| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/14/2010 08:30:02 PM · #5026 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
An interesting post, Bear. I had previously emailed Deb and told her that a battle had already been fought and lost with the onset of "no-fault" divorce. Walker is an insightful person.
It all makes me ask two questions to myself. First, if we have no-fault divorce, what IS the marriage contract? Why even have it at all? A contract usually spells out the obligations each party carries. If one party is free to walk away for any reason, what is the point?
Second, could it be that progressives look at a situation and ask "What can be gained?" while conservatives look and ask "What can be lost?" No-fault divorce supposedly allowed a gained freedom from specific gender roles (though I don't quite understand this argument), but the cost was high by evicerating the security of what it meant to be married. |
It's not so much about being free to walk away, but being allowed by law to do so. I was not able to divorce my first wife until no-fault divorce became legal in Pennsylvania. She told me when I asked that she would never agree to it. It was only because it passed, and the separation stipulation was met that I was able to get a divorce. The conditions of a marriage contract are not always clear. Mental cruelty is a tough thing to prove, but even tougher to live with..... |
|
|
|
10/01/2010 10:30:42 AM · #5027 |
Judge who overturned Prop 8 quitting
Originally posted by The Article:
The change could create huge new possibilities should the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the Prop 8 case now is pending, return any or all of the case to the lower court for further action, which is not unusual for the much-overturned appellate district. |
|
|
|
|
10/01/2010 12:25:17 PM · #5028 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Judge who overturned Prop 8 quitting
Originally posted by The Article:
The change could create huge new possibilities should the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the Prop 8 case now is pending, return any or all of the case to the lower court for further action, which is not unusual for the much-overturned appellate district. |
|
Why would anyone even read that website? It's like the Weekly World News. |
|
|
|
10/01/2010 09:19:52 PM · #5029 |
Good gravy. It never ends.
Notice the second photograph in that article. Click on it. Read the caption.
"Same-Sex Marriage Supporters In California Celebrate After Judge's Ruling"
Yeah... a picture of the Sisters Of Perpetual Indulgence is TOTALLY representative of equal marriage rights supporters. It's not factually wrong as far as I can tell (besides their completely non-celebratory demeanor) but it's certainly NOT representative. Yet they use it anyway. It's like using pictures of Cirque Du Soleil gymnasts to illustrate 'French Canadians'.
So, photographers... what do you think of this usage? Is it fair? Is it using photography to paint an unflattering image of a group some want to vilify? What, exactly, can be inferred from the author's choice of picture?
Personally, I'm sure it was just a random, innocent, completely well-intentioned choice of photos. Right.
Call me cynical, but this is the kind of purposeful misrepresentation that gets kids killed.
-----
Also, I wonder why the fat, mannish lesbians make the front page, and all the hottie dykes are buried in the slideshow. Coincidence? I think not.
Message edited by author 2010-10-01 22:26:30. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 08:09:22 PM · #5030 |
 Mousie - it isn't worth discussing this piece of trash writing. It just gives it more readership. Yeah, even I glanced at it, wondering what all the fuss was about. And fuss it was.
Mousie, save your energy for those who can learn from it.
These trash-writers exist only to exemplify their own ignorance.
Yes, you are right. It never ends. |
|
|
|
10/08/2010 05:26:27 AM · #5031 |
I don't mind what people prefer when having sex (as long as both or all parts agree of course) and I think that love is so great, so important, so wonderful that it's a pity to punish people not allowing them a legal union.
In Spain it's legal, the only point and maybe the only truly controversial one has been the name "matrimonio" (that is "marriage"), the word has latin origin matrem monium, and matrem (mater) is related to mother, so people with strong catholic beliefs have hit the ceiling.
Personally I like the word "union", at least in spanish as I don't know if there are other ideas associated in english.
I'm pro marriage, no matter the sex, the colour of the skin, the nationality.
I married 12 years ago in the chapel of the cathedral of Santander, under the catholic rite, it was a very emotive day, feelings were so intense...
I wish everybody could enjoy such a great day and share a lifetime full of love.
Message edited by author 2010-10-08 23:08:20. |
|
|
|
10/08/2010 07:04:17 PM · #5032 |
Originally posted by Mambe:
I don't mind what people prefer when having sex (as long as both or all parts agree of course) and I think that love is so great, so important, so wonderful that it's a pity to punish people not allowing them a legal union.
In Spain it's legal, the only point and maybe the only truly controversial one has been the name "matrimonio" (that is "marriage"), the word has latin origin matrem monium, and matrem (mater) is related to mother, so people with strong catholic beliefs have hit the ceiling.
Personally I like the word "union", at least in spanish as I don't know if there are other ideas associated in english.
I'm pro marriage, no matter the sex, the colour of the skin, the nationality.
