Fight to legalize gay marriage in Rhode Island

Jan 15, 2013 Full story: New York Daily News 524

Supporters of same-sex marriage rights plan to assemble at the Rhode Island Statehouse to urge lawmakers to make the smallest state the 10th to allow gay and lesbian couples to wed - and the last to do so in New England.

Full Story

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#182 Jan 17, 2013
The reason primitive cultures embraced polygamy is simple: for the benefit of males, who dominated females and often treated them as property.

People will make up rules and religious doctrine to justify what they want (i.e. multiple wives.) Gee, where were all the women with multiple husbands? Oh...

Again, there is something wrong with you that I have to explain this to you, and I won't do it again, but a sibling co-habitation arrangement is not marriage and does not mimic marriage. If those two people want to get married, then they can try to get married. If they run into legal issues, then they can try to fight those legal issues.

p.s. My marriage does not "mimic" heterosexual marriage. It is marriage.

For the record, I also disagree with domestic partnerships or civil unions for heterosexual couples. If they want to get married, they can.

Don't presume to know what God wants or had in mind. Don't presume He's stupid like you. Gay people are gay by design, just like tall people are tall by design, and red-haired people are red-haired by design. Why the variations? That is not ours to question.

And that was the realization that led me to finally accept the way I was born: I don't have to understand why God made me this way, I just have to accept that He had His reasons, and trust Him. That, my friend, is faith. Real faith, not bullsh!t on Sunday "faith." And life only got better from that day forward, because I stopped fighting God and the way He made me.

So...maybe I was not meant to have kids. Maybe my genetic line is running its course and is supposed to drop off. Maybe it's a test for me, or for you.

I don't need to know why. I just know I am as tight with God as I have ever been, and I rely on Him for the most important aspects of life. And just as surely as He set me on the path that led me to my job, my home, and my friends (although I didn't always understand where it was going at the time) I know He set me on the path to learn the lessons I needed to learn before I met my husband, and He meant for us to be together and take care of each other, til death do us part.

That includes standing against any and all threats.

Apparently your insecurity and stupidity lead you to have some kind of need to put your marriage above mine. That's comical. And sad.

Few take it more seriously than we. And your side has a piss-poor track record on marriage AND child-rearing. Many many straight marriages are an insult to mine. Maybe you should pay more attention to that than to my marriage.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#183 Jan 17, 2013
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
1. yes it is.
2. so what?
OK, apparently you're another dummy.

A percentage difference is not a difference. Should women not be allowed to vote if there were only 20 women in the country?

Should blacks not be equal because they are a small minority?

Where did you get this nonsense line of thinking?

And regardless of percentage of homosexuals, far more heterosexual couples by number adopt or use surrogates than gay couples.

This country does not ever state that rights are based on percentages. So get over that nonsense.

You keep repeating these same two things which are not valid except to you. They have no bearing on the law and would never matter in court.

Please educate yourself.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#184 Jan 17, 2013
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
so to you, losing you leg in a tragic accident is the SAME EXACT THING as cutting your leg off because you are bored?
The end is the same, does the means matter?
Yes it means the exact same thing because either way, the loss of leg needs to be addressed. Regardless of how you got there, you will need either a wheelchair, prosthetic leg, etc.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#185 Jan 17, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text
Fairness is subjective....is it fair to redefine the legal definition of marriage to include SSCs, but not not fair to include plural marriage(s)?
Most of that was garbage, so I am only answering this one. You're barking up the wrong tree little doggy. I am not against plural marriage if all the other little things are taken care of beforehand. You know, like child custody, Soc. Sec. death benefits, etc. There's a lot more to plural marriage than there is to the marriage of two men or two women.
straight shooter

Montpelier, VT

#186 Jan 17, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>

A percentage difference is not a difference..
again, he said:
"A percentage ******difference***** is not a ******difference***.
straight shooter

Montpelier, VT

#187 Jan 17, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes it means the exact same thing because either way, the loss of leg needs to be addressed. Regardless of how you got there, you will need either a wheelchair, prosthetic leg, etc.
I would gladly buy a wheelchair for someone born that way, I would never buy one for someone who cut their legs off for being bored!
See how that works?

Take octomom and compare with a woman whose husband died tragically...
see how that works?

