Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 61391 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Mar 28, 2013, titled Gay marriage. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering two controversial cases involving whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry: Proposition 8, California's 2008 ban on gay marriage, and the Defense of Marriage Act, which since 1996 has defined marriage for federal purposes as a union between a man and a woman.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8225 Oct 28, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmmm, well that didn't stop anyone from marrying or getting the rights & benefits of marriage.
It also didn't stop your tax dollars from supporting married same-sex couples & our families.
Nope, not a damn thing you can do about that.
Except, ss marriage is an oxymoron. I've proved it in numerous ways.

Smile.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#8226 Oct 28, 2013
Same sex marriage is antidemocratic:

In North Carolina, a lawsuit has been pending before the courts to strike down the state's Marriage Amendment — a law passed just last May and by 61% of the popular vote! But just this week North Carolina's Attorney General, tasked with defending the voters' will in this case, compromised his integrity in that role by formally announcing his support for same-sex 'marriage.' Worse, he's headlining a fundraising event for a group that wants the courts to strike down the marriage law!

As if that were not bad enough, hot on the heels of the A.G.'s reckless announcement, a County Register of Deeds in North Carolina announced that he would begin accepting same-sex couples' applications for marriage licenses — a move we've seen before in states like New Mexico and Pennsylvania. This is the lawless destruction of democracy that we can expect to see spreading around the nation if we do not act today!

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#8227 Oct 28, 2013
fr KiMare:
>...Except, ss marriage is an oxymoron. I've proved it in numerous ways.<
No, you haven't. You continue to post the same trash, constantly. GLBTQI couples ARE getting married, no matter what YOU say about it. You can stomp your little feetsies all you wish, it's not going to change the FACT that Marriage Equality is coming.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8231 Oct 28, 2013
Pattysboi wrote:
fr KiMare:
>...Except, ss marriage is an oxymoron. I've proved it in numerous ways.<
No, you haven't. You continue to post the same trash, constantly. GLBTQI couples ARE getting married, no matter what YOU say about it. You can stomp your little feetsies all you wish, it's not going to change the FACT that Marriage Equality is coming.
Denial is not an argument.

Your limp wristed flailing, foot stomping, gay twirling won't change things either.

There can never be equity with things that are not equal.

These things are only complicated for blondes...
Equal

Centereach, NY

#8232 Oct 28, 2013
MentalHelpNow wrote:
<quoted text>That is your disease talking. You, too, can be cured if you take the first step. Don't let the vile disease of homosexuality keep you down and deprive you of a normal life. There IS a cure!
It's not a disease

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8233 Oct 28, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Men can be lesbians?
That's a new one.
Sure...just google "male lesbian".

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#8234 Oct 28, 2013
fr KiMare:

>...These things are only complicated for blondes...<

I'm not blonde, cupcake, nor am I "limp wristed". I heft banker's boxes all day. Maybe you should try getting a job that doesn't have you filling soda cups all day.
well

Round Lake, IL

#8235 Oct 28, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Denial is not an argument.
Your limp wristed flailing, foot stomping, gay twirling won't change things either.
There can never be equity with things that are not equal.
These things are only complicated for blondes...
Is it your mental illness that prevents you from accepting reality, or are you just really stupid? Same sex marriage is legal, that is reality whether you like it or not and your denial will not change it.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#8236 Oct 28, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage is antidemocratic:
In North Carolina, a lawsuit has been pending before the courts to strike down the state's Marriage Amendment — a law passed just last May and by 61% of the popular vote! But just this week North Carolina's Attorney General, tasked with defending the voters' will in this case, compromised his integrity in that role by formally announcing his support for same-sex 'marriage.' Worse, he's headlining a fundraising event for a group that wants the courts to strike down the marriage law!
As if that were not bad enough, hot on the heels of the A.G.'s reckless announcement, a County Register of Deeds in North Carolina announced that he would begin accepting same-sex couples' applications for marriage licenses — a move we've seen before in states like New Mexico and Pennsylvania. This is the lawless destruction of democracy that we can expect to see spreading around the nation if we do not act today!
Such a drama queen, Brian.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#8237 Oct 28, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Except, ss marriage is an oxymoron. I've proved it in numerous ways.
Smile.
No, you've stated certain truths (i.e., we're "duplicate gendered").

