GOProud puts economics before gay marriage at ‘Homocon’ dance party in Tampa

[TX-Beau]

... everyone know communists travel on rusty boats...

Jesus, just ask BEN!!!!

Oh and yeah, they have USELESS degrees in the arts. Everyone KNOWS the arts are just chock full of Commies and homosexuals....

 

[Rolyo85]

The last one is actually true. Filthy liberal field, arts are...

 

[Stardreamer]

That's not a bad idea. If gays started saying they were married, acting married, etc., people would get used to it.

Exactly but it is not just saying they are married, it is getting married and standing by that belief. We dispute the idea that government decides who is or is not married. Here a great book on the issue that reminded me that marriage is not defined by just a marriage license from city hall.

Gay Marriage and Democracy: Equality for All by R. Claire Snyder.

there are four different components to the institution we call "marriage"—the personal bond, the community-recognized relationship, the religious rite, and the civil contract. Much of the time, a marriage involves all four aspects; other times, it might not. It is possible that a valid marriage might not include a personal bond of love (if the marriage was arranged), community recognition (if the couple is isolationist), a religious rite (if the couple is agnostic or atheist), or civil contract (if a couple never made it official).

You can have all the aspects of except the civil contract and be married. And once we remind society of that it becomes harder for them to argue in court and in law that we are not married and therefore entitled to equal treatment in the law. Gay couples should get married and be married and anyone who denies them their rights as married couples they should fight tooth and nail and defy the courts to say they are not.

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

You can have all the aspects of except the civil contract and be married. And once we remind society of that it becomes harder for them to argue in court and in law that we are not married and therefore entitled to equal treatment in the law.

I don't understand this. Of the four components she lists, the ONLY one that signifies legal marriage is the civil contract. It's the only one of the four that is actually required and none of the others will stand as the legal definition of marriage without it. Legal marriage is what grants married couples the host of rights in question. Two of the three USED to signify common-law status but there are very few states (if any) that still recognize a common-law marriage. You really CAN'T have all the components except that one and be "married." Besides, the religious ceremony you mentioned counts toward the civil contract because ordained officiants can bestow marriage status on behalf of the state as long as a license is also present. No minister or priest is going to marry you without a license.

Gay couples should get married and be married and anyone who denies them their rights as married couples they should fight tooth and nail and defy the courts to say they are not.

Maybe it's because I'm getting sleepy, but I don't understand this either Stardreamer. You SEEM to be arguing that the civil contract is unimportant because the government shouldn't sanction marriage in the first place, yet gay couples should use the other components of marriage to "get married" and then fight the courts to GET the government to sanction it? Wouldn't THAT be a civil contract then?

Has anyone ever tried this? Quite honestly, I can't imagine the couple in question would have a legal leg to stand on.

 

[Stardreamer]

I don't understand this. Of the four components she lists, the ONLY one that signifies legal marriage is the civil contract. It's the only one of the four that is actually required and none of the others will stand as the legal definition of marriage without it. Legal marriage is what grants married couples the host of rights in question. Two of the three USED to signify common-law status but there are very few states (if any) that still recognize a common-law marriage. You really CAN'T have all the components except that one and be "married." Besides, the religious ceremony you mentioned counts toward the civil contract because ordained officiants can bestow marriage status on behalf of the state as long as a license is also present. No minister or priest is going to marry you without a license.



Maybe it's because I'm getting sleepy, but I don't understand this either Stardreamer. You SEEM to be arguing that the civil contract is unimportant because the government shouldn't sanction marriage in the first place, yet gay couples should use the other components of marriage to "get married" and then fight the courts to GET the government to sanction it? Wouldn't THAT be a civil contract then?

Has anyone ever tried this? Quite honestly, I can't imagine the couple in question would have a legal leg to stand on.

We have let the fight to obtain marriage redefine marriage, to say that the STATE says if we are married or not. We need to get back to the concept of common law marriage and remind society that marriage is a bond between two people and is valid as long as it is recognized by their peers in the community. The State has no rights telling couple they are not married, even if they refuse to acknowledge that marriage. If we can shift back to that understanding of marriage then it becomes harder for the those who oppose gay marriage and use the state sanctioning of marriage to say a couple is not married. The courts say that marriage is civil right, if we get people to understand that you and your peers are the ones who say if you are married or not it becomes harder for the state to say otherwise without it becoming a constitutional issue. We need to take back the definition of marriage to the people not the courthouse.

