Why same-sex marriage is an American value

  • metta

    Posts: 39077

    Jan 10, 2010 6:48 AM GMT
    Why same-sex marriage is an American value

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/229957
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 10, 2010 8:25 AM GMT
    no it's not! it's Canadian icon_biggrin.gif
  • drypin

    Posts: 1798

    Jan 10, 2010 9:04 AM GMT
    Refreshing perspective, though I admit I only read the first page.
  • metta

    Posts: 39077

    Jan 10, 2010 9:14 AM GMT

    Here is where the YouTube videos will be found if they continue to allow it:

    http://www.youtube.com/usdccand
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 10, 2010 2:45 PM GMT
    There's something to it.

    but it's kinda funny that so many gay americans are fighting so hard for the right to conform to a traditional, christian, conservative, conception of marriage/family.

    I guess living in a country saturated w conservative values, and being told over and over that the nuclear family is the back bone of America, makes even gay people want to be part of that club.

    sure getting the same legal rights as straight couples is important, but I really wouldn't care if it's called marriage or a union or whatever. And I certainly wouldn't look for recognition in a church.
    I could make my own ceremony.

    My lifestyle and personality doesn't mix with a traditional family value pattern, so personally I couldn't conform. And lots of straight people don't want to either.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 10, 2010 3:47 PM GMT
    There really is no such thing as a traditional, standard, family. I know very VERY few 'mom, dad, brother, sister, cat, and dog, all surrounded by a white picket fence' families.

    That doesn't make the title any less important though.

    "Hi, this is husband" makes a hell of a lot more sense to people then "Hi, this is my life partner/civil partner/long term friend".

    Anyway, I could go on about this topic for days so I'll stop there.
  • metta

    Posts: 39077

    Jan 10, 2010 3:47 PM GMT
    judoguy
    ^
    what is it you don't understand about "seperate but equal is not equal"? Anyways, over a thousand rights are not recognized with seperate but equal state laws.


    If the goverment did not recognize any marriage and only recognized civil unions or what ever they want to call them, that would be fine with me. It is not the word, it is the rights and the importance that they are called the same thing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 10, 2010 3:56 PM GMT
    I do like this article, but the idea of traditional marriage is somewhat flawed in our society.

    Traditionally, marriage has been used to advance one's social position, to join to opposing houses or families together, or to bring peace to two warring nations. Which is why, for long ages, marriages were (and still are) arranged.

    But still, this article gives me hope that one day the Republican party will one day start making sense again and go back to being the Party of the People, rather than the Part of Persecutors.
  • metta

    Posts: 39077

    Jan 11, 2010 7:49 PM GMT


    if you have a facebook account, follow Dennis....



    http://www.facebook.com/dennis.veite?ref=nf#/dennis.veite?v=wall&ref=nf
  • metta

    Posts: 39077

    Jan 11, 2010 7:56 PM GMT



    http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_14165465?source=most_viewed&nclick_check=1
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 11, 2010 8:05 PM GMT
    jimbobthedevil saidBut still, this article gives me hope that one day the Republican party will one day start making sense again and go back to being the Party of the People, rather than the Part of Persecutors.


    Sorry to pop your bubble, Jim Bob, but the Republican Party has never, ever been the "Party of the People"...Rich People, yes, Everybody else, no. The only notable exceptions to this were Abraham Lincoln & Theodore Roosevelt. In the case to T.R., when he tried to advocate that the Republican Party move towards more progressive ideals; they threw him out of the Party for it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 11, 2010 8:12 PM GMT
    Perhaps the word/term "marriage" needs to be changed or given up. As long as we get same protections and benefits straight couples do why does the "label" matters so much? We're way behind on this...it's a shame our government doesn't support us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 11, 2010 8:15 PM GMT
    equivalency <> equality

    Marriage for all or marriage for none.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 11, 2010 8:38 PM GMT
    metta8 saidjudoguy
    ^
    what is it you don't understand about "seperate but equal is not equal"? Anyways, over a thousand rights are not recognized with seperate but equal state laws.


    If the goverment did not recognize any marriage and only recognized civil unions or what ever they want to call them, that would be fine with me. It is not the word, it is the rights and the importance that they are called the same thing.


    I don't know much about american law, but what you say is my point is exactly that, IF a civil union (onion, potato or what the heck the politicians decide to call the gay version of marriage) would give equal rights, then what is a word?
    In everyday speak it'll be referred to as "marriage, married, husband" et.c anyway. By using the terms YOU want to call it you'll also own those words eventually, no matter what a piece of law paper says.

    In my country, gay people (and straight couples who don't want the church wedding) get "married" at the city hall, and even though that's not the legal term, that's what it is in terms of rights, and in the minds of the people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 11, 2010 8:46 PM GMT
    the bottom line is gays don't care that much to be included, but cannot bear the thought of being excluded.
  • tbeaux

    Posts: 419

    Jan 11, 2010 9:02 PM GMT
    I understand the argument about calling it something different. But it's also saying hey, you can have your rights, but you still will never be considered "right" in society's eye.. I hate society more than anything to be honest, but also it's a reality that we have to abide by society... I understand it is not left up to society about what you make your marriage as. I hear a lot of we'll just get civil unions and we can call it marriage ourselves... that's great! ONLY THING you still work, and function in society and if that society/gov't still does not like you...well, then that's still a problem.
  • Latenight30

    Posts: 1525

    Feb 04, 2010 8:41 PM GMT
    equal is equal. We don't need to redefine what we as a gay culture sees as marriage the other 1/2 does. It's union and for the love of all that is right.. It's a freaking legal document.