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#188 Jan 17, 2013
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
again, he said:
"A percentage ******difference***** is not a ******difference***.
Precisely! What's your problem?

I am so sick of trying to have a conversation with stupid people.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#189 Jan 17, 2013
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
I would gladly buy a wheelchair for someone born that way, I would never buy one for someone who cut their legs off for being bored!
See how that works?
Take octomom and compare with a woman whose husband died tragically...
see how that works?
Again, it doesn't matter whether you buy it or think they deserve it or any other baloney.

The bottom line is it will have to be addressed the same way.

Likewise, no matter how any couple came to have children, those children all need to be addressed in the same way.

I'm sorry you're so impaired that you can't grasp this simple concept.
straight shooter

Montpelier, VT

#191 Jan 17, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Precisely! What's your problem?
I am so sick of trying to have a conversation with stupid people.
you cant see that you said a DIFFERENCE is NOT a difference?
straight shooter

Montpelier, VT

#192 Jan 17, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, it doesn't matter whether you buy it or think they deserve it or any other baloney.
The bottom line is it will have to be addressed the same way.
not so, as my example that you failed to grasp shows.
There are so many ways that HOW it happens matters that I think you are being purposely obtuse (and arrogant about it).

But do feel free to buzz off....

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#193 Jan 17, 2013
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
you cant see that you said a DIFFERENCE is NOT a difference?
My God, you are stupid.

I said a difference in percentage is not a difference.

It isn't.

It doesn't matter at all.

What makes you think it does? What rights depend on how many people are involved in those rights? WTF is wrong with you?

Stupid f**k.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#194 Jan 17, 2013
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
not so, as my example that you failed to grasp shows.
There are so many ways that HOW it happens matters that I think you are being purposely obtuse (and arrogant about it).
But do feel free to buzz off....
No matter how it happened, it still has to be addressed, stupid f**k. The person still has no legs. The person still needs a wheelchair. Again, WTF is wrong with you? Whether or not you have sympathy for that person or approve of that person has nothing to do with anything. You're nobody. You're not involved. The person still needs and will get the same treatment no matter the cause of the problem. Get it through your head.

You "debate" by just repeating the same thing over and over. You're still wrong. And you'll be wrong when you say the same thing again.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#195 Jan 17, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow....I have to say thank you...very well thought out... you responded with out the "only bigots oppose ssm" implication. I think that last line speaks volumes. Perhaps the answer is somewhere in the middle.
We tried for decades for "somewhere in the middle", but certain groups fought us each and every step of the way.

So now it's full marriage equality nationwide; we will settle for nothing less.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#196 Jan 17, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
We tried for decades for "somewhere in the middle", but certain groups fought us each and every step of the way.
Some of that opposition came from within the gay movement, did it not? There was a belief that marriage did not fit in with "queer" notions of sexuality, that it was too contraining. Even today. not all within the gay community think that marriage should be redefined, and/or that fits in with gay culture. How is a gay person who opposes gay marriage viewed? Is s/he a "traitor" to the cause? Are they a bigot? That would be ironic.
So now it's full marriage equality nationwide; we will settle for nothing less.
Ahhhhhh....full marriage redefinition.....full marriage segregation...carry on...

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#197 Jan 17, 2013
A Gay Catholic Voice Against Same-Sex Marriage

Part 1
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/us/05belief...

By MARK OPPENHEIMER


WASHINGTON —“I spent the summer before college reading Shakespeare and staring out the window and occasionally being a roadie for my friend’s band,” says Eve Tushnet, the celibate, gay, conservative, Catholic writer. That was all good fun, she says upon meeting in Union Station, but she was ready for more, although she knew not what.“I was hoping for something very different in college.”

It is common, this freshman urge for self-invention. The football player tries his hand at poetry; the classical violinist fiddles in a bluegrass band. But Ms. Tushnet — whose parents, Mark Tushnet and Elizabeth Alexander, are a well-known liberal Harvard law professor and a former American Civil Liberties Union lawyer, respectively — did not imagine that she would become a Roman Catholic, nor that 10 years after graduation, her voice, on her blog and in numerous articles, would be one of the most surprising raised against same-sex marriage.

As the hundred or so daily readers of eve-tushnet.blogspot.com , and a larger audience for her magazine writing, know by now, Ms. Tushnet can seem a paradox: fervently Catholic, proudly gay, happily celibate. She does not see herself as disordered; she does not struggle to be straight, but she insists that her religion forbids her a sex life.

