So Gay marriage failed again...

[Valtiel the Watcher]

well... I don't believe in marriage in general but that aside as to why it seems to never get through, not basing my bs ideas on any fact mind you, I think it has to do with just the fact that probably those with gay friends and gay people themselves would have voted no on 8. Those who do not live with or around homosexual people probably don't think about the idea of their marriage rights thus they simply vote to keep things the way they are. if you think about it, the majority of homosexual people tend to congregate in small areas and are not so spread out. areas such as San Franscisco, west Hollywood, long beach etc but drive just a half an hour away and around the time that the whole thing was going on there were plenty of "Yes on 8" Signs around in more conservative areas. In spite of the libertarian left wing image of California, there are plenty of those on the socially conservative side of things that that opinion is still the majority. and I base all that on absolutely nothing so if it sounds like BS it probably is..... if it sounds like I'm speaking the truth however then.... er... well you got me on that one.

[Zed Millar]

Sumitsu01

GunsmithKitten

Sumitsu01

You know, I'm one for saying that gays should have the right to marraige. The only thing about it is, some of them will end up just like the straight married people. Devorcing each other.

The thing that most people don't pay attention to in this day and age, is that there really isn't a relationship that hasn't ended in breaking up or devorce in a long time. All the people are becoming free thinkers, and not really needing a companion on that level anymore. So I say, lets let them have what they want. Make it legal in all states and just watch and see how they turn out.

Believe me, I'm not saying all relationships will turn out like this, but the majority of them will. And it's sad to say, but it's also true.

So, you willing to campaign to ban hetero marriage as well, or is it somehow better when THEY mess it up?

Neither. I'm just saying that it's going to turn out the same way, so why should people be against it? I mean seriously, if you think about it, one of the pioneer couples that fought for Gay Marriage rights in Mass. filed for devorce back here in January of this year. There ain't no telling how many more is going on right now. Seems to me, like they are all falling into the same rut as heterosexual couples.

That is why they fight for marriage, because they are as worthlessly imperfect as heterosexuals. They don't wish for this rediculous governmental concept of love and equality out of self importance but out of equal importance and as the right of an American citizen. They are merely asking for the same right to ******** up their lives as straight people, which is their right to ******** it up in style.

Me, personally, am strongly against the concept of marriage at all seeing as I feel it is forced on our society, is way to religiously governed, has little to no real purpose, and puts this really awkward structured feel on what was supposed to be spontaneous and enjoyable, love. I may very well be one of the few fags who dislikes the notion of marriage.

Basically, it irritates me the reason why they disallow marriage for gays, but not the fact that it is actually disallowed. I hope that one day, we leave that relic of the past where it belongs and liberate our love and justify it as just as equal without having to take that rediculously theologically based governmental jump of structured unpleasantness.

[Torrent_Of_Octane]

Yuki The Uke

Temba

Torrent_Of_Octane

Yoshpet

Torrent_Of_Octane

Sure I dont give a damn what you do in the bedroom, but you're stretching this beyond just your room. You're trying to force the government... my government to favor you. I dont agree with it and why am I called "closeminded" simply because I have a different opinion than you? Like I said, gay activists are just as close minded from our prospective.

You obviously care what people do in their bedroom, since you think it disqualifies them from being an integral part of a family unit. You are the one who is interfering, creating legislation (and maintaining it) in order to systematically prevent same-sex couples from functioning as a family unit like they have been desiring for decades.
People want to go about their lives, and you want to parade around and scrutinize their personal sexual lives.

No, I dont give a damn about your bedroom or desires. The law dont give a damn about your desires. However, the benefits that attaches with marriage, granted by the government is purely political. Marriage is between a man and a woman, thats it.
What you guys want to do in your room, out of legal marriage is completely up to you. Just dont try to force the government to cater to you guys without our resistance. We dont like it, we wont just sit back and let it pass.
Again, its all about perspective. What you call interfereing, I call my rights. Where you want to claim "civil rights" I call interfereing with our government.

we are not trying to force the gov. to do anything, we are simply fighting to give us the legal right to marry the person we LOVE. a legal right you straights seem to take for granted.

I don't think he takes them for granted, I think he waves them in front of people, like wagging a doughnut in front of an Ethiopian.

And thats wrong because...?

And no I dont take it for granted. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Simple as that. Theres nothing to take granted for. Theres no legal reason to allow gay marriage.

[sleepy dinosaur]

Because the Religious Right still controls more cash than all the gay groups put together. In a capitalist society and without the intervention of the judicial system, that means they win. It is a shame because the Supreme Court knows full well that equal protection under the law provided in the Constitution can not constitutionally be denied to gays. Yet they allow the denial of rights to go on. They're ignoring their responsibility.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

Torrent_Of_Octane

And thats wrong because...?

