Messages

*yawns*


Whatever.  You can try to cover up all you want, but your words are there.  You don't give a shit about gay rights, you'd be happier the way things were... you're such the little conservative, aren't you?


Well, I have to go.  You have fun getting all pissy that I poked your little rant full of holes.  I'll read it, if I feel like it.

Ciao!

My only objection to the idea of gay marriage is a legislature being drafted forcing the churches to recognize it.  What will that mean?  Some asshat gay activist is going to sue a Church for the minister declining to marry him/her to his/her partner, since it is against the Church's doctrine.
Somewhere in Europe, there's a gay man suing the Catholic Church for not allowing him to be a priest.  So it's not like it won't happen.
And I'm not cool with that.  Freedom in this country shouldn't mean only freedom for the minorities and everyone else has to suck it up.  The right to hate should be a right for everyone, and not just those minority haters who declare "down with whatever we're protesting today!"

So, you're against gay marriage because some activist is going to sue the church?  You silly bitch.  You'd deny the government recognizing the rights of two loving monogamous people to live together with the same benfits that straigt couples, becasue of a lawsuit?

First off, no church has to recognize a religious marriage performed by another church.  If you're a Catholic, and you want a same-sex, religious marriage in a Catholic church, you can't.  just like you can't have a Jewish wedding in a Catholic church.  Or a Muslim wedding in a Jewish Temple.  That's becasue a religion is an institution with different game rules than the government.  The church isn't required to aknowledge the sacred aspect of anything the government rules upon.

So, gay marriage isn't about religion.  it's a civil marriage.  which means, it's not religious;  At most, it's performed by a religion that accepts gays as having the right and grace to marry (the new Anglican schism, the Unitarians, Wiccans, etc etc).  It has nothing to do with religions that don't recognize gay marriage as "correct under God".  The Massachussets Supreme court didn't say that the Catholic church had to marry gays, it said that there was nothing in the state constitution that prevented gays from civil marriages.  Further than that, thay said that it was against the constitution, as written, to deny gays the benefits of marriage.  Again, nothing to do with religion, everything to do with the laws of the land.

So there's your separation of church and state.  The reason you can't just go with "Civil unions" is that there are churches that will consider gays married, so they are, by the game rules, married.  Look at it this way:  A straight couple who says they are married because they dedicated themselves to Artemis & Apollo, tied their hands together, & jumped over a broom aren't going to be considered married in the eyes of a Catholic.  But they are, in the eyes of the state,a nd in the eyes of their religion.  What's the difference between that and gay marriage?

And no matter what happens in Europe, anyone who is going to sue the church over it's rules is going to get their asses handed to them.  At most, there will be some flap about the tax-exempt status of an institution that discriminates.  It would be the same as if the couple in the previous example sued the Catholic church because they don't accept the the Greek Gods.

The ban, however, is completely bullshit.

If there existed someway of drafting a law that would allow gays to marry without permitting them to abuse the legislature, then I'm all for it.    They need it, they want it, there's no real reason to deny it to them.

Oh, but it's ok for straights to abuse the legislature?  The legislature is abused every day.  to say that gays shouldn't be allowed to is to worsen an already fucked playing field.  You're acting like only those pesky gays are capable of messing with the laws.  What about the christians?  they are already fucking with the legislature, but I don't hear you complaining about that.  You really think that a handful of quixote-type activists are going to change a 2000 year-old religion?

Sadly, you've fallen for the ruse the christians have established:  That legalizing gay marriage is somehow intruding upon the civic and religious rights of Christians.  The Church doesn't recognize gay marriage; that has nothing to do with the state.  If the state allow benefits to married gay couples, this has nothing to do with the Church.  There is clear church/state separation, if you were just smart enough to see it.

Still, what I want to know is - what are the gays doing?  What steps are they taking to get their rights?  Why aren't the gays doing something about their own rights before Bush manages to sodomize them all with his proposed Constitutional Amendment?
I hear a lot of "Oh, boohoo, I'm never going to be allowed to marry someone I love!  I'm going to cry, and maybe make a bumpersticker protesting the injustice!"  But I don't hear any "They chose the wrong people to mess with!  This is what we're going to do about it and they'll back off or regret it! RAH!"
WTF is up with that?  They've got the numbers, and they have several extremely slick organizations in place, so where's their oomph?  Their solidarity and forward-movement?  Doesn't a hand fight better as a fist?
They're here, they're queer - I don't see too many people getting over it, though.

Wow.  Way to over-generalize.  You're an idiot.  Or perhaps you don't read the paper.  Maybe you just don't care enough to research the activism going on in the swing states that had gay marriage bans last election.  

Not to mention, you, who decry the (potential) abuse of the legislature by gays, apparently did nothing on your own to stop the abuse of the legislature by straight fundamentalists in those swing states.  What did you do to prevent such a constitutional travesty?

It's sad, when you talk about things you know nothing about.  It makes you look stupider than you actually are.


If that's possible.

I'm not stalking... You just refuse to face up to the fact that you're a sub-standard intellectual hypocrite.

All talk, no action...

Can't the creators of this board even get something simple as an automatic log-in correct?

There is only God.
Your Eris does not exist.
Praise be unto Him.

there's dealing with and there's letting it go by unnoticed and unhindered. My ex is a very well defined (and I mean jaw-droppingly defined) 85 kilograms (190 pounds) I have a friend who is convinced she will be forever unlucky in love because she is a less-shapely girl of the same weight, her sister meanwhile, is a weight-obsessed 14-year-old model with an eating disorder.

Your "ex."  I see.  Not a terribly convincing endorsement.