“The sacrifices you want to make aren’t always the only sacrifices God wants,” Ms. Tushnet wrote in a 2007 essay for Commonweal. While gay sex should not be criminalized, she said, gay men and lesbians should abstain. They might instead have passionate friendships, or sublimate their urges into other pursuits.“It turns out I happen to be very good at sublimating,” she says, while acknowledging that that is a lot to ask of others.

Marriage should be reserved for heterosexuals, whose “relationships can be either uniquely dangerous or uniquely fruitful,” she explained in an e-mail message.“Thus it makes sense to have an institution dedicated to structuring and channeling them.”

But same-sex marriage, she wrote in The New York Post in 2007,“can bring one of three outcomes: A two-tiered marriage culture, where heterosexual couples are asked to do the hard things (sex only within marriage, marriage for life in most circumstances) and homosexual couples work out their own marriage norms; reshape marriage into an optional, individualized institution, ignoring the creative and destructive potentials of ‘straight’ sex; or encourage all couples to restrict sex to marriage and marry for life, and hope that gay couples accept norms designed to meet heterosexual needs.”

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#198 Jan 17, 2013
A Gay Catholic Voice Against Same-Sex Marriage
Part 2

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/us/05belief...

Ms. Tushnet entered Yale in 1996 a happy lesbian, out since age 13 or 14 (she can’t quite remember). Her father, a nonobservant Jew, and her mother, a Unitarian, both belonged to progressive traditions, tolerant of her sexuality.

When, as a freshman, she attended a meeting of the Party of the Right, a conservative group affiliated with the Yale Political Union, it was “specifically to laugh at them, to see the zoo animals,” she says.

“But I was really impressed, not only by the weird arguments but the degree to which it was clear that the people making them lived as if what they were saying had actual consequences for their lives, that had required them to make sacrifices.”

In Ms. Tushnet’s time, as in mine — I was four years ahead of her at Yale — the Party of the Right had a benignantly cultish quality.“Have you read ‘The Secret History?’” she asks, referring to Donna Tartt’s 1992 novel about a secretive student clique obsessed with Greek literature.“It was like that.”

But she found the Party of the Right students compassionate, intellectual and not terribly exercised about her homosexuality. She was drawn to the Catholics among them, who corrected her misimpression that the existence of sin “means you are bad.” It means “precisely the opposite,” they taught her.“It means you have a chance to come back and repent and be saved,” she says. She began reading books like St. Anselm’s “Why God Became Man.” She began attending church. Her sophomore year, she was baptized.

“By the time it was real enough to be threatening,” she says of her conversion,“things had gone too far. I didn’t see it coming.”

After college, Ms. Tushnet worked briefly at the National Catholic Register, a weekly magazine, but since 2002 she has made a meager living through writing, computer programming and freelance research. She lives in the Dupont Circle neighborhood of downtown Washington and volunteers two hours a week at a Christian pregnancy-counseling center. She writes for liberal Catholic publications like Commonweal, and for conservative secular magazines like The Weekly Standard.

But it is on her blog that a small but presumably learned readership finds her most ambitious writing: lengthy, often obscure, for gay love, against same-sex marriage, and serious about Scripture, saints and medieval philosophy. She writes about obscure Hungarian fiction (“Janos Nyiri’s ‘Battlefields and Playgrounds’ is one of the best novels I’ve read in a long time.”) and struggles in print with St. Anselm’s “ontological proof” of the existence of God.

It is not simple to embrace both traditional Catholicism and unrepentant, if sex-free, gayness. For example, Ms. Tushnet finds it difficult to interest fellow Catholics in their church’s theology of friendship, as articulated in books like St. Aelred’s “On Spiritual Friendship.” She says that when she talks to people about the religious importance of same-sex closeness,“they look at you like you’re trying to get married in the church.” And few of her friends share both her theology and her predilections for Edmund White, Jean Genet and the Smiths.

She may befuddle others, but for her, life is joyful. She takes obvious pleasure in being an eccentric in a tradition with no shortage of odd heroes, visionaries and saints.“You can be really quite strange, and the Catholic church will canonize you eventually,” she says. She loves eating the flesh and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, which she believes is a carnivorous meal, not a metaphor. She loves gay synth-pop bands.