And no I dont take it for granted. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Simple as that. Theres nothing to take granted for. Theres no legal reason to allow gay marriage.

The same reasons for legally binding contracts between men and women are the same reasons to allow for legally binding contracts between men and men as well as women and women. Your logic is flawed. If there is no legal reason for gay marriage then there is no reason for heterosexual marriage either.

If persons A and B are consenting adults and allowed into binding contract with all the rights that entails, then persons C and D who are consenting adults should be allowed access to the same contract despite gender. Gender, race, or creed isn't a reason to deny a contract as unworthy. A marriage license allows for a number of rights for both parties that would have to be made up with wills, power of attorney, etc.

And I was hoping that Iowa would be intelligent and leave gay marriage alone after it was passed but no... Apparently they are going to s**t themselves with rage and make it a focal point for next year's campaign. Of all the things that need to be addressed in this state, they are going to have a bender over two dudes/chics wanting to have marital sex. I ******** hate people.

[Torrent_Of_Octane]

DeathWyrmNexus

Torrent_Of_Octane

And thats wrong because...?

And no I dont take it for granted. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Simple as that. Theres nothing to take granted for. Theres no legal reason to allow gay marriage.

The same reasons for legally binding contracts between men and women are the same reasons to allow for legally binding contracts between men and men as well as women and women.

Wrong. The reason legal binding contracts between man and women are legal is because its between a man and women. Its its between two of the same sex, it wouldnt be legal marriage anymore.

DeathWyrmNexus

Your logic is flawed. If there is no legal reason for gay marriage then there is no reason for heterosexual marriage either.

You are trying to shift the burden of proof. We have marriage institutions set up already. If you guys want it, you have to convince us why you deserve it. Besides, you guys already get to have marriage. And homosexual are allowed into a legal marriage, as long as its per defined by law. In the case of 31 states, thats strictly between a man and a woman and in only 5 states, its can be either or.

DeathWyrmNexus

If persons A and B are consenting adults

And let me stop you right there. Who ever told you we drew the line at consenting adults? Its consenting adults of the opposite sex.

DeathWyrmNexus

and allowed into binding contract with all the rights that entails, then persons C and D who are consenting adults should be allowed access to the same contract despite gender.

According to you. Gender is not a protected right. Gender determines who is allowed to marry or not, as per described by the law.

DeathWyrmNexus

Gender, race, or creed isn't a reason to deny a contract as unworthy.

Again, sexuality is NOT protected by the law. It is ground to deem a marriage contract unworthy, and it holds true in 31 states.

DeathWyrmNexus

A marriage license allows for a number of rights for both parties that would have to be made up with wills, power of attorney, etc.

Yes.

DeathWyrmNexus

And I was hoping that Iowa would be intelligent and leave gay marriage alone after it was passed but no... Apparently they are going to s**t themselves with rage and make it a focal point for next year's campaign. Of all the things that need to be addressed in this state, they are going to have a bender over two dudes/chics wanting to have marital sex. I ******** hate people.

Obviously. The people are upset about it. They dont want gay marriage, dont expect them just to sit back and let it happen. Do you know what will happen IF suddenly we ban gay marriage federally? Yeah, you guys would be the ones shitting yourselves with rage. So dont even bother acting surprised that the people of Iowa is standing up for what they deem to be wrong.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

Actually I only see politicians outraged by gay marriage. I haven't met any Iowans who are. And you really aren't reading that argument and instead just using circular logic.

Marriage as legal because it is legal isn't a good argument for saying that others can't have it. Burden of proof isn't needed for what is essentially a equal protection issue. If Lynn and I can be legally married, I want an answer that states why Bob and Tom can't get married. What you are using for proof is basically the "I said so" rule and that isn't a logical answer.

So try again.

[Torrent_Of_Octane]

DeathWyrmNexus

Actually I only see politicians outraged by gay marriage. I haven't met any Iowans who are. And you really aren't reading that argument and instead just using circular logic.

Marriage as legal because it is legal isn't a good argument for saying that others can't have it. Burden of proof isn't needed for what is essentially a equal protection issue. If Lynn and I can be legally married, I want an answer that states why Bob and Tom can't get married. What you are using for proof is basically the "I said so" rule and that isn't a logical answer.

So try again.

Because you obviously havnt seen the wording of prop 8 and their similars have you?

Prop 8

Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

So its illegal because due to the actual law's definition. Why can Lynn and you get married? : razz oints at the law::
So why cant Bob and Tom get married? : razz oints at the law::

So you want to change it? You have to come up with the reason to repeal it.

