Comments on: Gay marriage is homophobic, claims man who wrote that homosexuality is a perversion

By: waetherman

waetherman — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 18:52:00 +0000

You missed the point. Seriously, right over your head. But thanks for playing.

By: Nathan Hornby

Nathan Hornby — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 18:48:00 +0000

CoE isn’t so much a religion as a loophole.

By: waetherman

waetherman — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 18:45:00 +0000

Yes, I misspoke. I guess what’s theoretical is whether they can get away with it, constitutionally.

By: elix

elix — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 07:14:00 +0000

I’ve seen gaysplaining, but it’s far less prevalent (albeit more bitchy) than mansplaining.

By: Deidzoeb

Deidzoeb — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:54:00 +0000

No! I was confused about the meaning of “mansplaining.” I thought it was when women or feminists have to explain things to moronic reactionary men. I see the error of my ways.

By: Deidzoeb

Deidzoeb — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 13:32:00 +0000

Gaysplaining?

By: elix

elix — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 13:18:00 +0000

Today I learned that gay people can receive mansplaining, too.

By: tw1515tw

tw1515tw — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 08:48:00 +0000

I remember there being a display at a Registry Office in Surrey that stated that officially recognised marriages in the 17th, 18th and 19th century were less common than we imagine. I think it said the majority of the working class were in “common law” marriages.

See http://www.marriedornot.org.uk/PDF/CommonLawMarriage.pdf

In France, you get married at the Town Hall, and if you’re religious, you get married again at the church.

By: Wreckrob8

Wreckrob8 — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 07:28:00 +0000

I wouldn’t know. Philosophy is not for the masses. I have to be consoled with religion – or with the fact that if he is good at anything he is good at making himself irrelevant.

By: marilove

marilove — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 02:47:00 +0000

I am an atheist and can get married. In a court of law. And it would have zero to do with religion.

Anyone who harps on how we should “just call it a civil union!” fails to see that … that is already what marriage IS. Marriage is civil union is marriage.

By: marilove

marilove — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 02:41:00 +0000

As a queer lady who really has no desire to ever get married, because, seriously, fuck that shit — but who also has spent years advocating for equal rights, which includes marriage for same-sex couples:

That’s nice. Don’t get married.

By: C W

C W — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 02:27:00 +0000

“What makes you think we consider those bible thumping trailer monkeys to be our equals?”

We are all human, even if some choose not to grant those same human rights to others.

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 01:01:00 +0000

Married gay couples lose out on a couple thousand dollars per year because they can’t take those deductions. Congratulations to you on being so rich that you can flush that money down the toilet. Most people really need it.

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:55:00 +0000

The COE must have a serious glitch somewhere, then.

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:49:00 +0000

But I haven’t really thought of a good rebuttal to the everything but marriage argument.

Not sure why “equality under the law” isn’t a good enough rebuttal.

By: Stacey B. Gray

Stacey B. Gray — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 23:25:00 +0000

Actually waetherman, it is not theorhetical at all. It is in fact the exact purpose of section 2 of the DOMA law. That section expressly authorizes that states do not have to recognize the legal same sex marriges from other states or countrys – like Canada for example. “Section 2. Powers reserved to the states:

No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.”

By: ixcheldelgato

ixcheldelgato — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:19:00 +0000

The pressure for gay marriage is therefore in a certain measure self-defeating for in seeking equality with something unlike yourself the thing that you join to is no longer what you joined.

Or, in other words, you shouldn’t want to join any club that would have you as a member?!?!?

By: Jeremy Sweeney

Jeremy Sweeney — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:42:00 +0000

By which you mean he’s pushing “what’s good for hegemony is good for the workers, and they should shut up and like it” right? Same shit, different country.

By: unit1421

unit1421 — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:15:00 +0000

What makes you think we consider those bible thumping trailer monkeys to be our equals? Getting access to those 1138 special rights given as payoffs will be fine and dandy, but in time we’ll be reading about bi/homophobic white trash in the UFO and bigfoot section.

By: wysinwyg

wysinwyg — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:11:00 +0000

should be legal for everyone

Umm, did you read a different comment from me?

Does my low opinion of the institution of marriage also make me an ally of the hateful bigots?

By: wysinwyg

wysinwyg — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:09:00 +0000

You should probably google “veganism” and see if some website focused on veganism has an FAQ or something. This is kinda off-topic.

The answer is “no”, btw. You should probably look up what the “morality of being vegan” actually entails before spouting off about it.

By: C W

C W — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:39:00 +0000

“ as they sputtered and tried to present some sort of argument that came across as anything but homophobic.”

So essentially nothing will change.

By: C W

C W — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:38:00 +0000

“My dad (a devout fundie and homophobe) had an interesting idea himself: Convert ALL marriages to domestic partnerships, and let the church decide who it wants to call married or sinners”

Church groups would protest this more than anyone else.

By: C W

C W — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:35:00 +0000

“Clearly he’s evolved in his thinking.”

Have you examined his conclusions or are you cherry-picking? Because he does not think this.

By: C W

C W — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:35:00 +0000

The descriptive language changes, the idiots still feel the same hatred.

By: C W

C W — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:34:00 +0000

“And then came the laws that said if you’re not married you don’t actually share property and when your partner dies you can’t be in the hospital room because you’re not family.”

These laws are not new, the problem is that these laws are very old and not likely to change radically.

By: Wreckrob8

Wreckrob8 — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:33:00 +0000

He is the foxhunting philosopher. Foxhunting unites all classes and is not the preserve of the privileged and to attack it is to undermine the life of the countryside (and England itself). He writes on animal rights, too.

By: C W

C W — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:33:00 +0000

“The gay rights and sexual revolutions were about building NEW institutions”

And many were similar in form and function than the last, only with equality. Funny, that! Maybe they should skip equality and go straight to the new, as you’re suggesting.

By: C W

C W — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:32:00 +0000

I’m sure it took you a very long time to craft that zinger.

By: C W

C W — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:29:00 +0000

Radical queer thought: “with something unlike yourself”, herp derp.

I’m glad you’re here to “protect” people from consensual decisions that may not hurt them at all! Good on you, teaming up with the hateful bigots and admiring their rationale in blocking gays from happy partnerships (for their safety, of course.)