That statement, as obvious as it is, does not PROVE anything about SSM.

You ramble on, ad nausea, but you've never proven that SSM is an oxymoron. You THINK that you have, Blanche, but you haven't.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8238 Oct 28, 2013
Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
The law has nothing to do with religion, you can hope for me to burn in hell, but I honestly don't care. We didn't choose to be gay, just like you didn't choose to be straight. Why would I be gay if it was a choice!!! I simply would not and would love, LOVE to be just like the rest of you 'normal people' but I can't and I accept that.
http://www.salon.com/2012/01/22/the_invention... Part 1.
The history of straightness is much shorter than you'd think. An expert explains its origins
BY THOMAS ROGERS

A detail from the cover of "Straight"

If you met Hanne Blank and her partner on the street, you might have a lot of trouble classifying them. While Blank looks like a feminine woman, her partner is extremely androgynous, with little to no facial hair and a fine smooth complexion. Hanne’s partner is neither fully male, nor fully female; he was born with an unconventional set of chromosomes, XXY, that provide him with both male genitalia and feminine characteristics. As a result, Blank’s partner has been mistaken for a gay woman, a straight man, a transman — and their relationship has been classified as gay, straight and everything in between.

Blank mentions her personal story at the beginning of her provocative new history of heterosexuality,“Straight,” as a way of illustrating just how artificial our notions of “straightness” really are. In her book, Blank, a writer and historian who has written extensively about sexuality and culture, looks at the ways in which social trends and the rise of psychiatry conspired to create this new category in the late 19th and early 20th century. Along the way, she examines the changing definition of marriage, which evolved from a businesslike agreement into a romantic union centered around love, and how social Darwinist ideas shaped the divisions between gay and straight. With her eye-opening book, Blank tactfully deconstructs a facet of modern sexuality that most of us take for granted.

Salon spoke to Blank over the phone about the origins of heterosexuality, the evolution of marriage and why the rise of the “bromance” is a very good thing.

Men and woman have been having sex for as long as there have been humans. So how can we talk about there being a “history” of heterosexuality?

We can talk about there being a history of heterosexuality in the same way that we can talk about there being a history of religions. People have been praying to God for a really long time too, and yet the ways people relate to the divine have specific histories. They come from particular places, they take particular trajectories, there are particular texts, and individuals that are important in them. There are events, names, places, dates. It’s really very similar.

So where does the term “heterosexual” come from?

“Heterosexual” was actually coined in a letter at the same time as the word “homosexual,”[in the mid-19thcentury], by an Austro-Hungarian journalist named Károly Mária Kertbeny. He created these words as part of his response to a piece of Prussian legislation that made same-sex erotic behavior illegal, even in cases where the identical act performed by a man and a woman would be considered legal. And he was one of a couple of people who did a lot of writing and campaigning and pamphleteering to try to change legal opinion on that matter. He coined the words “heterosexual” and “homosexual” in a really very clever bid to try to equalize same-sex and different-sex. His intent was to suggest that there are these two categories in which human beings could be sexual, that they were not part of a hierarchy, that they were just two different flavors of the same thing.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8239 Oct 28, 2013
Part 2

But the term took quite a while to catch on. How did it spread?

Thanks to psychiatrists in the 1880s and 1890s — a part of the medical profession that was deeply unscientific at that time. It meant that somebody with a medical degree and all of the authority it brings could stand up and start making value judgments using specialized medical vocabulary and pass it off as authoritative, and basically unquestionable.

Psychiatry is responsible for creating the heterosexual in largely the same way that it is responsible for creating the various categories of sexual deviance that we are familiar with and recognize and define ourselves in opposition to. The period lasting from the late Victorian era to the first 20 or 30 years of the 20th century was a time of tremendous socioeconomic change, and people desperately wanted to give themselves a valid identity in this new world order. One of the ways people did that was establish themselves as sexually normative. And it wasn’t the people who were running around thinking,“Oh, I’m a man and I like to sleep with other men, that makes me different,” who were creating this groundswell of change; it was the other people, the men who were running around going,“I’m not a degenerate, I don’t want to sleep with other men, I am this thing over here that is normative and acceptable and good and not pathological and right, that’s what I am. That’s what I need people to understand about me, because I need people to understand that I am a valid person and I need to be taken seriously.”

This also has to do with the popularity of social Darwinism at the time.

Social Darwinism comes into play in a big way. It became important to prove that you were part of the solution and not part of the problem in this pell-mell, hurly-burly, crazy new social order [of the late 1800s and early 20th century].

So how did this change in terminology play itself out in the real world?

I actually talked to my grandmother about this. My grandmother is 88 and she came to consciousness in a world that didn’t have heterosexuals in it, where nobody knew that word, and certainly nobody used it to refer to themselves. And she associates this change with Freud, whom she’s never read but whom she’s heard a lot about. So there was this sort of culture-wide game of telephone, if you will, in which these authoritative medicalized ideas coming from very rarefied circles trickled down into the larger culture. I think that for people of my grandmother’s generation particularly, heterosexual simply became a synecdoche for normal. And that’s certainly the way Freud talks about it, that you know, you attain heterosexuality. There’s this process of attaining normality. When you manage to develop yourself, or to become developed, in the proper way, in an appropriate way, in the way that Freud says you’re supposed to, what you end up with is a heterosexual.

In his book “Gay New York,” George Chauncey writes about the flip side of this, how previous to the invention of “homosexuality,” men’s sexualities were much more fluid. Do you think that’s the case?

Oh, absolutely. When you start operating on the principle that you indeed can divide people into sheep and goats, then there’s also the idea that you must divide people into sheep and goats and there are certain boundaries that cannot be crossed without reclassifying.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8240 Oct 28, 2013
Part 3

As you point out in the book, for much of human history, marriage had absolutely nothing to do with sexuality or sex.

It’s more that marriage didn’t have a lot to do with desire. Marriage has always had to do with sex, and the ability to have marital sex and preferably procreate has always been central to marriage. But what was not so important was whether or not you necessarily wanted to have sex with that person. It was your duty, it was paying the marriage debt, and you were gonna do it, by golly, but this was a co-worker, this a partner in business enterprise — not a person you chose to satisfy your own personal whims and desires with. If you happen to also like them and think that they were swell or pretty or handsome then that’s great. But that’s not what you were in it for.

And now everything has changed, because we now prioritize attraction, desire, love, romance, over the strictly economic and community-building aspects of marriage. We live in a culture now where we find it very odd when women don’t support themselves, if somebody chooses to be a stay-at-home mother. That is a huge change, and that’s a huge change just in my lifetime. I’m in my early 40s and I know that when I was a very small child those discussions were not happening in the same way. The economic and legal enfranchisement of women has gone hand-in-hand with both women’s and men’s ability to choose marriage partners based on their own desire, desires for sex, love, companionship, all of those things, and to put that first.

You can read the rest if u like here
http://www.salon.com/2012/01/22/the_invention...

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8241 Oct 28, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
You go first!!!
I'm a Lesbian, normal, happy, highly educated and married to a wonderful woman.......and we both know what it's like trying to fit into what you claim is the "REAL" life called heterosexuality.......sorry, but if you folks are so happy and normal......why do you post in a Gay/Lesbian forum under different nics trying to discuss thinks you are clueless about?
Oh those political sexual identity labels....not everyone agrees

Isle of Lesbos residents say they're the only Lesbians

ATHENS, Greece - A Greek court has been asked to draw the line between gay women and the natives of the Aegean Sea island of Lesbos.

Three islanders from Lesbos - home of the ancient poet Sappho, who praised love between women - have taken a gay rights group to court for using the word lesbian in its name.

One of the plaintiffs said Wednesday that the name of the association, Homosexual and Lesbian Community of Greece, "insults the identity" of the people of Lesbos, who are also known as Lesbians.
"My sister can't say she is a Lesbian," said Dimitris Lambrou. "Our geographical designation has been usurped by certain ladies who have no connection whatsoever with Lesbos," he said.

The three plaintiffs are seeking to have the group barred from using "lesbian" in its name and filed a lawsuit on April 10. The other two plaintiffs are women.

A spokeswoman for the Homosexual and Lesbian Community of Greece said the action was "a joke in bad taste that borders on discrimination."

"I don't see how the word can be an insult," Evangelia Vlami said. "We don't think doubt can be cast on dictionaries ... even the United Nations refer to us as Lesbians."

Also called Mytilene, after its capital, Lesbos is famed as the birthplace of Sappho. The island, particularly the lyric poet's reputed home town of Eressos, is a favored holiday destination for gay women.

"This is not an aggressive act against gay women," Lambrou said. "Let them visit Lesbos and get married and whatever they like. We just want (the group) to remove the word lesbian from their title."

He said the plaintiffs targeted the group because it is the only officially registered gay group in Greece to use the word lesbian in its name. The case will be heard in an Athens court on June 10.

Sappho lived from the late 7th to the early 6th century B.C. and is considered one of the greatest poets of antiquity. Many of her poems, written in the first person and intended to be accompanied by music, contain passionate references to love for other women.

Lambrou said the word lesbian has only been linked with gay women in the past few decades. "But we have been Lesbians for thousands of years," said Lambrou, who publishes a small magazine on ancient Greek religion and technology that frequently criticizes the Christian Church.

Vlami, the gay group spokeswoman, said any misunderstanding can easily be resolved through linguistics.

"Most people from Lesbos prefer to use the word Mytilene, which is the more ancient version and because some people may be afraid of being misunderstood," she said. "I don't see what the problem is ... Can't a woman just say: I am from the island of Lesbos?"

Very little is known of Sappho's life. According to some ancient accounts, she was an aristocrat who married a rich merchant and had a daughter with him. One tradition says that she killed herself by jumping off a cliff over an unhappy love affair.

Lambrou says Sappho was not gay. "But even if we assume she was, how can 250,000 people of Lesbian descent - including women - be considered homosexual?"

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/0...

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8242 Oct 28, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but it's NOT.......and you can continue to post all the crap that you do and it WON'T change the fact that Gay and Lesbian couples are getting legally married.
Or having their relationships designated marriage by the state.
, that procreation is NOT a requirement to marriage and can take place without the couple EVER getting married
True, and true.
and that there are infertile/sterile heterosexuals who get married WHO are incapable of procreation or past the childbearing years who are getting married, therefore your procreation argument has failed!!!
Actually infertile men and women, but that's nothing new. As to the procreation argument "has failed" claim, that's not true, nor is it logical. There are enough legal cases, dating back before those precious modern political sexual identity labels entered common usage, to demonstrate the link between marriage, and procreation. Simply because some states, courts, and legislative bodies have chosen to ignore it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist in the first place.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8243 Oct 29, 2013
well wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it your mental illness that prevents you from accepting reality, or are you just really stupid? Same sex marriage is legal, that is reality whether you like it or not and your denial will not change it.
LOL, SOOOOOO blonde!

I post a list of unchangeable distinctions between ss couples and marriage, and you try to trump it with a fraudulent, manipulated piece of paper!

The law was manipulated and changed. Reality hasn't changed yet, but you keep waiting Blondie!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8244 Oct 29, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you've stated certain truths (i.e., we're "duplicate gendered").
That statement, as obvious as it is, does not PROVE anything about SSM.
You ramble on, ad nausea, but you've never proven that SSM is an oxymoron. You THINK that you have, Blanche, but you haven't.
LOL, you list one of my points, and admit it is correct, then you dismiss all the others without being specific.

