Wow

In Maine, where in spite of being signed into law last spring, the fight for marriage equality still goes on, a moving and personal speech of support given by a WWII veteran before the law was passed:

Maybe it’s just my Canadian naivety showing, but as with the Prop8 travesty, it never fails to amaze and disgust me that the hatemongers would devote the resources to challenge an equality law and push it to a ballot referendum.  The majority deciding on the rights of the minority?  What a sick concept.

(via andrew sullivan)

41 Responses to “Wow”


  1. 1 toujoursdan Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 8:28 am

    Many Americans don’t understand what democracy is and confuse it with mob rule. I have had to point numerous Americans to this pamphlet by their own State Department: Majority Rule, Minority Rights

    From bullet point #1:

    “Majority rule is a means for organizing government and deciding public issues; it is not another road to oppression. Just as no self-appointed group has the right to oppress others, so no majority, even in a democracy, should take away the basic rights and freedoms of a minority group or individual.”

    I get the sense that civics isn’t taught in American schools anymore. [Seriously!]

  2. 2 J. A. Baker Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 9:27 am

    Toujoursdan – As a survivor of American schools, I can tell you with certainty that it isn’t taught. (Granted, this was just over a decade ago, but still…)

  3. 3 Torontonian Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 11:25 am

    I remember my 4 university years in the US and I couldn’t believe
    how much each person or entity greatly wanted to exercise power
    over all those around him. Everyone wants to be the leader.
    It was amazing to see how student councils, unions and civic
    leaders were trying to out-power one another in the quest
    of dominance–usually to no real avail and to some great
    resentments being developed. You can see the downstream result
    of that in the hate-mongers of today who wish to impose their will
    in the name of God–among others–or democracy!

    We’re different here. We work on a collective survival basis
    and we listen to each other and try to work out realisable
    solutions to problems.

    The power trippers were in great abundance in the Mike Harris/
    Ernie Eves Ontario government. The little guy never had a
    chance.

  4. 4 Robert Rouse Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 1:30 pm

    Will some people never learn? Love is love. It strikes when the iron is hot and there is no law anywhere that can stop it. I think anyone should be allowed to marry – except Dogs and Cats – that’s just wrong on so many levels.

  5. 5 Jasper Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 2:17 pm

    ” think anyone should be allowed to marry – except Dogs and Cats”

    why not? why can’t I marry my dog? how is that effecting your marriage? how, by me marrying my dog going to effect hetersexual or homosexual marriges? Your church doesn’t have to recongnize my marriage, but you have no right to say who or what I may marry. There are a minority of people who are in love with dogs, I agree with toujoursdan ,democracy does not mean majority rule.

  6. 6 Torontonian Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    Jasper,

    You’re so excited, you’re going to throw a litter of kittens.

  7. 7 toujoursdan Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 2:51 pm

    Jasper: Start small.

    How about giving cats and dogs the legal right to sign and be bound by contracts first?

    Then you can work on your little dog marriage project.

  8. 8 Janus Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 3:41 pm

    “why can’t I marry my dog?”

    Is your dog a consenting adult that can read, understand, and sign a marriage contract?

    And the cat wouldn’t have you.

  9. 9 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:01 pm

    toujoursdan – Thanks for the link, most interesting.

    This concept that human rights need to be decided upon and “bestowed” upon minorities by the majority has always been confusing and repugnant to me. Human rights are something personal that we are all born with. It’s not the same as deciding if a neighbourhood needs a new stop light at a bad intersection, or deciding to vote a new government into power. It blows me away that people could be so arrogant.

    You either believe all people are equal or you don’t, it’s really that simple.

  10. 10 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:03 pm

    JAB

    As a survivor of American schools

    America has some of the finest schools in the world. Unfortunately, it’s the not-so-fine ones that we hear about most often (school boards considering teaching creationism in science class etc.).

  11. 11 Jasper Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:04 pm

    “Is your dog a consenting adult that can read, understand, and sign a marriage contract?”

    who says a marriage partner has to be a consenting adult? who says a marriage partner has to read? Again, please explain how I marrying my dog will effect your marriage?

    when the judge in massachusetts legalized gay marriage she said marrige was an ‘envolving paradigm’. I agree with her.

  12. 12 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:13 pm

    Torontonian

    I remember my 4 university years in the US and I couldn’t believe how much each person or entity greatly wanted to exercise power over all those around him.

    It’s odd that such an attitude would originate in a country that supposedly places so much emphasis on “rugged individualism”. Not that there’s anything wrong with that concept, at least in my view, but in reality genuine live-and-let-live-type individualists are actually few & far between. Many talk a good game, but would leap at the chance to dictate how others live their lives.

