tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post116828102320785153..comments2023-10-31T05:03:38.910-07:00Comments on Letters from a broad...: Discrimination against homosexuals: why? why? why???C. L. Hansonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-82226788844987142032007-11-09T09:57:00.000-08:002007-11-09T09:57:00.000-08:00Fortunately he hasn't been seen in Outer Blogness ...Fortunately he hasn't been seen in Outer Blogness for some time, so hopefully you're right about him getting treatment... :^)C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-72827042085963931212007-11-09T09:53:00.000-08:002007-11-09T09:53:00.000-08:00Trevor said... Aaaaiiirrrrr baaaaalll !! Aaa...<I>Trevor said...<BR/><BR/> Aaaaiiirrrrr baaaaalll !!<BR/> Aaaaiiirrrrr baaaaalll !!<BR/> Aaaaiiirrrrr baaaaalll !!<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>Been thinking about this one for a while, and have come to the conclusion that it's probably something prompted by the guy's Tourette syndrome: he's announcing that although he IS a pathetic prick, he's also a freak with three inconsequential,useless and utterly irrelevant air balls that are unattached to anything.<BR/><BR/>I hope he's begun getting the medical care he needs, for all his problems.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-14306987127809581132007-11-09T05:54:00.000-08:002007-11-09T05:54:00.000-08:00Hey Holly!!!I agree that improvements in healthcar...Hey Holly!!!<BR/><BR/>I agree that improvements in healthcare and contraception will continue to make marriage less of an obligation and more of a choice, and this is a positive change.C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-4692537821404295382007-11-09T05:28:00.000-08:002007-11-09T05:28:00.000-08:00I'm completely on board with you on this. And I t...I'm completely on board with you on this. And I think that heterosexual marriage will be improved by the participation of gay people in the institution. Though for a variety of reasons, I'm not the biggest fan of marriage--I think providing universal health care, still better contraceptives and so forth so that people have even less incentive to get married unless they REALLY want to spend their lives together is pretty important too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-66178958142220683392007-07-04T09:16:00.000-07:002007-07-04T09:16:00.000-07:00Thanks Eric, and thanks for the link -- it looks i...Thanks Eric, and thanks for the link -- it looks interesting!!!C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-47731048702317917502007-07-03T21:39:00.000-07:002007-07-03T21:39:00.000-07:00Slate Magazine just published an article called "M...<A HREF="http://www.slate.com/" REL="nofollow">Slate Magazine</A> just published an article called <A HREF="http://www.slate.com/id/2169615" REL="nofollow">"Marriage, Trademarked"</A> which looks at this from a refreshing perspective. The author analyzes the "institution" of marriage as an issue of intellectual property, particularly as regards to trademarks and the idea of "tarnishment."<BR/><BR/>Ultimately, of course, this claim is baseless (as the article goes on to demonstrate). Fundamentalists don't have a leg to stand on legally, and the tide of public feeling will (I hope!) sweep away any lingering discriminatory laws.<BR/><BR/>Chanson, I think your observations are right on target. Your point of view is refreshing and helps us get out of the rut of viewing the issue from one angle.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06167372868768877051noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-38959765726110038082007-06-24T04:59:00.000-07:002007-06-24T04:59:00.000-07:00Thanks MoHoHawaii!!!I agree things are going in th...Thanks MoHoHawaii!!!<BR/><BR/>I agree things are going in the right direction at the moment -- the belief that homosexuality is a mental illness and/or a choice is becoming a thing of the past.C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-18726759705052897532007-06-23T17:32:00.000-07:002007-06-23T17:32:00.000-07:00I find it telling that cultures that treat their w...I find it telling that cultures that treat their women like property tend to mistreat their gay people, and vice versa. Did you know, for instance, that they currently execute homosexuals in Iran?<BR/><BR/>Once we in the West figured out that women were people (and this took an awfully long time) we started wondering if gay folks might be too. That's where we are right now. We'll arrive at the logical conclusion soon enough. In one more generation this whole issue will be a historical curiosity in First World societies.