expect people to suddenly accept and tolerant other cultures through force. Both parties have to equally put forth effort, and it's impossible for each and every member to do so.

That really wasn't my point though. I was just saying there is a lot of racism at the school, obviously both ways, and that helps stifle the ideal of a world without prejudice. Then again, it's the deep south, so I'm not surprised or anything.




Posted by S

Honestly, I'd still question where they got off with that attempt at second degree murder charge, and I wouldn't rule out racism, but I really would like more information. Besides that, it just seems like typical procedure with a racially charged backdrop.




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

and people got so ****ed off about Landon saying it before. . . but guys. . . the truth of the matter is, the South has A LOT of black people, and A LOT of them are poor, A LOT of them are on welfare and won't get off for A LOT of generations, A LOT of them are fine with that, and A LOT of them are involved in A LOT of crime. It's not a surprise that a divide keeps getting wider, frankly. If you lived here, you'd understand when you're spending your last 70 bucks on food and working your *** off, while a black woman behidn you with three kids and no husband is buying 3 shopping carts full of it. It kinda ****es you off, ya know?




Posted by Sable Wind

That doesn't mean anything that happens because of those feelings is okay.




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

that doesn't mean that anything that happens happens because of those feelings




Posted by Foppy D

BJ you're gay. We should get married