  13. 13 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:15 pm

    Robert – I like the expression Jesus’ General uses: “love segregation”.

  14. 14 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:18 pm

    Jasper

    why can’t I marry my dog?

    Only a fundie pervert would interpret what Robert said

    I think anyone should be allowed to marry – except Dogs and Cats – that’s just wrong on so many levels.

    to mean humans marrying animals. (FYI, Robert meant dogs marrying cats.)

  15. 15 Bleatmop Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:18 pm

    Jasper, glad to see you back to your old self. It’s much easier to convince people to dismiss you and your entire group of religious right fascists when you use ridiculous arguments like marrying cats and dogs. Thanks for being such a great ally to the cause of reason.

  16. 16 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:21 pm

    toujoursdan – Jasper must be a fan of Rick Santorum. These guys have dog-fucking on the brain.

  17. 17 Shade Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:22 pm

    It’s funny they always forget that marriage lincenses are a contract and as such they are a two way agreement. So the person has to be legally old enough and considered capable of understanding in order to enter such a contract.

    You can do what you like with the religious hokey pokey and marry a goat to a rock if it makes you feel better. But see, rocks and goats just can’t sign an agreement or even have the legal right to enter one, so they can’t get married legally.

    You can’t even marry a male and female goat together legally, why? Because they have no idea what’s going on. Plus they’d probably eat the marriage license.

  18. 18 Jasper Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:30 pm

    “Only a fundie pervert would interpret what Robert said”

    Well, I’d say you’re bigoted. Just because I was born with a different sexual orientation why shouldn’t I be able to marry?

    “Jasper, glad to see you back to your old self. It’s much easier to convince people to dismiss you and your entire group of religious right fascists when you use ridiculous arguments like marrying cats and dogs.”

    well you may think it’s ridiculous but I don’t. Why does marriage have to be between consenting adults? I’m not asking you to endorse my marriage, your church does have to agree with beastuality. Just don’t descrimnate against me because of my sexual orientation.

  19. 19 Jasper Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:37 pm

    “It’s funny they always forget that marriage lincenses are a contract and as such they are a two way agreement. So the person has to be legally old enough and considered capable of understanding in order to enter such a contract.”

    why does marriage have to be a two way agreement? My sexuality orientation does not include monogamy. why are you denying my right to marry 2 women or 2 men?

    You already changed the defintion of marriage,it is no longer husband and wife (the contract in Massachusetts say party A and Party B now), why can’t we change it again for other sexual orientations?

  20. 20 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:44 pm

    Jasper

    Again, please explain how I marrying my dog will effect your marriage

    I got a better idea.

    How about you explain exactly how it affects your marriage if gay people are also getting married.

    You’ve got the floor. We’re listening…

  21. 21 Jasper Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:54 pm

    Studies of the effects of same-sex marriage in Scandinavia and the Netherlands by Stanley Kurtz raise at least the inference that when there is a powerful (and ultimately successful) campaign by secular elites for homosexual marriage, traditional marriage is demeaned and comes to be perceived as just one more sexual arrangement among others. The symbolic link between marriage, procreation, and family is broken, and there is a rapid and persistent decline in heterosexual marriages. Families are begun by cohabiting couples, who break up significantly more often than married couples, leaving children in one-parent families. The evidence has long been clear that children raised in such families are much more likely to engage in crime, use drugs, and form unstable relationships of their own. These are pathologies that affect everyone in a community.

    There is, finally, very real uncertainty about the forms of sexual arrangements that will follow from homosexual marriage. To quote William Bennett: “Say what they will, there are no principled grounds on which advocates of same-sex marriage can oppose the marriage of two consenting brothers. Nor can they (persuasively) explain why we ought to deny a marriage license to three men who want to marry. Or to a man who wants a consensual polygamous arrangement. Or to a father to his adult daughter.” Many consider such hypotheticals ridiculous, claiming that no one would want to be in a group marriage. The fact is that some people do, and they are urging that it be accepted. There is a movement for polyamory—sexual arrangements, including marriage, among three or more persons. The outlandishness of such notions is no guarantee that they will not become serious possibilities or actualities in the not-too-distant future. Ten years ago, the idea of a marriage between two men seemed preposterous, not something we needed to concern ourselves with. With same-sex marriage a line is being crossed, and no other line to separate moral and immoral consensual sex will hold.

  22. 22 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 4:55 pm

    Jasper

    why does marriage have to be a two way agreement?

    It doesn’t. The construct consenting adults choose for their relationships is none of my business.