<BR/><BR/>P.S. Love your blog.MoHoHawaiihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15086670779804942122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168496940003121292007-01-10T22:29:00.000-08:002007-01-10T22:29:00.000-08:00Hey Sinister Porpoise!!!Exactly -- there's no reas...Hey Sinister Porpoise!!!<BR/><BR/>Exactly -- there's no reason for some to care about other people's personal life choices that don't affect others.C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168496664189508882007-01-10T22:24:00.001-08:002007-01-10T22:24:00.001-08:00Hey Kalvin!!!Sorry, what was your position on the ...Hey Kalvin!!!<BR/><BR/>Sorry, what was your position on the subject again?<BR/><BR/>Hehe, J/K!!! ;-)C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168496653775894162007-01-10T22:24:00.000-08:002007-01-10T22:24:00.000-08:00Er... sorry, it was a Non sequitur, but it is in t...Er... sorry, it was a Non sequitur, but it is in this case because I did not follow the steps necessary to prove a correlation.<BR/><BR/> I am not however, the best advocate for this nor for the other side. I simply don't care what two people decide to do together.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168495668095250992007-01-10T22:07:00.000-08:002007-01-10T22:07:00.000-08:00I agree with the why? why?? why??? of it all. It ...I agree with the why? why?? why??? of it all. It doesn't really make sense, but you probably already know my thoughts on the subject. :PKalv1nhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12105726258904259151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168491581876700552007-01-10T20:59:00.000-08:002007-01-10T20:59:00.000-08:00Thanks Freckle Face Girl, too true!!!Hey Sinister ...Thanks Freckle Face Girl, too true!!!<BR/><BR/>Hey Sinister Porpoise!!!<BR/><BR/>I'm not trying to do social engineering on gay people, I'm just saying that it's contradictory for the traditional moralists to complain about gay promiscuity while actively denying monogamous gay couples the right to marry.<BR/><BR/>Thanks Gluby!!!<BR/><BR/>Very good points, and thanks for the additional historical perspective. I touched on the connection between the birthrate and willingness to go to war in my post <A HREF="http://lfab-uvm.blogspot.com/2006/07/fertility-mortality-or-sex-vs-death.html" REL="nofollow">fertility, mortality</A>.<BR/><BR/>I agree we should be concerned with social justice issues in general.<BR/><BR/>Hey Sideon!!!<BR/><BR/>I understand how you feel about gay people being scapegoated for problems that are everyone's problems.<BR/><BR/>Hey Aerin!!!<BR/><BR/>Thanks for emphasizing this point: it is a civil rights issue.<BR/><BR/>Thanks Tom!!!<BR/><BR/>I like your style too!!! :DC. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168490171585818202007-01-10T20:36:00.000-08:002007-01-10T20:36:00.000-08:00Sinister Porpoise said:"Gay people will have sex. ...Sinister Porpoise said:<BR/>"Gay people will have sex. It seems to me encouraging monogamous relationships would reduce the spread of STDs..."<BR/><BR/>The encouragement of marriage and/or monogomous relationships among heterosexuals hasn't done much, if anything, to slow the spread of STDs in that community. Why do you think it'd be any different in the gay community? It's a red herring anyway.<BR/><BR/>Promoting gay marriage on the basis of any greater good for the world or the communities is beside the point, in my opinion. Equal rights under the law is the essential bottom line of what we're dealing with here.<BR/><BR/>In their ruling regarding gay marriage, the Massachussetts Supreme Court said, "It is unconstitutional to discrimate against a designated class of people." Granting marriage to heterosexuals and denying it to homosexuals is a blatant act of discrimination against a clearly designated class of people. The constituion forbids it.<BR/><BR/>Ultimately the courts will have to sustain gay marriage because it will be proven to be unconstitutional to do otherwise.<BR/><BR/>And that's why so many people want to change the constitution; because they know that sooner or later that's where we're going to end up with all of this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168489106896036192007-01-10T20:18:00.000-08:002007-01-10T20:18:00.000-08:00That was amazing Carol. I've said it before and I'...That was amazing Carol. I've said it before and I'll say it again: I love how your mind works.<BR/><BR/>Preach on sister, the choir is listening!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168484410588374682007-01-10T19:00:00.000-08:002007-01-10T19:00:00.000-08:00It's an issue of basic human rights.A straight cou...It's an issue of basic human rights.<BR/><BR/>A straight couple's marriage is legally recognized by their state or the US gov't. <BR/>That means that they can visit one another in the hospital as close family when ill. Their property is held in common and can go through the divorce process if that should ever happen. Ensuring that both parties are treated equally. Children produced from the union are automatically protected and the other parent has custody. Straight couples get all these protections simply from a marriage license. <BR/><BR/>Gay couples are denied these rights in most US states. If they are able to get some of the protections, it is with great effort and expense (living wills, etc.) It's the same type of discrimination the same as miscegenation laws from earlier in this century - where straight people of different races were not allowed to marry.<BR/><BR/>I have yet to hear a valid argument from anyone (not here, in the outside world) about why this discrimination against gay couples should be allowed to continue. Or why it's good for society as a whole...<BR/><BR/>FYI - I believe currently the highest percentage transmission of STDs (including HIV) in the US is between straight people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168479116827302812007-01-10T17:31:00.000-08:002007-01-10T17:31:00.000-08:00*warning - probable use of graphic language at som...*warning - probable use of graphic language at some point*<BR/><BR/>A quick note to Sinister Porpoise's comment about marriage and disease: I don't think they're related or relevant. <BR/><BR/>The sheer numbers of heterosexuals versus the number of homosexuals, for one, gives heterosexuals them far superior proclivities to spread the wealth called STD's. HIV is not a "gay" disease, if that's what the inference was to, it's a universal tragedy. <BR/><BR/>Two, speaking as a member of the gay community, we're at least upfront and PROUD about being sexually active instead of cheating behind spouses. Granted, there are gays and lesbians who do cheat on their spouses, but that's a subtopic for "bad communication within marital bliss."<BR/><BR/>Three, EVERYBODY wants sex, not just gay people. If people want to lick, finger, suck or fuck, they'd better be responsible about it, which means <B>safe sex</B>. Anything else in this day and age is stupidity or a sub-conscious death-wish.Sideonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00563675498159890372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168472192655332992007-01-10T15:36:00.000-08:002007-01-10T15:36:00.000-08:00Sorry -- two more things.1) Trevor seems to post t...Sorry -- two more things.<BR/><BR/>1) Trevor seems to post that same "air ball" post on lots of exmormon blogs. He also writes things like "LOL! Go back to church where you belong! LOL!" Facetious or not, he seems to be annoying and idiotic. I deleted him off mine.<BR/><BR/>2) The phenomenon you are referring to, M.M.M., has been generally called "pronatalism." Interestingly, opposition to abortion based on claimed humanitarian grounds is a new phenomenon. In the early- and mid-20th century, governments like Mussolini's adopted pronatalism out of a claimed need for more workers and soldiers. Countries like France adopted it out of a fear of "demographic crisis" -- net population loss -- because of decreased birth rates and so forth, that would result in a decline in the nation's status among the Great Powers.<BR/><BR/>It was always about ambition and power. We want you people to <I>breed</I>, because we need to send your children off to war!<BR/><BR/>Pronatalism has been around for thousands of years, but we really see a lot of it in the 20th century. I can't remember, but either fascist Germany or fascist Italy actually gave governmental awards to women who had a certain number of children (something like eight) -- it's been a while since I read about it, so forgive the fuzzy details.