(no subject)
San Diego is joining San Fran in the lawsuit against Prop 8. *dances!* And in going through pictures (see link in last post), I saw this sign that I love: "Would Jesus discriminate?" Ah, yeah. Why do I think churches forget that part?
Also, saw the Salt Lake city hall--which I recognized from Ki's pics--and Madison, WI city hall--which I was like, "Hey! I've been there with maelie!" They were all labeled, but it's fun to actually recognize it, too. :D
Other funny signs: "A gay marriage is just as important as my first, second, and third straight marriage!" *falls over laughing* Mr. Straight Man, I love you.
Other great signs: "Some of my best friends are Mormons," which makes me laugh in two ways. One, because I like to see people realizing that we have Mormon (and Catholic) allies, too, and two, because it just echoes right back to "I'm not a bigot! Some of my best friends are gay/black!" *falls over laughing*
Something I read recently, which I actually thought was rather sad, was that the Catholic and Mormon churches came together and stopped being anti-each other in San Fran to pass 8. Now, while I would have preferred they come together for a different reason, it's awesome that they came together at all. What makes me sad is that while the Catholic Bishop was saying he hoped this would heal rifts, the Mormon... uh, I'm not sure what the title would be. Sorry. >.> Anyway, he was saying they still wanted nothing to do with other religions. I thought that was sad--if you can't reach out to the people you kind of agree with, how are you supposed to take your lead from Jesus and reach out to everyone?
And a reader, here:
As a straight man, and a lifelong Republican (until the Palin pick), I was rare company at the DC Prop. 8 protest. I went because discriminating against homosexual marriages isn't just wrong, it's ridiculous.
Walking through the crowd in front of the US Capitol, I was nearly moved to tears. To look into the faces of so many people and realizing that their lives felt incomplete, that they were told by our government and by many in our society that they are somehow less than human, that they do not deserve the same rights as everyone else, was nothing short of depressing.
This was my first protest march ever; yet, through the cold rain of a November Saturday, for far longer than I'd walk on any other day, in the company of people with little in common with me, I felt completely fulfilled. The protesters felt like family. (taken from Andrew Sullivan, again. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/)
It's interesting to me how right the media was, when it said Prop 8 was going to be a big deal thing, that other states were watching to see how California handled it, that if it passed here it would make a difference for everyone else. They were just wrong in how that difference would be made, I think. Over and over they said that if it passed here, other states would pass similar laws. Instead, the nation is rallying. It did make a huge difference--a difference that wouldn't have been made, had Prop 8 been defeated. If it had been defeated, then we would have celebrated, other states would have said, "maybe we can, too," and, hey, maybe the religious right would have rallied. Instead, it was passed, and there's now this huge movement nation-wide to push for equal rights for all, and to stop discrimination. This is perfect. And it wouldn't have happened if Prop 8 had been defeated. (It helps that FL and AZ and... somewhere else >.> passed discriminatory laws, too.)
I think the Cali Supreme Court will likely overturn Prop 8 on equality issues. Not all states can do that--our Cali Constitution is different than others, and there's some wordage going on that will greatly help this lawsuit. (Specifically, that it says all people get equal rights, it labels marriage a 'right,' and it protects minorities. In the earlier overturn this year, homosexuals were named a minority. So we've got the 'equal rights' thing on our side, and the 'minority protection' on our side, and the fact that a right, marriage, has been revoked, on our side.) BUT, even if it doesn't get overturned now, if we have to wait until the next election... I'm still glad Prop 8 passed. It got the whole US realizing that we're discriminating, and that's not okay.
Go us. *grins*
As an aside, someone asked me once how to tell if it's discrimination. There are two points of reference I use: will it create victims? If the answer is no, then I move on to, "replace whatever group you're unsure about with 'black people.' We're more sensitized to what discriminates against black people: if thinking this makes you tense, it's discrimination." So, is saying gays can't marry discrimination? 1. Will it create a victim? No. No one will be victimized by someone else getting married. 2. If you replace 'black...' 'Black people cannot marry.' Oh, yeah. That's just racist, right? Right. (Note: this doesn't mean we don't discriminate against black people. It just means we've been better trained to be twitchy when someone points it out blatantly. I'm sure there are subtle questions you could ask that would be discriminatory that wouldn't give you the same reaction. But the BIG ones, at least, this works for.) (Note two: The reason I use blacks rather than latinos or women is because there's--at least here--more socially acceptable discrimination against latinos and women. You can say, "It's wrong to pay a black person less than a white person, right?" and people say, "YES!" And then say, "It's wrong to pay a woman less than a man, right?" and people say, "well... she might take time off for kids..." Which might be true--if she has kids and if she's the primary caregiver and if her husband doesn't help, so basically if she's in a bad situation all around--but doesn't change the fact that it's wrong.)