I wont lie, I'm not from Iowa and I dont know the situation in Iowa. I'm just saying, why do you expect people just going to let a law like that pass and do nothing about it if they dont like it. Obviously the politicans dont like it or they would have left it alone.

[Zed Millar]

God, Octane can be so disagreeable sometimes, but I do agree that simply making demands to be an illogical way of getting votes past, and being pissed when rights are repealed because it is the right of all Americans to vote, and repeal, any act, really.

The only thing you can do is recommit yourself to re-passing the bills you want and try gaining support for them.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

Wow, your only ability to rebuttal is based on it is legal because it is legal and illegal because it is illegal...

Actually, I am for gay marriage because I actually believe in what this country is supposed to be. Freedom to point as long as there are no victims of said freedom. It is why murder is illegal. It takes choice away from the victim.

I find that gays are just as tax paying and conscientious of their neighbors as any straight person. I find that I have the right to marry or divorce Lynn as we see fit. So why shouldn't they? They are citizen of legal age. Why deny them the protection I possess? To deny one group the rights given to another is to create a second class of citizen, something I cannot abide in this country.

So despite how magical your reasoning seems, I cannot do anything but find it trite.

[Helios Trope]

As someone who is involved in gay rights activism, and also connected with one of the organizations who campaigned and canvassed in Maine, I will provide some insights (some of it my personal opinion based on what I've experienced).

First off, there is no "official" leadership. The big name gay rights organizations such as GLADD and HRC are ineffective and irrelevant. GLADD is more focused on media representations of gays, and while Will and Grace was a great big success and probably made middle class moms less afraid of the queer man, I doubt it did much as far as furthering any political agenda. The HRC is even worse because of its habit of complying and compromising on gay rights to try and maintain rapport with the Democratic party and its candidates. In trying to pass the Employee Non-Discrimination Act, they excluded trans people to get a few extra votes.

And speaking of liberals... there has been a reliance on Democratic candidates to prioritize gay rights, or to forward our agenda. However, time after time after time democratic candidates who spent their campaigns pandering to the gays to get votes, as soon as they step into office falter, concede and compromise on the issue of gay rights. Obama, who called himself a "fierce advocate" (while simultaneously not being for gay marriage?), has done no "advocating" when and where it actually mattered. While he was helping candidates campaign for re-election elsewhere, he remained totally silent on Maine.
The gay community and its allies need to give up on the idea that the way to win equal rights is by electing a democrat. After all, it was under a Republican guv'nah, that gay marriage was passed in Massachusetts.

Further, this also brings up the issue of complacency. Many on the left who are for gay rights mistakenly view the trend toward "legalizing gay" as inevitable. It's 2009, right? No one cares who you date anymore. Right? Wrong. It's still a very polarizing issue, and frankly, life for gays is not all hunky-dory everywhere in the country. It will only be inevitable if we have an aggressive movement that makes it inevitable.

This means taking the gloves off. In the process of trying to sanitize the image of gays to avoid being aligned with *****, and psychopaths, the gay community has also shied away from being too aggressive and too political. The image of the middle-class, white, otherwise privileged gay has excluded not only a large swath of people within the community, but has also alienated other parts of society that find that image hard to sympathize with. We need real people involved in this movement, real people speaking out and coming out. Your Catholic Latina neighbor is not going to be any more invested in gay rights just because Lance Bass came out, she might if it was her daughter.

So, to summarize:
-The big corporate groups are ineffectual and removed from the realities of many gay people in this country
-The Democrats, who have amassed the support of gays and pro-gay allies haven't actually been all that effective
-People have grown complacent (through blind faith in the Democratic party, and perhaps even disillussionment with politics)
-Overall lack of aggressiveness and lack of outreach

[Overlord Fang]

What will it take for the god damn country to homosexuals? This is getting ridiculous. Me and millions of other people are sick of it.

[Alyska_the_Original]

This fight is the same exact pattern as black's suffrage, AND woman's suffrage. It's appalling when it first gets pushed, because "the Bible said so" or "it's the way the Constitution was written" but when people start looking at the details, and the older generations die off, it becomes more accepted, and then legalized.
Not saying that we shouldn't fight for it ,because that's part of what makes it a top priority. THe bigger the cause gets, the less the government can deny the rights.

[Yuki Goes Rawr]

Ecstatic Fang Dealer

What will it take for the god damn country to homosexuals?

Derp.

[Mathematical Trickery]

Torrent_Of_Octane

Theres no legal reason to allow gay marriage.

You're saying...there's no law respecting homosexual marriage [in this country], so we shouldn't create a law to allow gay marriage?