Comments on: Fuck you, California.

By: ian

ian — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:10:50 +0000

@Zeke – you are of course correct and when it comes to realities then pragmatism is always a good policy, however you need to have the vision to see what the goals are in order to work towards them.

By: alphabitch

alphabitch — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:21:09 +0000

@grimbles: I'm pretty sure they do in the big cities. ;-)

By: grimbles

grimbles — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 04:48:00 +0000

They have the internet there? *cough*

By: alphabitch

alphabitch — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 23:08:56 +0000

(Now someone from Alabama is probably going to show up and try to tear me a new one … hehe)

By: alphabitch

alphabitch — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 22:54:01 +0000

@Zeke: Well, given that gays already have the right to vote, are already counted as 1/1 person in the Census, can attend integrated public schools & even get to sit anywhere they like to on public transportation, there really isn't much progress left to be made there … except, y'know, letting 'em get married if they want to.

If Alabama voted to ban interracial marriage, but allow mixed-race couples to have civil unions, would you be arguing that was a reasonable compromise?

By: Zeke

Zeke — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:06:07 +0000

Utopian ideals of the perfect society are great for conversation. But in the real world; wealth is not shared, war is not extinct & your average joe is not unbiased. In the real world, only compromise works.
@alphabitch- You wonder "what history would look like if "compromise" were the rule for civil rights issues?"???? Compromise over the course of 200 years, and still on-going, is what has allowed the changes from a country that valued slaves as 2/5ths of a person thru the compromises of the 13th 14th & 15th amendments to the compromise of separate but equal and the continuing compromises of the civil rights act of 1964, which required the compromise of being passed under the commerce clause, now that's what I call a "slap in the faces of blacks".
So get off your high horses and do a little horse tradin' to move things in a positive direction, if the moves must be incremental to succeed, then make the compromise and set to the battle for the next step forward. Maybe in this manner someday we savages can truly become civilized.
By the way, I fucking love the video!

By: alphabitch

alphabitch — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 01:18:45 +0000

@ian: I've been saying that since gay marriage was first mentioned as an issue. :-) Civil unions for any two adults who want to legally bind themselves together, and leave the "marriage" for the churches.

By: ian

ian — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 22:41:09 +0000

In a right thinking state/nation religous marriage shouldn't be recognised at all. Any union between two people would be a civil union, no matter what the composition of said couple.

That means no tax breaks unless a civil union has been declared and so on.

By: grimbles

grimbles — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:30:43 +0000

If you don't give gay civil unions the same legal rights as hetero marriages, you're discriminating. The moment you make the rights bestowed equal, the only thing that separates them is the religious aspect. Any law that says marriage is restricted to hetero couples is therefore saying "this religion's interpretation of marriage is the right one, and too bad if you don't agree", which would be a violation of a little thing called the First Amendment.

There is no compromise. It's discrimination or it's not, there is not middle ground.

By: alphabitch

alphabitch — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 07:38:35 +0000

@Zeke: Democratic Republic, if you want to nitpick. ;-) A pure democracy and a republic are incompatible.

One wonders what history would look like if "compromise" were the rule for civil rights issues? Separate but Equal would still be the law for blacks in the South. Perhaps women would only be allowed to vote IF the individual state they lived in passed a resolution saying so? Anti-discrimination laws wouldn't exist in anything resembling their current strength… Hell, interracial couples would probably be limited to civil unions in more than one state.

Nope, sorry. Civil rights have no room for compromise, IMO. I suspect you'd feel the same if you were ever thrown in jail for sitting at the front of a city bus, or even if you were told that your particular relationship partner meant you weren't allowed to get married.