That was a long aside. >.> Anyway, yeah, that's my two rule theory. The victim part is important in arguments like, "letting gay people marry will lead to letting adults marry children!" No, that creates a victim--the child. Saying no to THAT is not discriminatory. Actually, technically, it is, but it's the good kind. ;-D
J
Also, saw the Salt Lake city hall--which I recognized from Ki's pics--and Madison, WI city hall--which I was like, "Hey! I've been there with maelie!" They were all labeled, but it's fun to actually recognize it, too. :D
Other funny signs: "A gay marriage is just as important as my first, second, and third straight marriage!" *falls over laughing* Mr. Straight Man, I love you.
Other great signs: "Some of my best friends are Mormons," which makes me laugh in two ways. One, because I like to see people realizing that we have Mormon (and Catholic) allies, too, and two, because it just echoes right back to "I'm not a bigot! Some of my best friends are gay/black!" *falls over laughing*
Something I read recently, which I actually thought was rather sad, was that the Catholic and Mormon churches came together and stopped being anti-each other in San Fran to pass 8. Now, while I would have preferred they come together for a different reason, it's awesome that they came together at all. What makes me sad is that while the Catholic Bishop was saying he hoped this would heal rifts, the Mormon... uh, I'm not sure what the title would be. Sorry. >.> Anyway, he was saying they still wanted nothing to do with other religions. I thought that was sad--if you can't reach out to the people you kind of agree with, how are you supposed to take your lead from Jesus and reach out to everyone?
And a reader, here:
As a straight man, and a lifelong Republican (until the Palin pick), I was rare company at the DC Prop. 8 protest. I went because discriminating against homosexual marriages isn't just wrong, it's ridiculous.
Walking through the crowd in front of the US Capitol, I was nearly moved to tears. To look into the faces of so many people and realizing that their lives felt incomplete, that they were told by our government and by many in our society that they are somehow less than human, that they do not deserve the same rights as everyone else, was nothing short of depressing.
This was my first protest march ever; yet, through the cold rain of a November Saturday, for far longer than I'd walk on any other day, in the company of people with little in common with me, I felt completely fulfilled. The protesters felt like family. (taken from Andrew Sullivan, again. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/)
It's interesting to me how right the media was, when it said Prop 8 was going to be a big deal thing, that other states were watching to see how California handled it, that if it passed here it would make a difference for everyone else. They were just wrong in how that difference would be made, I think. Over and over they said that if it passed here, other states would pass similar laws. Instead, the nation is rallying. It did make a huge difference--a difference that wouldn't have been made, had Prop 8 been defeated. If it had been defeated, then we would have celebrated, other states would have said, "maybe we can, too," and, hey, maybe the religious right would have rallied. Instead, it was passed, and there's now this huge movement nation-wide to push for equal rights for all, and to stop discrimination. This is perfect. And it wouldn't have happened if Prop 8 had been defeated. (It helps that FL and AZ and... somewhere else >.> passed discriminatory laws, too.)
I think the Cali Supreme Court will likely overturn Prop 8 on equality issues. Not all states can do that--our Cali Constitution is different than others, and there's some wordage going on that will greatly help this lawsuit. (Specifically, that it says all people get equal rights, it labels marriage a 'right,' and it protects minorities. In the earlier overturn this year, homosexuals were named a minority. So we've got the 'equal rights' thing on our side, and the 'minority protection' on our side, and the fact that a right, marriage, has been revoked, on our side.) BUT, even if it doesn't get overturned now, if we have to wait until the next election... I'm still glad Prop 8 passed. It got the whole US realizing that we're discriminating, and that's not okay.
Go us. *grins*
As an aside, someone asked me once how to tell if it's discrimination. There are two points of reference I use: will it create victims? If the answer is no, then I move on to, "replace whatever group you're unsure about with 'black people.' We're more sensitized to what discriminates against black people: if thinking this makes you tense, it's discrimination." So, is saying gays can't marry discrimination? 1. Will it create a victim? No. No one will be victimized by someone else getting married. 2. If you replace 'black...' 'Black people cannot marry.' Oh, yeah. That's just racist, right? Right. (Note: this doesn't mean we don't discriminate against black people. It just means we've been better trained to be twitchy when someone points it out blatantly. I'm sure there are subtle questions you could ask that would be discriminatory that wouldn't give you the same reaction. But the BIG ones, at least, this works for.) (Note two: The reason I use blacks rather than latinos or women is because there's--at least here--more socially acceptable discrimination against latinos and women. You can say, "It's wrong to pay a black person less than a white person, right?" and people say, "YES!" And then say, "It's wrong to pay a woman less than a man, right?" and people say, "well... she might take time off for kids..." Which might be true--if she has kids and if she's the primary caregiver and if her husband doesn't help, so basically if she's in a bad situation all around--but doesn't change the fact that it's wrong.)
That was a long aside. >.> Anyway, yeah, that's my two rule theory. The victim part is important in arguments like, "letting gay people marry will lead to letting adults marry children!" No, that creates a victim--the child. Saying no to THAT is not discriminatory. Actually, technically, it is, but it's the good kind. ;-D
J