 

[Nick4444]

I'll bet that they went through about 1000 pounds of male hookers though.

Man, I should have been there

 

[GhostMost]

Well, I wouldn't love to see marriage benefits being struck down. Getting married is one of the fastest ways for me to get a citizenship, were it legal. Not something I could do with an attorney, a church marriage and a honeymoon exactly. Not that my plight brings Benvolio anything but cold xenophobic terror...

don't even think about it then

 

[GhostMost]

I'd much rather have a secure job, and a secure life than care about marriage at the moment. With the experience he has with business and finances, I can definitely put gay marriage on hold.

Heard Jimmy LaSalvia on Pierce Morgan- he said this assinine comment about- in order to 'get married, you need a date, to get a date, you need a job.....' IS passing ENDA on the GOP Platform???? Hard to get a job/keep a job if you can be discriminated against while applying or fired for being gay...

If you have qualities that a company is looking for in a candidate to hire then race, sexual preference, and gender shouldn't even be brought up. Think about it you're great at your job, your boss knows you're gay, or a female, or a specific race and despite their beliefs conflicting with all of those they decide to keep you because you an excellent asset to the company. wow so abstract.

That's weird because I told my friend I'm not voting for Obama today and she looked at me and was baffled and said I have to because I'm gay.

 

[CoolBlue71]

I'd much rather have a secure job, and a secure life than care about marriage at the moment. With the experience he has with business and finances, I can definitely put gay marriage on hold.

Now that's a fine example of being devoid of any self-respect.

 

[FuryOfFirestorm]

Now that's a fine example of being devoid of any self-respect.

It fits with the Republican ideal of "screw you, I got mine".

 

[CoolBlue71]

It fits with the Republican ideal of "screw you, I got mine".

But of course it doesn't actually fit with some people who figure that they can have that attitude. It's as if they have fooled themselves into believing either they are among the haves … or, with not being there yet, that they have a feasible chance to join them.

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

If you have qualities that a company is looking for in a candidate to hire then race, sexual preference, and gender shouldn't even be brought up. Think about it you're great at your job, your boss knows you're gay, or a female, or a specific race and despite their beliefs conflicting with all of those they decide to keep you because you an excellent asset to the company. wow so abstract.

What it "is" is pretty naive. Do you think discrimination laws were put on the books just as a precautionary measure fifty years ago? They were put on the books because people were discriminated against in the work force for the VERY things you mention. Sould they matter? No. Did they and do they? You betcha.

 

[Rolyo85]

I'd much rather have a secure job, and a secure life than care about marriage at the moment. With the experience he has with business and finances, I can definitely put gay marriage on hold.

If you have qualities that a company is looking for in a candidate to hire then race, sexual preference, and gender shouldn't even be brought up. Think about it you're great at your job, your boss knows you're gay, or a female, or a specific race and despite their beliefs conflicting with all of those they decide to keep you because you an excellent asset to the company. wow so abstract.

That's weird because I told my friend I'm not voting for Obama today and she looked at me and was baffled and said I have to because I'm gay.

A government is not a business. If business experience was the way to go, we should all just ask Bill Gates to run the country.

And your "if you have the qualities, you'll get hired and keep the job" spiel is obviously untrue, or ENDA wouldn't be needed. When your employer has "firm beliefs" and "morals" that your very existence doesn't mash with, all the qualifications in the world won't help you. But please, sit at the back of the bus because you've been promised more money.

As if Romney has offered ANYTHING to suggest he actually has any plan to fix the economy. But why let fact-checking stop your lack of self-respect? And just for the record, putting "gay marriage" on hold is putting every other right you have a s a gay man on hold. Marriage is just the flag-bearer of the movement, and the Republican platform is against everything we are, not just our right to marry those we love.

 

[GhostMost]

And your "if you have the qualities, you'll get hired and keep the job" spiel is obviously untrue, or ENDA wouldn't be needed. When your employer has "firm beliefs" and "morals" that your very existence doesn't mash with, all the qualifications in the world won't help you. But please, sit at the back of the bus because you've been promised more money.

If you and your boss don't mesh then find a new job, it's really not hard at all, it's the employer's company if he doesn't want gay people or black people then that's his prerogative, though it will have negative connotations, and he will ultimately, if he is smart, evolve with the times and be a little less discriminatory. You don't need to have government regulations for everything.

And I have much more self respect than you and most people in this world, I can admit to myself that I don't want to get married, so I don't need gay marriage in my life, civil unions are fine, an amendment for one man and one woman will probably not get passed anyway.

