Gay Marriage/Marriage Equality/End of World?

Turtwig · 21-08-2012 04:25PM

Shooter nailed it.

Not so much to the lay person, but to person simply unaware of the argument from tradition, the argument is a very intuitive one. When a proposal conflicts with our intuitions we tend to dismiss that proposal. I've seen Dave Quinn on Prime Time twice and his strategy is excellent. He mentions how there are numerous studies which show the benefits and positivity (he tends to throw in as many emotive expressions as possible) of parents. Then his opponent immediately interjects with how those studies are minority, how they are flawed etc. To the ordinary person looking on it it looks like the balance of studies is a 50/50 split and there is a valid debate. The relevance of the studies is never even considered.

Personally I think the best way of combating this fallacy is not through the gay marriage debate but with everything. Any time people refer to the wisdom of the ancients and how their "traditions" knew stuff that we're just rediscovering today I usually point out how they also severed penises as a form of masculinity rites.

Bannasidhe · 21-08-2012 05:02PM

OldNotWIse wrote: »

With respect (and I think we are all in agreement that the last thing anyone wants is an abortion bicker on a tuesday afternoon) I understand your point somehwhat, but I feel its a little simplistic to essentially prohibit men from having opinions worth taking into consideration simply because they are men. I am sure plenty of men mourn the loss of their unborn when their partner decides to abort it. Of course, they dont "have to carry the child", an argument often trotted out, but maybe given the choice, they would (a silly theoretical argument of course). Also, if one argues that only those of child-bearing capacity can have an opinion, this is shutting out women who are infertile.

I am not for a second saying men should be denied an input to any debate. Was expressing my growing frustration at my, and other women's bodies, becoming a political/religious ideological battleground where those shouting the loudest to reduce women's rights to decide for themselves are nearly always male.

Just think more listening to women and less telling women is in order.

efb · 21-08-2012 05:04PM

It's the one debate Im glad I've no part in- abortion - but I do respect a woman's right to chose.

Bannasidhe · 21-08-2012 05:09PM

efb wrote: »

It's the one debate Im glad I've no part in- abortion - but I do respect a woman's right to chose.

Absolutely. I cannot imagine ever having an abortion - but I can't see the future and I have no idea what life will decide to fling my way in the few short years left to me before the glorious menopause frees me.
Nor can I make other people's decisions for them - they have the right to choose.

Links234 · 21-08-2012 07:17PM

robindch wrote: »

Well, the man's free to voice his opinion one way or the other; but gosh, you'd have to ask what century and what weird culture he's living in to produce the above.

This bit is a bit boggling:

The vast majority of us feel there is something very sad about an effeminate man and all the great facets of their personality would be so much more illuminated by having this quality.

I personally find it very odd just how many people of that kind of mindset are so utterly against men expressing femininity at all, and it can be almost obsessive in some places. It reminds me of Keith Ablow (the guy that made Bill O'Reilly look sane when he was interviewed) ranting and raving when there was a picture in a catalogue of a boy wearing nailpolish:

These folks are hostile to the gender distinctions that actually are part of the magnificent synergy that creates and sustains the human race. They respect their own creative notions a whole lot more than any creative Force in the universe.

"Magnificent synergy that creates and sustains the human race"?! Not even John Watery-Excrement could top that. there's this utter nonsense that if gender roles are blurred, even just a little bit, the sky will fall and it'll be mass hysteria, dogs and cats living together and Pauly Shore will be popular again.

what I can't really seem to wrap my head around is in Gallagher's quote, is he suggesting that a man who expresses femininity is lacking? I really, really don't get that. Why is that? it would seem to me that someone who expresses all aspects of their personality is the more "illuminated"

can someone explain this to me?

BluntGuy · 21-08-2012 08:11PM

turgid mess wrote:

any creative Force in the universe.

The Unnecessary Capitalisation of "force", as though it somehow adds gravitas to his broken arguments, is slightly irritating.

NuMarvel · 21-08-2012 08:11PM

Jernal wrote: »

Any time people refer to the wisdom of the ancients and how their "traditions" knew stuff that we're just rediscovering today I usually point out how they also severed penises as a form of masculinity rites.

I usually ask how many sheep and goats their wife's family brought to the marriage, and if that brings up blank stares, I remind them of the wonderful tradition of the dowry.

