Prop 8 Nov. 15 Protest

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

No one claimed that these were true - however, these things are neither necessary nor sufficient for a comparison to be made.

That is because to claim that gays have suffered the exact same as Blacks in this country is a weak argument, at best.

Maybe our impasse is one of being far too literal. To use the phrase "separate but equal" is simply to reference the fact that, in practice and in theory, any sort of bifurcation or double standard has been shown to be unlawful and discriminatory. Does that make more sense?

You're the one who's trying to make it literal by posting the picture that you did. And again, I disagree. I don't see where there is any double standard here.

No one is claiming any of these things - we're only claiming that, for years, the court system in the United States has determined that the right to marry is, indeed, a constitutionally-given right - as is the right to vote, the right to liberty and property, and a host of others.

Again, you're not going to convince me that this is a valid argument.

I believe someone smarter than me once said that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere - this is the part you're missing when you view my comparison, to my mind.

I don't see the injustice. I just don't.

Nope, they just earn less, get fired more, get targeted for crimes based on their minority status, and lack fundamental rights under the law. So yeah - if you're comfortable with that, there's no discussion to be had.

Not from my perspective. The gays I know seem to earn more and get fired less. Where do you live? Maybe you should move.

This is the same logic that was used to prevent blacks from voting decades ago.

Actually, you've validated the comparison implicitly - banning gay marriage is "restoring" a right to gays that has been unilaterally denied under false pretense. I've never owned a gun, but that doesn't mean I forfeit my Constitutional right to do so.

Blacks were denied the right to vote because in part we were seen as 'less than human, lacking the mental capacity to make important decisions'. I've never gotten the feeling that gays have had to suffer that type of injustice.

[a.e.B.O.T.]

This isn't about scorecards... the group that gets the most discrimination will receive their rights first... The only comparison to the black struggle that was trying to be made is, that this country has a history of LEGALLY suppressing the rights of individuals based on race, gender, religion and sexuality, with the African American struggle being the most prevalent by means of recency and severity. Now, in every national battle, both sides of the argument will say things they shouldn't say, things that cross the line. You shouldn't hold that against the other side as a whole. There are ignorant people on both side of the issue.

Gays are being told that they couldn't vote because they are immoral, confusing to children, and will upset church practice. No, that is not as severe as "less than human, lacking the mental capacity to make important decisions" as Sigmadiva put it. No, gays probably aren't being treated bad as African Americans. There were 3 times as many race-related crimes to sexual orientation related crimes. However, gays are being told they do not deserve the rights of everyone else. They are being told that they can not marry the one that they love. They are being told that they are not capable of raising healthy children. ETC... There is a difference between the way the government is benefiting straight people and gay people. That IS discrimination, even if it is not as bad as slavery or the right to vote, it still is discrimination.

Two days ago Moses Cannon was shot for being gay in Syracuse, New York. Again, I am not saying the gay struggle compares, but the struggle is definitely there and relevant... and tolerance will not come until our government fully accepts us.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by a.e.B.O.T.

This isn't about scorecards... the group that gets the most discrimination will receive their rights first... The only comparison to the black struggle that was trying to be made is, that this country has a history of LEGALLY suppressing the rights of individuals based on race, gender, religion and sexuality, with the African American struggle being the most prevalent by means of recency and severity. Now, in every national battle, both sides of the argument will say things they shouldn't say, things that cross the line. You shouldn't hold that against the other side as a whole. There are ignorant people on both side of the issue.

Gays are being told that they couldn't vote because they are immoral, confusing to children, and will upset church practice. No, that is not as severe as "less than human, lacking the mental capacity to make important decisions" as Sigmadiva put it. No, gays probably aren't being treated bad as African Americans. There were 3 times as many race-related crimes to sexual orientation related crimes. However, gays are being told they do not deserve the rights of everyone else. They are being told that they can not marry the one that they love. They are being told that they are not capable of raising healthy children. ETC... There is a difference between the way the government is benefiting straight people and gay people. That IS discrimination, even if it is not as bad as slavery or the right to vote, it still is discrimination.

Two days ago Moses Cannon was shot for being gay in Syracuse, New York. Again, I am not saying the gay struggle compares, but the struggle is definitely there and relevant... and tolerance will not come until our government fully accepts us.