    Also, before you say anything else dumb: please understand that “sexual orientation” means attraction to other adults. Pedophilia & bestiality aren’t sexual orientations. So do try and stick with the program — consenting adult relationships and marriage.

  23. 23 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 5:39 pm

    Jasper – Okay, that’s a lot of Dumbness in one comment. Maybe one of my intellectual betters in the comments here will take it out to the parking lot, lay a beating on it and leave it for dead. But until someone else shows up, just a coupla things:

    traditional marriage is demeaned and comes to be perceived as just one more sexual arrangement among others

    Too late. Hetero marriage, especially the “traditional” 50s-style union that I suspect you idealize, was always more of an economic arrangement than anything else. Once women discovered they didn’t have to be pregnant all the time, got out of the house and became self-supporting, that all changed (for the better, I might add).

    At this point in time, there’s virtually no difference between a childless married hetero couple and a married gay couple. If you maintain that the hetero couple is superior because they can reproduce, then you’re also dismissing infertile couples, couples where the woman is post menopausal, and couples who are childless by choice. That’s an awful lot of marriages to consider inferior.

    To be continued…

  24. 24 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 6:14 pm

    Jasper – Next, the slippery slope 😯 polygamy 😯

    There is a movement for polyamory—sexual arrangements, including marriage, among three or more persons. The outlandishness of such notions is no guarantee that they will not become serious possibilities or actualities in the not-too-distant future.

    Too late. Like it or not, Jasper, polygamy already exists in pretty vast numbers, on its own and within hetero marriage — except we call it “keeping a mistress”. (Polyandry also exists, but in much lesser numbers.)

    And so what? These are all adults — some are religious fanatics, others are just people with a lot of time on their hands, and still others live in cultures where this kind of arrangement makes sense from a survival standpoint. It’s not my cuppa tea, but if my neighbours want to be polygamous who am I to tell them they can’t?

    Connecting polygamy with gay marriage is a real red herring, though, so I probably shouldn’t waste any more time on it. Gays are not asking for polygamous marriage, they’re asking for… 😯 traditional marriage.

  25. 25 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 6:29 pm

    Shade

    It’s funny they always forget that marriage lincenses are a contract and as such they are a two way agreement.

    For sure. But they like to throw out that red polygamy herring anyway, visualizing a future where 10 people & their dog go for a marriage license. It’s absurd.

  26. 26 Jasper Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 6:29 pm

    “Gays are not asking for polygamous marriage, they’re asking for… traditional marriage.”

    All people aready have a right to traditional marriage, although it has to between a man and a woman. Anything else is not marriage, and no law or legal document can change that.

  27. 27 Shade Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 6:47 pm

    “All people aready have a right to traditional marriage, although it has to between a man and a woman. Anything else is not marriage, and no law or legal document can change that.”

    Actually the marriages we have now are not “tradtional” marriage, marriages have only recently been about love. Tradionally they were about money and business.

    If you desire tradtional marriage then logically, you should be expected to pay a dowry for your wife, your parents to decide who is suitable and if you don’t like it, tough. You marry who your told and you deal with it.

    It was also about ownership of your wife, which marriage today is not.

  28. 28 Frank Frink Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 7:16 pm

    I guess Japser’s game today is “How many ways can I think of to make a complete ass of myself.”

  29. 29 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 7:34 pm

    Jasper – Why is it not marriage? (And I’ve already knocked down the childbearing thing, so try something else.)

    Better yet, you could take a swing at my original question since everything else is a red herring:

    How does gay marriage affect your marriage? (and please, no more cut-and-pastes from articles that shriek “What if??”. I want to know the real-world effects of gay marriage on your marriage, or anyone else’s marriage that you know of.)

  30. 31 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 7:37 pm

    FF – Or maybe “How many lame articles can I cut-and-paste” 🙄

  31. 32 MariaS Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 9:39 pm

    jj – here’s my opinion. Gays and Straights, mean the same to me. As long as two people commit to each other in marriage I am all for it. The fact that gays want to get married and set up home should be an example to all other so called “normal” people to stop sleeping around and make a commitment – and what better way than the sacrament of marriage.

    Bet you were not expecting that, huh?

    Never generalize – not that I am saying you do.

    MariaS (dodocanspell)

  32. 33 JJ Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 10:14 pm

    MariaS – Well said. I’ve always thought that gay marriage could only strengthen marriage in the overall scheme of things. More people getting married = stronger institution, makes sense to me.

    Thanks for your comment — it’ll be interesting to see how our resident conservative visitor responds.

  33. 34 The Anti-Social Socialist Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    You can’t blame Jasper for not being able to grasp what ‘Consent’ means.