Bobby42 · 21-08-2012 08:12PM

He seems to be arguing that if you behave manly enough, eg. play football, knock back pints, drive a fast car, poke a fire with a stick, not talk about feelings, ect. you are qualified to be a dad.

Display any hint of femininity you aren't "man" enough.

What a disgusting and backwards view of the world.

NuMarvel · 21-08-2012 08:12PM

BluntGuy wrote: »

The Unnecessary Capitalisation of "force", as though it somehow adds gravitas to his broken arguments, is slightly irritating.

I'm pretty sure that any use of the word Force (with the capital) needs TM LucasFilms Ltd after it...

ShooterSF · 21-08-2012 08:33PM

BluntGuy wrote: »

The Unnecessary Capitalisation of "force", as though it somehow adds gravitas to his broken arguments, is slightly irritating.

But you always spell God with a capital

Turtwig · 21-08-2012 08:40PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that any use of the word Force (with the capital) needs TM LucasFilms Ltd after it...

Not if it's Net Force.

robindch · 29-08-2012 06:45PM

New Zealand passes Marriage Equality law:

http://www.thejournal.ie/new-zealand-passes-gay-marriage-law-577107-Aug2012/

TheJournal wrote:

THE NEW ZEALAND parliament has overwhelmingly passed the first stage of a gay marriage law.

The vote on the marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill was passed by 80 votes to 40, a margin that should see it pass the two remaining votes before parliament.

Should it pass, New Zealand will become the 12th country since 2001 to recognise gay marriage, which polls indicate about two-thirds of New Zealanders support. Before the bill’s reading, lobby groups gathered the signatures of 50,000 people opposed to it.

“Throughout history and in virtually all human societies, marriage has always been the union of a man and a woman. Marriage reflects the complementary natures of men and women” Bob McCroskie, the head of Family First told the New Zealand Herald. If marriage was redefined, there was nothing to stop it being redefined again to allow polygamy, polyamory and incest. A legal adviser to the campaign also suggested that religious celebrants who refused to perform gay marriages could be breaching the Human Rights Act.

However Louisa Wall, an MP with the opposition Labour party, assured parliament that if the bill became law, ministers or other religious celebrants would not be forced to offer gay marriage ceremonies. “That is the situation now, and nothing will change. And because we have freedom of religion in New Zealand no religious body is bound to marry a couple if that marriage is at odd with their religion’s belief.”

Prime Minister John Key, who came out in support for gay marriage after US president Barack Obama did the same, warned his fellow National Party members that debate on the bill would likely be “very emotionally charged. There will be a deluge of email campaigns both ways on this issue.”

Irish campaigners for gay marriage welcomed the result of the vote. “This is a great step forward for New Zealand and for lesbian and gay couples living in New Zealand,” said Brian Sheehan of Ireland’s Gay and Lesbian Equality Network. “The vote is another example of the growing political and public support for access to civil marriage for lesbian and gay couples. With the success of civil partnership the next step for Ireland is to move to full constitutional equality for lesbian and gay people by providing access to civil marriage.”

Same sex marriage is now recognised in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, Portugal, Spain, Canada, South Africa and Argentina.

old hippy · 30-08-2012 12:17PM

"Same sex marriage is now recognised in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, Portugal, Spain, Canada, South Africa and Argentina."

And have these societies been destroyed by this, yet? :rolleyes:

Sin City · 30-08-2012 12:20PM

Once again

Beruthiel · 30-08-2012 01:40PM

old hippy wrote: »

"Same sex marriage is now recognised in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, Portugal, Spain, Canada, South Africa and Argentina."

We can add France to the list in October.

Link234 wrote:

it would seem to me that someone who expresses all aspects of their personality is the more "illuminated"

can someone explain this to me?

Because a manly man (one of those neanderthal types) feels threatened in some way?
It's outside his comfort zone and he cannot cope with it in any other way bar going on the defensive.

Sarky · 30-08-2012 01:41PM

Has the world ended yet?

Nodin · 30-08-2012 01:52PM

Sarky wrote: »

Has the world ended yet?

No, you probably just had a bad pint.

Sarky · 30-08-2012 01:52PM

I don't get bad pints in my local :coolface:

robindch · 05-09-2012 01:05PM

http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-city-council-marriage-equality-motion-583420-Sep2012/

TheJournal wrote:

DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL has just passed a motion in support of civil marriage for same sex couples.

The motion was passed at this evening’s meeting of the council – it had been proposed jointly by Labour and Sinn Féin councillors. The approval of the motion was welcomed by the director of Marriage Equality Moninne Griffith this evening. She said:

Moninne Griffith wrote:

This is a wonderful step by Dublin City Council to raise awareness of this important issue at a local level. We’d like to thank the councillors from both Labour and Sinn Féin for their initiative, and our supporters in Dublin who spoke to their councillors over the last few months about raising the issue.

The organisation said that it hoped to see similar motions passed by other local authorities over the coming weeks. Griffith said that “with 73 per cent popular support, including TDs, government ministers and local authorities, the time for marriage equality is now”.

The Gay and Lesbian Equality Network (GLEN) said that the next step for Ireland should be a “move to full Constitutional equality for lesbian and gay people by providing access to civil marriage”.

Cork City Council became the first local authority in June in the Republic of Ireland to pass a motion in favour of marriage equality. In Northern Ireland, Belfast City Council, Omagh, Down, Moyle and Magherafelt Distric Councils all passed motions in favour of marriage equality.

Sin City · 05-09-2012 01:15PM

1082d1328104214-my-post-my-psych-dr-friends-wall-re-equal-rights-gay-marriage-401346_3073186273785_1387504699_33177626_1980618134_n.jpg

MrPudding · 05-09-2012 06:15PM

Does anyone have the pic of the twitter post where the parent explained gay marriage to their child and the child's head did not explode?

MrP

jill_valentine · 05-09-2012 07:13PM

The Council motions are basically just nice gestures right? They don't have any tangible effect?

I'm just curious, I know they're a significant statement of approval and all, I'm just wondering if they have any greater weight than that.

Bannasidhe · 05-09-2012 08:44PM

jill_valentine wrote: »

The Council motions are basically just nice gestures right? They don't have any tangible effect?

I'm just curious, I know they're a significant statement of approval and all, I'm just wondering if they have any greater weight than that.

Given that Councillors don't even have a real say in how the area they are elected to 'govern' is run, it's really just a gesture and about as legally useful as when Cork City Council declared the city a Nuclear free zone despite the fact that the only nuclear reactor in Ireland is under the Kane building in UCC.

Zillah · 06-09-2012 12:37AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Given that Councillors don't even have a real say in how the area they are elected to 'govern' is run, it's really just a gesture and about as legally useful as when Cork City Council declared the city a Nuclear free zone despite the fact that the only nuclear reactor in Ireland is under the Kane building in UCC.

This is such a special pair of facts, I love it.

Galvasean · 06-09-2012 12:41AM

Beruthiel wrote: »

Because a manly man (one of those neanderthal types) feels threatened in some way?

Hey hey hey hey... Let's not tar the neandertals with that brush. As best we can tell, they had no problem with homosexuality.

robindch · 06-09-2012 03:20PM

MrPudding wrote: »

Does anyone have the pic of the twitter post where the parent explained gay marriage to their child and the child's head did not explode?

This one?

MrPudding · 06-09-2012 06:00PM

robindch wrote: »

This one?

Exactly the one. Cheers.
MrP

old hippy · 06-09-2012 06:01PM

- Bob's your uncle and he's gay, gay I tells ya

- Well, that really takes the biscuit

MagicMarker · 08-09-2012 11:12AM

...

Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo has spoken out in favor of a Maryland ballot initiative that would legalize gay marriage. Yahoo has published a letter that Maryland state delegate Emmett C. Burns Jr. wrote last week to Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti, urging him to "inhibit such expressions from your employee." This is Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe's response to Burns.

Dear Emmett C. Burns Jr.,

I find it inconceivable that you are an elected official of Maryland's state government. Your vitriolic hatred and bigotry make me ashamed and disgusted to think that you are in any way responsible for shaping policy at any level. The views you espouse neglect to consider several fundamental key points, which I will outline in great detail (you may want to hire an intern to help you with the longer words):
1. As I suspect you have not read the Constitution, I would like to remind you that the very first, the VERY FIRST Amendment in this founding document deals with the freedom of speech, particularly the abridgment of said freedom. By using your position as an elected official (when referring to your constituents so as to implicitly threaten the Ravens organization) to state that the Ravens should "inhibit such expressions from your employees," more specifically Brendon Ayanbadejo, not only are you clearly violating the First Amendment, you also come across as a narcissistic fromunda stain. What on earth would possess you to be so mind-boggingly stupid? It baffles me that a man such as yourself, a man who relies on that same First Amendment to pursue your own religious studies without fear of persecution from the state, could somehow justify stifling another person's right to speech. To call that hypocritical would be to do a disservice to the word. Mind****ing obscenely hypocritical starts to approach it a little bit.