“I really think the most important thing is, I really like being gay and I really like being Catholic,” she says.“If nobody ever calls me self-hating again, it will be too soon.

“Nothing is quite as great as getting up in the morning, listening to the Pet Shop Boys and going to church.”

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#199 Jan 17, 2013
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/us/05belief...

A Gay Catholic Voice Against Same-Sex Marriage

By MARK OPPENHEIMER

WASHINGTON —“I spent the summer before college reading Shakespeare and staring out the window and occasionally being a roadie for my friend’s band,” says Eve Tushnet, the celibate, gay, conservative, Catholic writer. That was all good fun, she says upon meeting in Union Station, but she was ready for more, although she knew not what.“I was hoping for something very different in college.”

It is common, this freshman urge for self-invention. The football player tries his hand at poetry; the classical violinist fiddles in a bluegrass band. But Ms. Tushnet — whose parents, Mark Tushnet and Elizabeth Alexander, are a well-known liberal Harvard law professor and a former American Civil Liberties Union lawyer, respectively — did not imagine that she would become a Roman Catholic, nor that 10 years after graduation, her voice, on her blog and in numerous articles, would be one of the most surprising raised against same-sex marriage.

As the hundred or so daily readers of eve-tushnet.blogspot.com , and a larger audience for her magazine writing, know by now, Ms. Tushnet can seem a paradox: fervently Catholic, proudly gay, happily celibate. She does not see herself as disordered; she does not struggle to be straight, but she insists that her religion forbids her a sex life.

“The sacrifices you want to make aren’t always the only sacrifices God wants,” Ms. Tushnet wrote in a 2007 essay for Commonweal. While gay sex should not be criminalized, she said, gay men and lesbians should abstain. They might instead have passionate friendships, or sublimate their urges into other pursuits.“It turns out I happen to be very good at sublimating,” she says, while acknowledging that that is a lot to ask of others.

Marriage should be reserved for heterosexuals, whose “relationships can be either uniquely dangerous or uniquely fruitful,” she explained in an e-mail message.“Thus it makes sense to have an institution dedicated to structuring and channeling them.”

But same-sex marriage, she wrote in The New York Post in 2007,“can bring one of three outcomes: A two-tiered marriage culture, where heterosexual couples are asked to do the hard things (sex only within marriage, marriage for life in most circumstances) and homosexual couples work out their own marriage norms; reshape marriage into an optional, individualized institution, ignoring the creative and destructive potentials of ‘straight’ sex; or encourage all couples to restrict sex to marriage and marry for life, and hope that gay couples accept norms designed to meet heterosexual needs.”

Ms. Tushnet entered Yale in 1996 a happy lesbian, out since age 13 or 14 (she can’t quite remember). Her father, a nonobservant Jew, and her mother, a Unitarian, both belonged to progressive traditions, tolerant of her sexuality.

When, as a freshman, she attended a meeting of the Party of the Right, a conservative group affiliated with the Yale Political Union, it was “specifically to laugh at them, to see the zoo animals,” she says.