    He’s a fanatic catholic. If they understood what Consent meant, their priests would probably be less likely to diddle children. Well, maybe not, but they might feel guilty about it.

  34. 35 Bleatmop Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 11:17 pm

    The biblical version of marriage, just to clarify for all you heathens out there.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/Bleatmop#p/f/63/OFkeKKszXTw

  35. 36 Bleatmop Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 11:18 pm

    woops, lets try again

  36. 37 southernquebec Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 3:58 am

    Jasper: Is this the William Bennett that you are quoting?

    “He said aborting all African-American babies “would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but the crime rate would go down.” ”

    I guess you can bet on it, eh?

  37. 38 toujoursdan Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 4:31 am

    well you may think it’s ridiculous but I don’t. Why does marriage have to be between consenting adults? I’m not asking you to endorse my marriage, your church does have to agree with beastuality. Just don’t descrimnate against me because of my sexual orientation.

    The stupid just overflows.

    Marriage is a legally binding contract with rights and responsibilities. Contracts can only be executed by people who read and can understand the terms of the contract.

    Show me a dog who reads and comprehends.

    Studies of the effects of same-sex marriage in Scandinavia and the Netherlands by Stanley Kurtz raise at least the inference that when there is a powerful (and ultimately successful) campaign by secular elites for homosexual marriage, traditional marriage is demeaned and comes to be perceived as just one more sexual arrangement among others. The symbolic link between marriage, procreation, and family is broken, and there is a rapid and persistent decline in heterosexual marriages. Families are begun by cohabiting couples, who break up significantly more often than married couples, leaving children in one-parent families. The evidence has long been clear that children raised in such families are much more likely to engage in crime, use drugs, and form unstable relationships of their own. These are pathologies that affect everyone in a community.

    Your spin on these studies were debunked a long time ago. They are using studies of young (under 30 y.o.) gay men who came into sexual clinic for HIV meds. Of course, the most stable gay couples aren’t going to access HIV clinics, so the study was biased.

    See: Box Turtle Bulletin: What the Dutch study really says about gay couples


    There is a movement for polyamory—sexual arrangements, including marriage, among three or more persons. The outlandishness of such notions is no guarantee that they will not become serious possibilities or actualities in the not-too-distant future.

    Aren’t you a Christian? Why do you think this is outlandish?? The Bible is choc-full of polyamorous marriages, some specifically blessed by God.

    This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.

    2 Samuel 12

    The New Testament says that people in polyamorous marriages shouldn’t become bishops but that’s it. (1 Timothy 3:2)

    Polyamory is as traditional as they come. The Bible says so.

    (Now I don’t think legal polyamorous marriage would work well in a modern society where the State and the private sector gives monetary benefits to spouses, but that’s a debate for another time.)

  38. 39 Cornelius T.Zen Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 8:27 am

    Good morrow, all!
    The original purpose of marriage was to establish three things, all to the benefit of men, one may observe:
    Property: my goats, my sheep, my camels – my women.
    Paternity: it’s Mama’s baby and Daddy’s maybe – my children.
    Posterity: I need sons to inherit my goats, my sheep and my camels.
    Note that there was no mention of love, or commitment to one another, or any such idealization of the relationship.
    News flash for Jasper: It’s nearly 2010. Do you know where your sheep, your goats, your camels, and your women and children are?
    Re: Prop 8: The lawyer who headmanned the original drive of Prop 8 is currently defending a challenge to Prop 8 in court. He was asked what effect the allowance of gay marriage would have on straight marriage. His answer? “I don’t know.”
    Jasper is telling us that he does know.
    By all means, marry your dog, Jasper. I’m sure it’s reassuring to know that somebody will be glad you came home for supper.
    That way, when she runs off with the mailman, you can truthfully say, “The bitch broke my heart.”
    Nobody is equal until EVERYBODY is equal – CTZen

  39. 40 toujoursdan Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 8:35 am

    Jasper is telling us that he does know.
    By all means, marry your dog, Jasper. I’m sure it’s reassuring to know that somebody will be glad you came home for supper.
    That way, when she runs off with the mailman, you can truthfully say, “The bitch broke my heart.”
    Nobody is equal until EVERYBODY is equal – CTZen

    ROFL. Thread win!

  40. 41 Seth Tuesday, November 17, 2009 at 7:54 pm

    Jasper , i’m interested in chatting w/ you about some personal things…. in private, k. feel free to contact me, using the same screen-name. don’t forget to add the ‘at’ ‘A’**’, DOT … ETC.


Wait. What?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Mac Security Portal
Rose's Place
Blogging Change

Incoming!

  • 631,441
[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

Archives


%d bloggers like this: