Gay Marriage to Alfred: Your Thoughts

That's the most priggish behavior I've ever heard. Does he want a golf clap?

tell me how it's right to enjoy the advantages of an unjust social arrangement, particularly when you have no need to and you actually acknowledge that it's unjust.

I don't need to eat chocolate, and I know the chocolate trade is built on an unjust social arrangement, but I do anyway. ¯\(°_o)/¯

That's really not even a fair analogue on my part. Straight people getting married doesn't directly or indirectly stop same-sex couples from getting married.

giving up an enterprise that you entered into freely just to make a point is token at best, at worst the height of arrogance. all it shows is that he's incredibly self-centered. It helps no-one & draws attention to him, not the cause.

now imagine jaymc including a special notice in his wedding invitations:

'dear gay friends,

it's wrong that you can't get married but my getting married doesn't stop you from getting married. enjoy the reception.

best wishes,

jaymc'

Being mad that straight people can get married just seems like an entirely unproductive response to marriage inequality. Should you be mad that you can't marry? Totally! I am! But the former response is totally misdirected and will probably just result in turning you into a bitter asshole like our columnist.

what's with all the projection in this thread? my teacher, for example, didn't make a big deal out of this. it was an issue he broached with his wife and that he happened to talk to some of his students about, privately, when we were discussing marriage equality. he wasn't trying to stand out, or strike a blow against the system, or anything. just looking to act in the right way. and the columnist doesn't seem bitter, and if you think he's an asshole for expecting married people to own up to the full significance of their acceptance of marriage, then ok, but that judgment seems like it doesn't regard marriage inequality as an actual injustice.

the question is, how is it right for straight people to be married if it's not right for gay people not to be able to be?

It's not wrong for straight people to marry. It's wrong that gay people are not able to.

It's an injustice, but straight people staying unmarried on principal (whoop-de-freakin-do) serves no purpose. If a straight friend wanted to marry but was holding out on principal because I can't, I'd tell him to stop kidding himself and go for it.

I know who my enemy is and it isn't my friends who want to marry someone of the opposite sex.

With this kind of logic in mind, I'm thinking that maybe white people should get jobs that pay proportionately less...

ahahahahaha otm. I think all us men should take a paycut, too.

If straight people boycotted marriage en bloc as a protest against inequality, then, theoretically, great. But if if the overwhelming majority of straight people came to support gay marriage then it would likely be legalised by then anyway. The mere fact of being willing to vote for it is the important factor.

I should tell the married straight peeps I know who are actively involved in fighting for marriage equality that their marriage is an affront to me.

I agree that not getting married out of solidarity is a pointless gesture, but it does highlight the larger issue, which is that the status quo won't change until straight people start really caring about the injustice of it. The question is, how do we facilitate that?

At this point I don't have any great hope that Minnesotans will vote differently than the residents of the 31 other states that have put amendments on the ballot, despite changing attitudes.

not getting married out of solidarity is a pointless gesture, but it does highlight the larger issue

isn't that the point of solidarity?

but boycotts have to be organized and en masse to be effective. if I boycott mac and cheese I'm not going to bankrupt kraft on my own.

The question is, how do we facilitate that?

Well, to answer both your question and j's absurd points, you help "us" by hanging out, drinking, and realizing that we're not caricatures. In other words, do little to nothing that that you don't already do. Look at the poll I cited last week. Its most important thing: not the number of people who think gay marriage is okay, but that the numbers keep rising, with no end in sight. This will change soon, folks. Soon we'll realize how boring -- for better or worse -- marriage is.

i think it is fine and admirable for ppl to make common cause and suffer privation in order to "make a point." however, to suggest that every straight couple entering into marriage is ~committing an injustice~ against ppl they may know and love is...noxious. it may not be untrue, or logically inconsistent, or what have you, but if you're concerned about, you know, solidarity, you might want to consider strategies that bind ppl together, not push them away.

xp alfred otm

http://www.minnpost.com/minnclips/2011/05/23/28533/rep_john_kriesels_full_speech_on_the_same-sex_marriage_ban_amendment

Republican MN State Representative John Kriesels making a speech re: the same-sex marriage ban amendment.

(from Cottage Grove btw)

hot damn

The CEO of Focus on the Family says of winning the younger generation on gay marriage:

We're losing on that one, especially among the 20- and 30-somethings: 65 to 70 percent of them favor same-sex marriage. I don't know if that's going to change with a little more age—demographers would say probably not. We've probably lost that. I don't want to be extremist here, but I think we need to start calculating where we are in the culture.

It's a bizarrely almost reasonable statement. His follow up not as much, but still.

now imagine jaymc including a special notice in his wedding invitations:

'dear gay friends,

it's wrong that you can't get married but my getting married doesn't stop you from getting married. enjoy the reception.

best wishes,

jaymc'

― j., Sunday, May 22, 2011 4:16 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark

Yeah, I don't think this is necessarily what jaymc is talking about. I have straight friends and family who are passionate about LGBT issues who have gotten married in the U.S. who have made a point of including a special notice like this and it's usually to the effect of encouraging or asking guests to donate to Marriage Equality organizations, etc. etc. Again, I'm not saying that this should be mandatory, but there are plenty of ways of acknowledging straight privilege and trying to use it for good that aren't as pointless callous as you imagine.

I'd rather my straight friends do something to productively advance queer causes than symbollically flagellate themselves for having the temerity to be straight.