It fits with the Republican ideal of "screw you, I got mine".

this is every human's ideal not just republicans you all just don't want to admit it and want to trick yourselves into altruistic ideals which are impossible.

You all don't understand how a business is run, it can be done without regulations, it's common sense. For some reason you don't understand your full potential, as customers, against business operations you people just cling to the government for everything.

And last but not least you can't say Obama is/was more qualified to be in office more so than Romney I mean come on even liberals must agree on that.

 

[GhostMost]

NO you don't. I don't want to get married at this point in my life. But Civil unions are not fine. They are far from fine. While I'm not ready to get married, if a same sex couple wants to do it fine. What is not self respecting about getting married. You have no self respect if you vote for the republicans.

Correction, civil unions for all couples, wipe out government marriage.

 

[GhostMost]

That's not acceptable in my book either.

But where is the response to the rest of my post?

And why can't you answer the point about the republicans actually being bad for the economy?

Because I don't agree with it so I'm saving my energy. What's the point if nothing will be solved from arguing with you? You will learn someday. Yes I know you used to be libertarian, maybe you won't learn then.

 

[ReadyWithReadyWit]

If you and your boss don't mesh then find a new job, it's really not hard at all, it's the employer's company if he doesn't want gay people or black people then that's his prerogative, though it will have negative connotations, and he will ultimately, if he is smart, evolve with the times and be a little less discriminatory. You don't need to have government regulations for everything.

And I have much more self respect than you and most people in this world, I can admit to myself that I don't want to get married, so I don't need gay marriage in my life, civil unions are fine, an amendment for one man and one woman will probably not get passed anyway.

this is every human's ideal not just republicans you all just don't want to admit it and want to trick yourselves into altruistic ideals which are impossible.

You all don't understand how a business is run, it can be done without regulations, it's common sense. For some reason you don't understand your full potential, as customers, against business operations you people just cling to the government for everything.

And last but not least you can't say Obama is/was more qualified to be in office more so than Romney I mean come on even liberals must agree on that.

Not to pile on, but most of this is insanely... insane...

Foremost, how is asking an employer not to discriminate on something entirely unrelated to their job performance an example of the government trying to regulate EVERYTHING? That seems like quite a leap... I mean, by this logic, exactly how far back in time do you want to go in terms of government "interfering" in civil rights?

Also- I respect that you don't want to get married (many do not), but how does anything you wrote have to do with self-respect? Wouldn't a self-respecting person want the equal opportunity as everyone else even if they they are not interested? Perhaps, you are simply apathetic or self-loathing, which is unfortunate, but far more respectable. But to go off on some random righteous spiel about self-respect because you just don't care doesn't quite make sense to me...

Next, "screw you, I got mine" is shockingly not EVERY human's ideal, but I can see how someone who subscribes to this philosophy may brainwash themselves into thinking this way.

Lastly, I accept that business are ruthless, heartless, cold machines motivated by greed and greed alone. That is what they should be in a capitalistic society. BUT, that is PRECISELY the reason for government regulations and PRECISELY the reason the government is NOT a business. It's a "checks and balances" type of thing going on, you see...

 

[rareboy]

I have to assume that Ghost Most is a provocateur.

No one could be that dull.

 

[Rolyo85]

IN MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE "You'll understand one day" is the shortest path to everyone thinking you are a moron. Nothing screams insecurity and immaturity louder than artificially trying to put yourself above your opponent like that.

As for all the libertarian bullshit, total deregulation will literally destroy the planet within a few short decades, so let's NOT have that instead. And marriage will NOT be dismantled as an institution in our lifetimes, so "I don't care about gay marriage because I don't care about marriage and it should not exist" is a crappyass excuse to ignore the issue. YOU might think the world should be this or that, but in reality we operate with what we have, and it is a world where marriage exists, validates your relationship within the context of society, and isn't available to everyone.

 

[FuryOfFirestorm]

Everyone else is feasting at the marriage table, but the majority of us are not content with the civil union crumbs being thrown our way. If my partner is in hospital, a civil union will not give me the right to visit him or make medical decisions for him. If he dies, civil unions won't give me rights to his estate or control over his burial/cremation. Civil unions won't give us tax breaks, shared medical benefits or equal parental rights of our children.

Civil unions are the back of the bus, and like Rosa Parks, we're fucking tired of giving up our damn seats in the front because some assholes tell us to.