Putting Civil Rights up to a Popular Vote

[Evandril]

As someone in this group, I get where you are coming from. I REALLY do, but it's unfair to paint all of us with that brush. I may be Christian but I do NOT hate gays nor do I feel they should be treated as inferior or second class citizens.

As a personal example of what they are saying...When I was stationed in little rock, arkansas, I was treated well...because I was a white male. When I was polite to anyone of a different race, they were shocked...and it killed me to see it. Was *I* discriminating against anyone? No...but because of my race/sex, I was not discriminated *against*. Though when the fact I was Pagan came up, I did start catching flack from idiots...and had Christians defending me from the xtians, and very effectively, too

[Eisa]

If the religious fundies were so worried about "attacks on the institution of marriage," you would think that they would be trying to outlaw divorce.

I always thought that our system of government was put in place to prevent the majority from discriminating against the minority. Putting civil rights issues up for a popular vote gives the majority an opportunity to oppress the minority.

QFT.

It's fucking ridiculous. Marriage is not a religious institution. It's a legal one. It CAN be a religious institution. In which case, why not just have it be ok if you're a church, you don't have to let gay people marry IN your church. There, problem solved.

Also, I can totally see that orgy of hellfire rolling over Canada now.

[Greenday]

It'd be hard for gay people to destroy the meaning of marriage when more than half the married couples these days get divorced.

[Mr. Anubite]

I like that guy from California. Even though I'm Gay, I would completely renounce my claims to marriage if divorce gets banned across the country.

I'm guessing it will happen some time between when pigs gaining flight and when fish gain the motor skills to pedal bicycles.

[Salesmonkey]

Marriage is sort of a legal shorthand, which allows one human to have limited control over the finances, legal proceedings, property, healthcare decisions, and reproductive rights of another willing human. So denying two humans the right to marry is a contract law matter, not a Shari'a law matter.

It's also a good litmus test to tell worthy humans from the ones who suck.

Possible answers:

A. Human A and Human B are getting married? I didn't receive an invitation! Their marriage must be forbidden!

B. Human A and Human B sent me a crappy present when I got married, so their marriage must be forbidden!

C. I'm broke! I can't afford any presents, so all human marriages are forbidden!

D. I just got invited to the wedding of Human A and Human B! Oh wait, their caterer sucks, and they won't have an open bar. All human weddings must therefore be forbidden!

There are just some people who aren't happy unless another group of people are being oppressed. It just makes their pancakes sweeter to be able to view starving Ethiopians while they dine. And to claim that, as good religious persons, it's the will of the divine that some get cream and some get sawdust.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

There are just some people who aren't happy unless another group of people are being oppressed.

This. This right here. I've been saying this since I was a CHILD. It's almost like it's the freaking keystone of human society or something.

[smileyeagle1021]

As someone in this group, I get where you are coming from. I REALLY do, but it's unfair to paint all of us with that brush. I may be Christian but I do NOT hate gays nor do I feel they should be treated as inferior or second class citizens.

He's not saying you do. But, you do benefit from being a white heterosexual Christian. It's never been illegal for you to get married.

KnitShoni hits the nail on the head. I never said that all white heterosexual Christians oppose equal rights for homosexuals. What I was saying is that in the history of our nation it has always been white heterosexual Christians voting on the rights of others. Whether or not those votes have been for better or worse doesn't change the fact that is what has happened. Never has the minority (religious, ethnic, or orientation) voted on the rights of the majority. Though, I do admit I would love to have seen the results of the vote asking the black southerners if they thought whites should be allowed to have slaves.

Even when the majority votes in our favor, it sure would be nice to not have to seek their blessing.

[EmiOfBrie]

This really bothers me. Yes, gays and lesbians can hire attorneys to draw up legal contracts that would give them the same rights as married couples. However, they would have to pay thousands of dollars in legal fees as opposed to the $110 it costs for a marriage license in Minnesota. Fuck you, Gazelka.

It's worse... apparently the amendment is one of those more insane ones that would make such contracts illegal since it would bestow some of the trappings of a 'marriage'.

I'm waiting for the 1st Amendment challenge to this, as since there is no secular reason to disallow gay marriage, therefore such laws are codifying religious doctrine into law, which is Constitutionally forbidden on a Federal level.

[smileyeagle1021]

It's worse... apparently the amendment is one of those more insane ones that would make such contracts illegal since it would bestow some of the trappings of a 'marriage'.

I'm waiting for the 1st Amendment challenge to this, as since there is no secular reason to disallow gay marriage, therefore such laws are codifying religious doctrine into law, which is Constitutionally forbidden on a Federal level.

Utah has such an amendment already in place (but you see it was only about protecting the sanctity of marriage, not about discrimination, yeah right, if it makes the Mormons sleep easier at night not to have to face their ingrained homophobia...)

Sadly though, I am not waiting for the court challenge and pray that it doesn't come too soon. The current SCOTUS is way too conservative and way too friendly to the christian right, a equal rights case going before them before we get more liberals and humanists/secularists on SCOTUS will end in disaster for GLBT citizens (if we truly are citizens after the current SCOTUS is finished with us)

[Daskinor]

I honestly believe that all this recent state legislation is the death knell of Gay discrimination. The people currently in power know that they are the last generation with enough homosexual hate in them to do something about it.

And they have to do it in such a way that they don't ruin it for everyone. If any hetro-only marriage laws hit the supreme court. They will have to show its does not violate the "equal protection under law" clause of the 14th amendment. And that wont be easy.