What a Surprise! Gay Marriage is a big deal in election year...
Offline http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/gay_marriage_politics
Analysis: Gay marriage back as campaign issue
By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer Thu May 15, 6:47 PM ET
WASHINGTON - A California Supreme Court decision clearing the way for gay marriages in the state injects an element of uncertainty into a presidential race in which the Iraq war and the sputtering economy have largely overshadowed social issues.John McCain, the GOP nominee-in-waiting whose position on the issue rankles the Republican Party's conservative base, sought to strike a delicate balance to the Thursday ruling.
He "supports the right of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution sanctioning the union between a man and a woman, just as he did in his home state of Arizona," his campaign said in response. "John McCain doesn't believe judges should be making these decisions."
Like McCain, Democratic rivalsBarack Obama
and
Hillary Rodham Clinton
say the marriage issue should be left to the states, and they, too, seemed to tread carefully.
"Barack Obama has always believed that same-sex couples should enjoy equal rights under the law, and he will continue to fight for civil unions as president. He respects the decision of the California Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage," the Illinois senator's campaign said.
Clinton's campaign said she "believes that gay and lesbian couples in committed relationships should have the same rights and responsibilities as all Americans and believes that civil unions are the best way to achieve this goal. As president, Hillary Clinton will work to ensure same-sex couples have access to these rights and responsibilities at the federal level. She has said and continues to believe that the issue of marriage should be left to the states."
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
- Login to post comments
I was thinking the exact same thing when I saw this news clip.
All it takes is one gov't entity to make a controversial court decision and ignite one of the usual "hot button" topics just before election time.
Not that anyone would do such a thing purposely of course..
Say where is that Ass-Clown Karl Rove lately ?
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
Fired if im not mistaken... of course that is probably a huge delusion on my part
What Would Kharn Do?
Actually I believe he resigned..... It was daddy... George H.W. Bush who fired Rove back in 1980.
Anyway, the moral of the story would be: Show yourself to be a lying, unethical slimeball to get your parties candidate elected & that candidate must make a big show of firing you or insisting you resign...but that doesn't mean you're not welcome at the country club, bourgeoise, white guy parties or that we won't hire you to do the same thing all over again in a few years once the negative publicity dies down.
And one way or another, "gay marriage" will be a hot topic just in time for election... Was there any doubt ?
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
[cue Whitesnake: Here I Go Again]
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080516/ap_on_re_us/gay_marriage
Gay marriage opponents vow to fight Calif. ruling
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Just what is America's problem with gay marriage? I mean, I think I understand what the problem is and in so many words it's religious stupidity. Is there more to it than that or is that pretty much driving the nail home?
I was starting to wonder what happened to gay marriage in the States. I guess I just needed to keep in mind that elections over there tend to stir a lot of shit up, I mean issues.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
...America's problem with gay marriage is an extension of its problem with religion generally. Within living memory, numerous cases went before our nation's Supreme Court, and the Court handed down decisions which were regarded as objectionable. I *think* that the decision on contraception was within living memory (...admittedly, I'm not sure about that...); this struck down laws against the use of contraception. Other decisions followed: no forced prayer in schools (which is often oversimplified to "no prayer in schools;"
pornography as "free speech," (so, no more anti-porn laws
the famous Roe V. Wade, (which, in the eyes of many, legalized murder
and so on. At one time, it used to be common for elected officials who were seeking re-election to put on a display of "cleaning up the town" by having the police invade gay bars to arrest the patrons, so that the officials in question would look effective to the voters who wanted that sort of thing. For a long time, the patrons of gay bars could be counted upon to cooperate quietly in hopes of not being publicly exposed. That, of course, started to change after the Stonewall riot in June of 1968.
You see, religion had a very large role, at least at the popular level, from the nation's founding. The First Great Awakening is even studied in college level American history courses. By striking down laws that were more-or-less explicitly religious in character, the proponents of religion began to feel targeted, even "persecuted," even if no genuine persecution was contemplated, much less carried out. Religion has been, and to some extent, continues to be, pushed away from government influence--influence that religious leaders were quite accustomed to having.