1. Good, then stop trying to make implicit comparisons to the struggle of Blacks in this country to gay rights. I'm glad that you have recognized that the weight of the two are not the same.

2. I personally in no way condone violence against anyone based on how they are.

3. People (the government) will have a hard time accepting you because to do that would be to support a lifestyle that they may find immoral.

[a.e.B.O.T.]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

1. Good, then stop trying to make implicit comparisons to the struggle of Blacks in this country to gay rights. I'm glad that you have recognized that the weight of the two are not the same.

2. I personally in no way condone violence against anyone based on how they are.

3. People (the government) will have a hard time accepting you because to do that would be to support a lifestyle that they may find immoral.

Ok, like I said before... there are going to be things said on both sides of the argument that are unjust and ignorant. That will not change. I can't change that. There however, is a difference between the struggle... i.e. saying that gays have had it as bad as blacks... and the arguments for the suppression... such as the Loving v. Virginia case mentioned here earlier... people found it immoral, and at that time, even after the case, a majority found it immoral. People find this immoral, but government isn't about morals. The government is about fairness, or at least should be. You want morals, go to church, believe that God doesn't approve of gays... that is all fine and dandy, and you have every right to do so. However, the government is about fairness... so the question is, is gay marriage fair? Loving V. Virginia is totally just in the argument for gay marriage as the grounds of the victory was based on the fourteenth amendment, which re-affirms the equal protection clause. The basis for that case were that Loving was protect under that clause as a citizen of the U.S... well, gays are protected under that clause as well. So there is grounds for bringing up that case as well as grounds for arguing discrimination.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by a.e.B.O.T.

Ok, like I said before... there are going to be things said on both sides of the argument that are unjust and ignorant. That will not change. I can't change that. There however, is a difference between the struggle... i.e. saying that gays have had it as bad as blacks... and the arguments for the suppression... such as the Loving v. Virginia case mentioned here earlier... people found it immoral, and at that time, even after the case, a majority found it immoral. People find this immoral, but government isn't about morals. The government is about fairness, or at least should be. You want morals, go to church, believe that God doesn't approve of gays... that is all fine and dandy, and you have every right to do so. However, the government is about fairness... so the question is, is gay marriage fair? Loving V. Virginia is totally just in the argument for gay marriage as the grounds of the victory was based on the fourteenth amendment, which re-affirms the equal protection clause. The basis for that case were that Loving was protect under that clause as a citizen of the U.S... well, gays are protected under that clause as well. So there is grounds for bringing up that case as well as grounds for arguing discrimination.

Because people have a funny way of letting their morals seep into laws.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I don't think anyone believes people should marry for health benefits or tax breaks, so why would they be a good reason to perpetuate the institution?

My experience tells me that some (certainly not all) couples do indeed chose to marry rather than simply live together precisely for reasons such as these.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Don't most of us operate that way? [Not being interested in any opinions that don't match our own]

The close-minded certainly do. I try not to.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

So, Sen, let me ask you - would you as a Black gay man find the issue of gay marriage more compelling if it is compared to the Holocaust that Jews experienced?

You do know, don't you, that thousands of German homosexuals were also sent to the concentration camps and to German jails? Many were forcibly castrated, used for hormone experiments and/or killed. They had to wear pink triangles instead of (or in addition to) the yellow Star of David as a badge.

After the liberation of the concentration camps, the German goverment often re-imprisoned those gay prisoners; some remained imprisoned for years after being "liberated," all because they had been convicted of being gay, which the Nazi government had made a felony.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

My experience tells me that some (certainly not all) couples do indeed chose to marry rather than simply live together precisely for reasons such as these.

The close-minded certainly do. I try not to.

You do know, don't you, that thousands of German homosexuals were also sent to the concentration camps and to German jails? Many were forcibly castrated, used for hormone experiments and/or killed. They had to wear pink triangles instead of (or in addition to) the yellow Star of David as a badge.

After the liberation of the concentration camps, the German goverment often re-imprisoned those gay prisoners; some remained imprisoned for years after being "liberated," all because they had been convicted of being gay, which the Nazi government had made a felony.

Yes, I do. My point was to illustrate that not only have Black Americans been ostracized, others have also. So, why do gays choose to compare their struggle to Blacks only? Why not compare their struggles to other groups.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Yes, I do. My point was to illustrate that not only have Black Americans been ostracized, others have also. So, why do gays choose to compare their struggle to Blacks only? Why not compare their struggles to other groups.

Who said they are comparing their struggles only to those of Blacks?

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Who said they are comparing their struggles only to those of Blacks?

They are. That is the comaprison they keep bringing up as a justification for their cause. I'm just responding to what has been said / posted. Did you not see the picture KSigRC posted?

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

They are. That is the comaprison they keep bringing up as a justification for their cause. I'm just responding to what has been said / posted. Did you not see the picture KSigRC posted?

FYI, I'm neither gay nor a spokesperson for gay rights.

Gays are free to compare their plight to whomever they want - but in a situation where some are pretending that a "civil union" is the same thing as "marriage," I'm going to compare that to pretending that "separate facilities" is the same thing as "equal facilities" . . . since, in a literal sense, they're identical.

Oh - by the way . . . no one can convince you that marriage is a right? Look up the Supreme Court decisions that say just that, maybe? This isn't a religion or "me" thing - it's a legal thing. Obviously, you're free to disagree with the Court's decisions, and if that's the case then we'll just have to agree to disagree on some level - but I think that would help you understand where I'm coming from, and it would fully explain the connection to past events that have paved the way for others to gain rights as well.

It's a good thing.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

They are. That is the comaprison they keep bringing up as a justification for their cause. I'm just responding to what has been said / posted. Did you not see the picture KSigRC posted?

Of course I did. The fact that Separate-but-Equal is brought up indicates two things:

-- that the Civil Rights Movement is the most recent example of an American movement seeking equality for citizens, and

-- that the court decisions in cases such as legalized gay marriage and said that providing for civil unions was not sufficient relied heavily on the reasoning of cases that struck down the Separate-but-Equal.

But your question was:

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

So, why do gays choose to compare their struggle to Blacks only? Why not compare their struggles to other groups.

So my question wasn't "who said they were comparing their struggle to the struggle of Blacks?"; it was "who said that they were comparing their struggle only to the struggle of Blacks?" The picture that KSigKid posted =/= the entirity of the discussions being had and comparisons being made on this issue.

[christiangirl]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I think we need to get rid of the term marriage altogether, except as a religious ceremony. Make the license for EVERYBODY say "Civil Union License" and make the rights the same as they are for marriage currently. This would be your legal version of marriage. The religious version would be up to the churches entirely, just like Baptism or other ceremonies are. The only thing is, I don't like the term civil union itself because I'm not sure what you would say "We're getting unionized" doesn't seem like a logical term to me. "We're getting civilized" doesn't work either. "We're being civil unionized"? "We're being partnered" ??? I just don't know what to really call it so that it makes sense. Take the religion completely out of the legal aspect of the whole thing. Then the government is allowing the same thing for any consenting adult and the churches can do what they want. The more I think about this, the more I think this is the way to go. It seems ridiculous to have to spend the kind of money it would take to do this when there is already a legal institution in place, but the term "marriage" has too many religious connotations to too many people at this point. This would better solidify a separation of church and state.

Hands down, one of the best posts of the entire year. I love you, AGDee.

Honestly, I think part of it is the romanticism of the thing. Even if all the rights were exactly equal, it still wouldn't be enough. No one (of any orientation) wants to dream of that one day in the future that their little girl will grow up, put on a pretty white dress, and go get "partnered." It's the societal connotation that KSig mentioned (though I won't even touch the other stuff in that post ).

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Of course I did. The fact that Separate-but-Equal is brought up indicates two things:

-- that the Civil Rights Movement is the most recent example of an American movement seeking equality for citizens, and

-- that the court decisions in cases such as legalized gay marriage and said that providing for civil unions was not sufficient relied heavily on the reasoning of cases that struck down the Separate-but-Equal.

ehh...I still think the connection is weak.

But your question was:
So my question wasn't "who said they were comparing their struggle to the struggle of Blacks?"; it was "who said that they were comparing their struggle only to the struggle of Blacks?" The picture that KSigKid posted =/= the entirity of the discussions being had and comparisons being made on this issue.

Because that is the reference that is continually brought up by their side.

[Senusret I]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Because that is the reference that is continually brought up by their side.

It's really not. It's all you see because you're prejudiced.