And, again, blah blah blah is marriage equality even desirable, blah blah blah homonormative citizenship blah blah models of domesticity blah...

as a prerequisite for this entire discussion, but since in the U.S. marriage is so strongly tied to access to benefits of the social welfare state, the option of marriage is probably necessary (at the very least pragmatically) for advancing health coverage, poverty issues, etc. etc. etc.

I missed j.'s post. Alex OTM.

Americans are just scared hobosexuals will marry each other for benefits.

hobosexuals?

http://www.electricinca.com/lies/hobosexual.jpg

Guys I don't think you realise that same-sex marriage will lead to THE COLLAPSE OF CIVILISATION as per this bloke's prophecy

And union heavyweight Joe De Bruyn warned that Labor - and civilisation itself - could cease to exist if the party overhauls its platform later this year to accept same-sex marriage. (...) Mr De Bruyn also claims that undermining marriage could also trigger social collapse.

I can understand a lot of things I don't agree with or find deplorable - various forms of racism, homophobia, misogyny - but I haven't been able to see the viewpoint of someone who thinks that gay marriage will be majorly detrimental to his society. It's underpants gnomes logic for me (1: X, 2: ???, 3: Y!).

The first step is in understanding that some people still literally gag at the thought of any same-sex contact. The rest follows naturally.

Jesse otm, that's EXACTLY what it is. They haven't worked out the logic of step 2 yet because there IS none. btw pumpkin makes me gag so I'm having it banned.

Gay sex makes me gag, but I don't want to ban it and, instead, wish it were mandatory.

lol

jaymc - I think putting a note in your wedding program is great, and if you decide to do it, could be productive. I expect your guests will generally be pretty enlightened and pro-gay, but thinking about gay marriage rights at a wedding emphasizes its importance and might lead to some action in those who are passively pro-equality. Also, it would be emotionally affecting for me. In other words, if you do it, I WILL make a spectacle, like a hired mourner.

This quote has been on my mind since a friend posted it on FB

One of the primary functions of marriage is to make two unrelated adults into close kin; that creates mutual responsibilities, but it also makes a family that courtrooms, police, hospitals and other crucial institutions of society are obliged to acknowledge. Right now, heterosexuals are able to point to their life partner and say “this person, this person here – s/he’s now my closest family in the world, for all legal purposes” and (99.99% of the time) make it stick. Lesbians and gays don’t have that right. And real-life experience shows that the ability to write up a personalized contract is no match for being a legally recognized family. Source

It most accurately says what the idea of marriage means to me, both sentimentally (creating kinship) and practically (having societal recognition).

A partially tangential anecdote:
My ex-boyfriend M. is in a long term relationship with an older man who is is happily estranged from his family who hate him but want his money and property. He wants to leave everything to M. when he dies, especially the house, so that M., who is disabled, has some place to live. They talked to lawyers and found that in North Carolina, probate law is such that regardless of what his will says, his family would likely win a legal fight, since family is favored over non-family.

In order to circumvent this problem, the guy legally adopted M. as a son. Even so, the circumstances of the adoption might give the family a legal foothold. Of course marriage would be the obvious direct and simple way to avoid all the bullshit.

tl;dr: marriage inequality leads to father-son incest.

Yeah, we read a New York case in my family law class this year where a gay couple tried a similar thing and the adoption wasn't even permitted because it wasn't the proper function etc. etc.

Today is the first day of civil unioning in Illinois.

I'm going through and announcing this on every thread I have bookmarked....

White House's Pride month proclamation, unlike the last two, makes no mention of recognizing gay relationships legally:

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/05/obama-issues-pride-month-proclamation.html

What a shitfuck.

Maybe he's pulling a Steve Jobs and we're getting the whole enchilada in June!

As critical as I am about the President, let me acknowledge the good he's done. Balloon Juice breaks it down:

1) Extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees
2) Signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act
3) Instructed HHS to require any hospital receiving Medicare or Medicaid funds (virtually all hospitals) to allow LGBT visitation rights.
4) Banned job discrimination based on gender identity throughout the Federal government (the nation’s largest employer)
5) Signed the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act
6) Extended the Family and Medical Leave Act to cover Gay employees taking unpaid leave to care for their children of same-sex partners
7) Lifted the HIV Entry Ban.
8) Implemented HUD Policies that Would Ban Discrimination Based On Gender Identity
9) Appointed the first ever transgender DNC member
10) Named open transgender appointees (the first President ever to do so)
11) Eliminated the discriminatory Census Bureau policy that kept LGBT relationships from being counted
12) Extended domestic violence protections to LGBT victims

I saw my first "Yes on 8 - Protect Marriage" bumpersticker on Sunday, on the car of a white woman driving her kid around. (I was driving through Bakersfield, RIP Buck Owens). Made me kind of apopleptic

i trust you did not wish death on her

I think I blurted out a string of expletives

It's so hard not to ram those cars

[[[[clowns gonna get clowned

Great news.:

Mr. Alesi informed Mr. Cuomo of his decision in a meeting on Monday afternoon. Speaking to reporters afterward, Mr. Alesi said he had anguished over his earlier opposition, and had apologized to gay-rights advocates “for voting politically rather than in a way that in my heart and soul I felt I should have voted.”

“What it really comes down to is one word: It’s equality, which is a basic right of living in America,” Mr. Alesi said. He qualified his support, saying he would vote for the bill only if it included protections for religious institutions.

All four senators who switched their votes said they had been persuaded to do so after discussing the issue with constituents and Senate colleagues in recent months.

“What we’re about to do is redefine what the American family is,” Mr. Kruger said. “And that’s a good thing. The world around us evolves.”