...she found the Party of the Right students compassionate, intellectual and not terribly exercised about her homosexuality. She was drawn to the Catholics among them, who corrected her misimpression that the existence of sin “means you are bad.” It means “precisely the opposite,” they taught her.“It means you have a chance to come back and repent and be saved,” she says. She began reading books like St. Anselm’s “Why God Became Man.” She began attending church. Her sophomore year, she was baptized.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#200 Jan 17, 2013
Tony C wrote:
The reason primitive cultures embraced polygamy is simple: for the benefit of males, who dominated females and often treated them as property.
Plus it could have been for survivial of the group, that was often beset by wars, famine, disease, etc. One man could impregnante many females, and in theory, that male would be one of the stronger ones of the group.
People will make up rules and religious doctrine to justify what they want (i.e. multiple wives.) Gee, where were all the women with multiple husbands? Oh...
Somehow I don't think there as many women who would want mutiple husbands, as there are men who would want multiple wives. Remember the old Mormom wife expression, "one night on, six night off".
Again, there is something wrong with you that I have to explain this to you, and I won't do it again, but a sibling co-habitation arrangement is not marriage and does not mimic marriage. If those two people want to get married, then they can try to get married. If they run into legal issues, then they can try to fight those legal issues.
Again there is something wron with you that you can't explain why the male female, non-blood relative, first cousins excluded, relationship is privileged over that of all others. I'll give ya a hint...two go to bed, but three (or more) get up.
p.s. My marriage does not "mimic" heterosexual marriage. It is marriage.
Why would it mimic opposite sex marriage? Hellloooooo....there's no wife. No bride and groom, no presumption of paternity, no consumation of the marital relationship, no pronouncing of "husband and wife", etc.,.......
For the record, I also disagree with domestic partnerships or civil unions for heterosexual couples. If they want to get married, they can.
Actually any man can marry any woman, and vice versa, as long as they meet any other basic requirements as set forth by the state.
Don't presume to know what God wants or had in mind. Don't presume He's stupid like you.
Don't presume God is arrogant, crude, rude, like you,either.
Gay people are gay by design, just like tall people are tall by design, and red-haired people are red-haired by design. Why the variations? That is not ours to question.
And that was the realization that led me to finally accept the way I was born: I don't have to understand why God made me this way, I just have to accept that He had His reasons, and trust Him. That, my friend, is faith. Real faith, not bullsh!t on Sunday "faith." And life only got better from that day forward, because I stopped fighting God and the way He made me.
Amen brother, we're all God's children, gay, straight, bi, tri, poly, whatever.
So...maybe I was not meant to have kids. Maybe my genetic line is running its course and is supposed to drop off. Maybe it's a test for me, or for you.
I don't need to know why. I just know I am as tight with God as I have ever been, and I rely on Him for the most important aspects of life. And just as surely as He set me on the path that led me to my job, my home, and my friends (although I didn't always understand where it was going at the time) I know He set me on the path to learn the lessons I needed to learn before I met my husband, and He meant for us to be together and take care of each other, til death do us part.
So be it...and at the risk of being told I'm stupid by the all wise and wonderful Tony C, bless ya both. Amen....peace be with you.
Few take it more seriously than we. And your side has a piss-poor track record on marriage AND child-rearing. Many many straight marriages are an insult to mine.
As a college educated married man of twenty plus years, father of four, all by the same woman, no disagreement there brother. Quite frankly there are some opposite sex marriages that pale in comparison to some same sex relationships. Thus the debate continues.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#201 Jan 17, 2013
RalphB wrote:
<quoted text>
Most of that was garbage, so I am only answering this one. You're barking up the wrong tree little doggy. I am not against plural marriage if all the other little things are taken care of beforehand. You know, like child custody, Soc. Sec. death benefits, etc. There's a lot more to plural marriage than there is to the marriage of two men or two women.
True, there's the children to deal with for one.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#202 Jan 17, 2013
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthought...

This week, the world witnessed anywhere from 500,000 to just over a million French citizens take to the cold, winter Parisian streets in protest of, as they stated it, the idea of legally denying children a mother and father through a proposed same-sex marriage law. It was the biggest public demonstration France has seen in decades. Reuters reported that “even homosexuals opposed to gay marriage [came] to protest.”

John D’Emilio, noted professor of history and pioneer in the field of gay and lesbian studies has, as a gay man and leading LGBT theorist, been vocally opposed (shown here and more recently here) to the idea of working for the legalization of same-sex marriage. He contends it is contrary to queer ideals and unjust to gays in other types of relationships. D’Emilio and our French friends are not odd outliers. Here is another and another and another and a few more and one more leading gay voices that assert the passage of same-sex marriage can actually be discriminatory and limiting. Uhm.

If some people can oppose same-sex marriage for reasons other than hate, bigotry and small-mindedness, why can’t others?

Are gay people who oppose gay marriage, bigots?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? 10 min Frankie Rizzo 783
Drag queens dress down Facebook over names 16 min Christshariahns 3
US judge upholds state same-sex marriage ban, r... 34 min Lars 761
Why do STR8 guys 'hang out' all day in a GLBT f... 37 min Lars 15
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 43 min Lars 67,991
Biggest Gay Lies 52 min Franz 2,012
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 54 min NorCal Native 55,901
Ginsburg: Watch 6th Circuit on gay marriage 55 min Christshariahns 50
Gay marriage cases await early Supreme Court de... 1 hr dirtclod 417
Web filter lifts block on gay sitesWeb filter l... 2 hr NE Jade 24
•••

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••