2. "Many of your fans are opposed to such a view and feel it has no place in a sport that is strictly for pride, entertainment, and excitement." Holy ****ing ****balls. Did you seriously just say that, as someone who's "deeply involved in government task forces on the legacy of slavery in Maryland"? Have you not heard of Kenny Washington? Jackie Robinson? As recently as 1962 the NFL still had segregation, which was only done away with by brave athletes and coaches daring to speak their mind and do the right thing, and you're going to say that political views have "no place in a sport"? I can't even begin to fathom the cognitive dissonance that must be coursing through your rapidly addled mind right now; the mental gymnastics your brain has to tortuously contort itself through to make such a preposterous statement are surely worthy of an Olympic gold medal (the Russian judge gives you a 10 for "beautiful oppressionism").

3. This is more a personal quibble of mine, but why do you hate freedom? Why do you hate the fact that other people want a chance to live their lives and be happy, even though they may believe in something different than you, or act different than you? How does gay marriage, in any way shape or form, affect your life? If gay marriage becomes legal, are you worried that all of a sudden you'll start thinking about penis? "Oh ****. Gay marriage just passed. Gotta get me some of that hot dong action!" Will all of your friends suddenly turn gay and refuse to come to your Sunday Ticket grill-outs? (Unlikely, since gay people enjoy watching football too.)

I can assure you that gay people getting married will have zero effect on your life. They won't come into your house and steal your children. They won't magically turn you into a lustful cockmonster. They won't even overthrow the government in an orgy of hedonistic debauchery because all of a sudden they have the same legal rights as the other 90 percent of our population—rights like Social Security benefits, child care tax credits, Family and Medical Leave to take care of loved ones, and COBRA healthcare for spouses and children. You know what having these rights will make gays? Full-fledged American citizens just like everyone else, with the freedom to pursue happiness and all that entails. Do the civil-rights struggles of the past 200 years mean absolutely nothing to you?

In closing, I would like to say that I hope this letter, in some small way, causes you to reflect upon the magnitude of the colossal foot in mouth cluster**** you so brazenly unleashed on a man whose only crime was speaking out for something he believed in. Best of luck in the next election; I'm fairly certain you might need it.

Sincerely,
Chris Kluwe

P.S. I've also been vocal as hell about the issue of gay marriage so you can take your "I know of no other NFL player who has done what Mr. Ayanbadejo is doing" and shove it in your close-minded, totally lacking in empathy piehole and choke on it. Asshole.

robindch · 11-09-2012 03:48PM

Frances begins a slow waltz with Satan. The local RCC rep is mute, by comparison with his friends in the USA, so promotion may be some time in coming.

http://www.thejournal.ie/france-to-allow-gay-marriage-591739-Sep2012/

TheJournal wrote:

FRANCE’S NEW Socialist government has outlined the broad parameters of its plan to introduce gay marriage and adoption, a key election campaign pledge.

The new law “will extend to members of the same sex the current arrangements of marriage,” justice minister Christiane Taubira told La Croix newspaper. “We will open adoption to homosexual couples,” she said. “They will be able to adopt children either as individuals or as a couple.”

A number of European nations allow gay marriage, but not France, where only married couples and not civil union partners can adopt. European nations including Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and Britain allow gay adoption.

Taubira said the new laws would allow “homosexuals wanting to become a ‘parent’ of their partner’s biological child to do so in similar conditions as heterosexuals.”

Prime minister Jean-Marc Ayrault had said in July that gay couples in France will be allowed to get married and to adopt children from next year. “Our society is evolving, lifestyles and mentalities are changing,” he said in a speech outlining the government’s agenda. “The government will respond to that.”

The Catholic church in France has stressed its opposition to the plan. But on Tuesday the Archbishop of Paris, Cardinal Andre Vingt-Trois, said: “If the republic changes the law, we will observe it”. Opinion polls suggest the church’s stance is out of sync with the views of most French people, nearly two-thirds of whom back gay marriage.

Christine Boutin, the leader of France’s Christian Democratic Party, today called for a referendum on the proposal.

Gay Marriage/Marriage Equality/End of World?

Comments