I wonder why...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8245 Oct 29, 2013
Great info Pietro!
Equal

Centereach, NY

#8246 Oct 29, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, you list one of my points, and admit it is correct, then you dismiss all the others without being specific.
I wonder why...
Your an idiot. Yes we can be considered a "duplicate gender", but you are using that fact and saying we can't marry because we can't reproduce and last time I checked marriage doesn't require you to have children.
Equal

Centereach, NY

#8247 Oct 29, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Part 2
But the term took quite a while to catch on. How did it spread?
Thanks to psychiatrists in the 1880s and 1890s — a part of the medical profession that was deeply unscientific at that time. It meant that somebody with a medical degree and all of the authority it brings could stand up and start making value judgments using specialized medical vocabulary and pass it off as authoritative, and basically unquestionable.
Psychiatry is responsible for creating the heterosexual in largely the same way that it is responsible for creating the various categories of sexual deviance that we are familiar with and recognize and define ourselves in opposition to. The period lasting from the late Victorian era to the first 20 or 30 years of the 20th century was a time of tremendous socioeconomic change, and people desperately wanted to give themselves a valid identity in this new world order. One of the ways people did that was establish themselves as sexually normative. And it wasn’t the people who were running around thinking,“Oh, I’m a man and I like to sleep with other men, that makes me different,” who were creating this groundswell of change; it was the other people, the men who were running around going,“I’m not a degenerate, I don’t want to sleep with other men, I am this thing over here that is normative and acceptable and good and not pathological and right, that’s what I am. That’s what I need people to understand about me, because I need people to understand that I am a valid person and I need to be taken seriously.”
This also has to do with the popularity of social Darwinism at the time.
Social Darwinism comes into play in a big way. It became important to prove that you were part of the solution and not part of the problem in this pell-mell, hurly-burly, crazy new social order [of the late 1800s and early 20th century].
So how did this change in terminology play itself out in the real world?
I actually talked to my grandmother about this. My grandmother is 88 and she came to consciousness in a world that didn’t have heterosexuals in it, where nobody knew that word, and certainly nobody used it to refer to themselves. And she associates this change with Freud, whom she’s never read but whom she’s heard a lot about. So there was this sort of culture-wide game of telephone, if you will, in which these authoritative medicalized ideas coming from very rarefied circles trickled down into the larger culture. I think that for people of my grandmother’s generation particularly, heterosexual simply became a synecdoche for normal. And that’s certainly the way Freud talks about it, that you know, you attain heterosexuality. There’s this process of attaining normality. When you manage to develop yourself, or to become developed, in the proper way, in an appropriate way, in the way that Freud says you’re supposed to, what you end up with is a heterosexual.
In his book “Gay New York,” George Chauncey writes about the flip side of this, how previous to the invention of “homosexuality,” men’s sexualities were much more fluid. Do you think that’s the case?
Oh, absolutely. When you start operating on the principle that you indeed can divide people into sheep and goats, then there’s also the idea that you must divide people into sheep and goats and there are certain boundaries that cannot be crossed without reclassifying.
I'll read your comment later

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
News Beloved gay Israeli pop star dies in freak drow... 4 min aintitthetruth 2
News Study: 12,000 acts of condomless gay sex, 0 HIV... 21 min Tyler 10
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 32 min facts only 52,181
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 37 min God 7,009
News Canning is 1st Republican to announce run for 1... 2 hr Cops are Degenerates 1
News Charlize Theron admits to taking 'a dip in the ... 3 hr Wondering 18
News This Gay Man Wants to End Texas' War Against LG... 5 hr Tre H 27
News Blood donation rules relaxed for gay men and se... 12 hr Howser 30
News Gay couple grilled by judge about their sex liv... 21 hr TomInElPaso 108
News 12-year-old girl comes out to her Mormon congre... Mon Tre H 502
More from around the web