I married 12 years ago in the chapel of the cathedral of Santander, under the catholic rite, it was a very emotive day, feeling were so intense...
I wish everybody could enjoy such a great day and share a lifetime full of love. |
Me too, Mambe, me too.
I truly believe it's up to people like you to work with your peers to help them understand the importance of the values that you hold, and that I share. Celebrate love. |
|
|
|
10/12/2010 04:31:51 PM · #5033 |
OkCupid has been doing some interesting data mining on it's users, first brought to my attention with their post about the "'Real' stuff white people like" (as opposed to the comedic 'Stuff white people like' website). Now they've released a post on 'Gay Sex V. Straight Sex' that I found really interesting. I know you can say anything you want with statistics and charts, and there's a couple places where I think he's wildly overstepping (see: comments on Canadian demographics paired with an incredibly low fidelity map), but on the whole its conclusions seem quite reasonable for an amusing, non-scientific read. :)
Since many of the 'myths debunked' in the post are the sorts of things brought up when legislating gay rights, do you think that the increased transparency of the internet age will start changing people minds, as they see more and more of these sorts of analyses?
|
|
|
|
10/12/2010 07:41:44 PM · #5034 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
OkCupid has been doing some interesting data mining on it's users, first brought to my attention with their post about the "'Real' stuff white people like" (as opposed to the comedic 'Stuff white people like' website). Now they've released a post on 'Gay Sex V. Straight Sex' that I found really interesting. I know you can say anything you want with statistics and charts, and there's a couple places where I think he's wildly overstepping (see: comments on Canadian demographics paired with an incredibly low fidelity map), but on the whole its conclusions seem quite reasonable for an amusing, non-scientific read. :)
Since many of the 'myths debunked' in the post are the sorts of things brought up when legislating gay rights, do you think that the increased transparency of the internet age will start changing people minds, as they see more and more of these sorts of analyses? |
That was an interesting read from okCupid. I think to answer your ultimate question, those who want to find balanced information have always been able to do so and will always do so. The internet simply makes it easier. Those who want to rely on myths, stereotypes and fears will equally continue to do so, because even in the face of the cold hard facts, they are unwilling to change their own prejudices. |
|
|
|
10/12/2010 07:49:27 PM · #5035 |
Originally posted by frisca:
...those who want to find balanced information have always been able to do so and will always do so. The internet simply makes it easier. Those who want to rely on myths, stereotypes and fears will equally continue to do so, because even in the face of the cold hard facts, they are unwilling to change their own prejudices. |
Translation: no. |
|
|
|
10/12/2010 08:01:07 PM · #5036 |
Originally posted by frisca:
...those who want to find balanced information have always been able to do so and will always do so. The internet simply makes it easier. Those who want to rely on myths, stereotypes and fears will equally continue to do so, because even in the face of the cold hard facts, they are unwilling to change their own prejudices. |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Translation: no. |
Unfortunately, with sites such as Wiki, where you can insert your own facts, it's that much easier, if you're web savvy at all, to support whatever hairball idea you may have.
|
|
|
|
10/12/2010 08:06:56 PM · #5037 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by frisca:
...those who want to find balanced information have always been able to do so and will always do so. The internet simply makes it easier. Those who want to rely on myths, stereotypes and fears will equally continue to do so, because even in the face of the cold hard facts, they are unwilling to change their own prejudices. |
Translation: no. |
Well that's a bummer.
Good news though, a second federal judge just ruled DADT unconstitutional on multiple counts!
Judge Orders "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Injunction
"A federal judge issued a worldwide injunction Tuesday stopping enforcement of the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy, ending the military's 17-year-old ban on openly gay troops."
You would think that if you can tell someone to work in the direct line of fire, you could tell them to work next to a homosexual. Bullets undeniably impair a unit's effectiveness.
|
|
|
|
10/13/2010 12:14:54 AM · #5038 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
You would think that if you can tell someone to work in the direct line of fire, you could tell them to work next to a homosexual. Bullets undeniably impair a unit's effectiveness. |
Hey, now we can point out that we'll be shooting OPENLY GAY bullets at the Taliban -- that should demoralize them no end ... ;-) |
|
|
|
10/13/2010 03:32:51 PM · #5039 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Mousie:
You would think that if you can tell someone to work in the direct line of fire, you could tell them to work next to a homosexual. Bullets undeniably impair a unit's effectiveness. |
Hey, now we can point out that we'll be shooting OPENLY GAY bullets at the Taliban -- that should demoralize them no end ... ;-) |
Yeah, I've thought about that... what better way to demoralize a fighting force who's culture is steeped in macho honor and saving face?
"You just got your asses kicked by a bunch of homosexuals."
Use their intolerance and irrational shame against them, I say. |
|
|
|
10/14/2010 10:14:06 AM · #5040 |
Are gay rights evolving?
From what I've been seeing in the news lately, the answer is a big fat NO (in the US). Anywhere else the answer would be yes. |
|
|
|
10/14/2010 10:39:27 AM · #5041 |
Originally posted by Jac:
Are gay rights evolving?
From what I've been seeing in the news lately, the answer is a big fat NO (in the US). Anywhere else the answer would be yes. |
I beg to differ. |
|
|
|
10/18/2010 10:20:13 AM · #5042 |
|
|
|
10/18/2010 10:41:05 AM · #5043 |
|
|
|
10/18/2010 12:40:29 PM · #5044 |
You know, it has lately occurred to me that "don't ask, don't tell" is actually the perfect policy for the military -- if only it were applied equally to all personnel across the board.
Imagine, an entire army where no one talks about or has sex, or a navy with no need for shore leave ... |
|
|
|
10/18/2010 03:00:58 PM · #5045 |
Clearly video games are to blame... :D |
|
|
|
10/18/2010 04:32:56 PM · #5046 |
I would have complained too. I'm all for equal rights for everyone but don't force me to participate in gay parades to make you look good (San Diego).
I wouldn't qualify this as anti-gay activity. |
|
|
|
10/18/2010 04:47:49 PM · #5047 |
This is the story that made me post my NO answer in this thread.
Your country is being overtaken by a bunch of racist, homophobic, religious zealots and what scares me the most is that NOTHING is being done about it by the elected officials. Are they afraid to side with homosexuals because they fear they'll get less votes? If so then they do not belong in public office. Your country is becoming a Middle East cesspool with the exact same values (no gays, no tolerance towards other religions, no tolerance towards others, period) and it's scary as heck to live 40 miles from your border. I'm more afraid of what the US is becoming than a nuke being exploded in Manhattan and the fallout that can reach my city.
It isn't elected officials who are going to change your country, it's you, The People, and so far I see nothing being done. It's as if you're all for the change that's sweeping your country. Prove me wrong.
Clive, I know you're British and I wasn't pointing the finger at you. :)
From that article.
Bounville has a simple thought when he hears statements such as those made by Paladino. "People like him are the new Ku Klux Klan," he said.
For how many years did the KKK do what they wanted to do without reprisal? Are we going through this shit again with gays? I think so.
Message edited by author 2010-10-18 16:52:43. |
|
|
|
10/18/2010 05:02:08 PM · #5048 |
Originally posted by Jac:
Your country is becoming a Middle East cesspool with the exact same values (no gays, no tolerance towards other religions, no tolerance towards others, period) and it's scary as heck to live 40 miles from your border. |
 
Message edited by author 2010-10-18 17:02:44. |
|
|
|
10/18/2010 06:47:08 PM · #5049 |
Good for them! That a firefighter was forced to participate in any parade that goes against their morality is insane. Participation in an event like that is an endorsement. Forced to show up to a parade and put it out if it's on fire, yes... but participate? No freakin' way.
And no, not that kind of 'on fire' even though it was a pride parade, thanks.
So, good for the courts! Score one for civil liberties! Everyone wins!
But interesting that particular link should get shared... I think it's a pretty awesome example of someone stirring the pot with a slippery-slope-implying gay-agenda-intimating non-sequitur. The link has nothing to do with gay rights... I'm assuming the firemen aren't... ah... gay? It would be the same ruling (I hope!) if the firemen were forced to participate in a wet t-shirt contest on Spring Break, or a Westboro Baptist Church funeral protest.
I'm on the fence whether firemen should be forced to put out folks from Westboro, should they happen to be on fire.
In any case, isn't it the presumably straight fire station management at fault here? The *parade* didn't lose the court case. Is the implication that the parade staff is somehow controlling the fire station? Oh those crafty gays, always plucking at the strings of power! Really, this has nothing to do with gay rights. Nullix? Why'd you even post it?
But that's not even why I'm commenting! Haha!
I draw your attention to article comment number two (it almost never takes more than two!):
"JMJ Praise the Lord! Some sanity from a court in the land of fruits and nuts! Let's all thank the Lord for the Alliance Defense Fund and Thomas More Law Center by sending them a donation. This whole thing is very simple: Homosexuality and homosexuals are sterile, they need to force people to be involved in their foul ctivities to make it look like their behavior is acceptable. We will win this war because we have Resources the libs/lefties cannot imagine."
Okay faithful, go denounce your peers! The ones who derogatorily declare literal WAR on us for FORCING people to be gay. Go comment! Go tell them that, as a Christian, they aren't being very Christian, that it's just about the definition of a word and serving openly in the military.
Good luck with that. Definition of a word my ass.
Your peers want us eliminated without even understanding where we come from. AKA your loins.
And you squabble over words.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2010 06:53:32 PM · #5050 |
|
