California does it first
Gay marriage again
Lots of good stuff here.
First off, this bill does nothing but take religion out of the picture when it comes to marriage. That is the right thing to do. It simply makes marriage between two people instead of making it based on what they carry or don't carry between their legs.
Second, I still wish someone would explain to me how this affects straight people? It simply says that any two people of legal age can get married. It simply says that any two consenting adults can enjoy the same priviledges as any two other consenting adults. You hear a lot about how gay marriage destroys the institution of marriage but I also once heard that the earth was flat, the problem is that there are no facts to back up either assertion.
Third, WWAD (What Will Arnold Do?). It's gonna be a lot of fun watching what everyone's favorite action hero/governor does with this little nuclear potato.
Lastly, you gotta love these folks who create organizations with names like
The Campaign for Children and Families. There has to be a special place in hell reserved for these self righteous assholes who want to tell everyone else how to live.
This one is gonna be a lot of fun to watch.
BTW, Texas has a constitutional amendment on the ballot for November to define marriage as between a man and a woman. More on that one later.
Lots of good stuff here.
First off, this bill does nothing but take religion out of the picture when it comes to marriage. That is the right thing to do. It simply makes marriage between two people instead of making it based on what they carry or don't carry between their legs.
Second, I still wish someone would explain to me how this affects straight people? It simply says that any two people of legal age can get married. It simply says that any two consenting adults can enjoy the same priviledges as any two other consenting adults. You hear a lot about how gay marriage destroys the institution of marriage but I also once heard that the earth was flat, the problem is that there are no facts to back up either assertion.
Third, WWAD (What Will Arnold Do?). It's gonna be a lot of fun watching what everyone's favorite action hero/governor does with this little nuclear potato.
Lastly, you gotta love these folks who create organizations with names like
The Campaign for Children and Families. There has to be a special place in hell reserved for these self righteous assholes who want to tell everyone else how to live.
This one is gonna be a lot of fun to watch.
BTW, Texas has a constitutional amendment on the ballot for November to define marriage as between a man and a woman. More on that one later.
posted by Big Ed at 8:23 AM
7 Comments:
Will your Texas amendment define "man" and "woman"? I mean, if I got and get a sex change operation, will I be able to marry a man in Texas?
Just wondering.
It will be interesting to see what happens with this here in California. I wonder if the feds will put any pressure on Arnie over this.
Good question. Obviously those are the kind of things the homophobes and control freaks don't think about.
As for Arnie, I bet Dubya has made a few calls.
Oh well. Not too big a suprise.
SACRAMENTO – Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced Wednesday he will veto a bill that would have made California the first state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage through legislative action.
Schwarzenegger said the legislation, given final approval Tuesday by lawmakers, would conflict with the intent of voters when they approved Proposition 22. That measure was put on the ballot in 2000 to prevent California from recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere.
"We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails that vote," the governor's press secretary, Margita Thompson, said in a statement. "Out of respect for the will of the people, the governor will veto (the bill)."
Proposition 22 stated that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The bill to be vetoed by Schwarzenegger would have defined marriage as a civil contract between "two persons."
Just because 'the people' voted for something doesn't make it right. The majority of people from the South during the time of the Civil War were probably in favor of slavery.
I'm torn on Arnold's decision.
One one hand, I'm sure it's just a cop out on his part, an easy way to appease his Republican backers without really telling all the girlie men to go get stuffed.
On the other hand, we all know how fucked the whole election process is. They put a constitutional amendment on the ballot that says, "Marriage shall only be between a man and a woman" and it passes but what is, for want of a better term, the statute of limitations on that? How long does something that that is just plain wrong, like this one, stand simply because it was approved by the voters? Hell, they elected Gray Davis but kicked his ass out in the middle of his term, obviously mistakes are meant to be corrected.
As for comparing this to slavery, no one is getting whipped and made to pick cotton but we are discriminating against a large number of our fellow human beings based on nothing else but an accident of birth. We can only hope that the PTB wake up and fix that which the Californian Legistlature seems to be trying to do.
The civil rights movement happened because the government had institutionalized racism for very long time. First with slavery then all the little things they did after that. There were laws against black people riding in the front of the bus or sitting at the same lunch counter as white people. The government, just like they are doing now, did the wrong thing and eventually fixed it. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it isn't still illegal for blacks and whites to marry in some states. They are doing the same thing with this marriage is only man and woman crap.
Marriage, as we are talking about it, is a government function. A marriage license is a legal document issued by the state that gives the two people certain rights and privledges.
Eventually, they'll get their collective heads out of their asses and do the right thing. I just don't understand why they can never just do the right thing from the beginning.
I never meant that this was the same as slavery, just that they were both things that were morally wrong but were still supported by a large segment of the population.
Post a Comment
<< Home