So...after a fashion, *both* of your answers are correct. The "gay marriage problem" is, in so many words, all about religious stupidity--stupidity that has been very comfortable with governing authorities, and wants its social position back. Then again, there is also "more to it than that"--in the sense that a whole raft of religion/state issues have been settled to the disadvantage of religion--and religion doesn't like that very much.
Conor
It's called homophobia. No matter what excuse they come up with, it always boils down to that.
Organised religion is the ultimate form of blasphemy.
Censored and blacked out for internet access in ANZ!
AU: http://nocleanfeed.com/ | NZ: http://nzblackout.org/
This is an important issue about fairness. A quick marriage will guarantee the spouse joint property ownership rights and the right to visit the spouse in the hospital, jail, military etc. Gay couples are being denied these rights.
The label "Marraige" ... is sacred??? , whatever ... Give gay couples the same rights NOW , and call it "whatever"....
You sick hating idiots that deny them, fuck you .....you are an embarrassment to humanity, "love", and me, > G O D. errrrr
Atheism Books.
That is so rational cool , a long time coming , good news , and my atheist jesus smiles .... 4 to 3 is still embarrassing tho, sheezzz , so many haters out there to heal ....
(((( Just came to mind , cool prophet Pat Condell,
Was Jesus gay?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReYfDlIa-Z8
If you don't want to give gay couples a marriage "title" , fine, but give them a "title" with equal rights .... call it ? .... whatever ....
Atheism Books.
Not only am I against gay marriage, I'm also against strait marriage. Why do people feel the need to have an impersonal, bureaucratic often corrupt government sanction their marriage? If two people gay or strait want to have community property, they can just sign a contract to that effect. Why do we have a government that is supposedly secular sanctioning the personal relation of people? Frankly, it's none of their God damned business about what I'm doing in my personal and sexual relationships.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
Financial benefits maybe?
Yeah, what's the deal ? Get out of my sex life .... Rules, laws, about responsibility for the created kids and their well being, is as far as the law should go regarding who is kissing who .....
And WHY can't that G I R L have a harem of willing husbands !
Hamby knows ! 
Atheism Books.
From Wikipedia: On May 15, 2008, the Supreme Court of California overturned the ban on same-sex marriage. The four-to-three decision made California the second state, behind Massachusetts, to allow full marriage rights for same-sex partners. Barring a last-minute injunction, marriage licenses will be issued to same-sex couples starting on June 14, 2008.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_California
Just curious about who does the planning for a gay wedding?
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
[Stereotype ON]
Oh... that's really complicated...
(NOTE: For the duration of this post, gay refers to male-male couples and lesbian to female-female.)
If one of the guys is more feminine than the other, it's fairly obvious. That would be the fag hag* who has been following him around for years. It's the closest equivalent to the bride's gay friend.
If both of the men are generally masculine, I think it's appropriate for either a lesbian or gay friend to do it. The thing is, there has to be one flaming personality at every wedding. Trust me. I've played music for maybe 300 weddings, and it's true. There's always one flamingly gay person involved in every wedding. I think they have a secret bulletin service or something. I have no idea how they do it.
In rare cases, I think it's ok for one of the participants to plan his own wedding. This can only be done when he can demonstrate a thorough familiarity with at least 80% of Martha Stewart's wedding tips.
If it's a lesbian wedding, there's no problem with having a gay friend do it.
[Stereotype OFF]
* In order to qualify as a fag hag, she has to have had a very close, completely (or almost completely... only one or two drunk "mistakes"
platonic relationship with her gay friend, and has to have turned down at least four straight men who she really liked, but just "didn't feel it" with. It wouldn't hurt if she had sexual trauma as a young girl and has power issues.
[Ok... Now Stereotype OFF]
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
/facepalm
"Gaychubbydating" ad... ffs...