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, in the age of mass communication, social reforms and mistrust of government, the whole humanitarian pretense has given pronatalism a legitimizing shot in the arm. And, of course, churches are heavily driving the trend as well. There is no Mormon like a born Mormon -- ah, the beauty of someone who has never known anything you didn't want them to. There are few people so easily controlled.Glubyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09312562242395394531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168471417544668082007-01-10T15:23:00.000-08:002007-01-10T15:23:00.000-08:00Oh, and amen on the call to GLBT allies. Of cours...Oh, and amen on the call to GLBT allies. Of course, I am a grand-scale radical, so I would expand it further to say let us acquire a consciousness of injustice as a whole. Not merely pick and choose based on our personal sympathies, but ally ourselves with the oppressed anywhere and everywhere.Glubyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09312562242395394531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168471101952224232007-01-10T15:18:00.000-08:002007-01-10T15:18:00.000-08:00Excellent post, Chanson.You hit an excellent point...Excellent post, Chanson.<BR/><BR/>You hit an excellent point about the relationship between the rise of divorce, on one hand, and the reform of laws and institutions that had made marriage a trap from which none could escape. Because marriage is not so much an economic survival strategy as it used to be (though it continues to be for many sub-middle-class women), and because of social justice developments, we're seeing the rise of companionate marriages.<BR/><BR/>I remember in my conservative days buying the line that an increased divorce rate represented people's increased selfishness and unwillingness to honor obligations.<BR/><BR/>Here's an interesting fact I learned about: in Iran, only men could file for divorce. Women could not. The divorce rate was very low. When women were granted the right to file for divorce in 1965, the reaction was huge and immediate, and the floodgates were opened. Thousands of divorces were immediately filed in Tehran.<BR/><BR/>Was morality in Tehran ruined? Or did people's suffering in miserable marriages finally find an outlet?<BR/><BR/>It's horrific how conservatives see things like economic assistance to single mothers as corrosive to "the family." Very revealing, really. I mean, if economic desperation is what keeps the family together in your ideal society, perhaps we should be running away from that ideal society as fast as our legs can carry us.<BR/><BR/>But, yes, the way I see things, and this is a common view, is that women for so long were <I>commoditized</I>. Hence the laws and customs you describe. There are many ways in which mainstream conservative society has really not progressed very far from days of slavery and brutality. If these guys had their way, we would truly live in fear.<BR/><BR/>I think you have some good points on the opposition to gays. There's a lot to the issue -- and I am sure that one of the main reasons for religionists' aggressive push on homosexuality and abortion in their modern <I>kulturkampf</I> is because it provides a viscerally-appealing battle cry that rides a wave of ambient bigotry in the populace. These are highly emotional issues that function as hinges by which they can swing the entire citizenry their way.<BR/><BR/>While I'm here, may I recommend two <I>excellent</I> recent books on the subject:<BR/><BR/><I>What's the Matter with Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America</I> by Thomas Frank -- a book that demonstrates horror at the trend but also explains quite well, in my opinion, what is at the heart of modern American working-class ultraconservatism.<BR/><BR/><I>Culture Struggle</I> by Michael Parenti -- same subject matter, to a large degree, but Parenti was never "one of them" and provides a powerful critique. Yes, the reference to the Nazi <I>kulturkampf</I> is deliberate.<BR/><BR/>Cheers et au revoir!Glubyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09312562242395394531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168470034562067632007-01-10T15:00:00.000-08:002007-01-10T15:00:00.000-08:00I thought something along these lines a few days a...I thought something along these lines a few days ago. While I still do not have a very strong opinion in favor for or against gay marriage, I've come out slightly in favor of it. <BR/><BR/> Not because it's a moral issue, but simply because it will decrease the prevalancce of some diseases. Perhaps my reasoning is flawed but I thought back to America's attempt at prohibition which failed miserably. The people wanted alcohol.<BR/><BR/> Gay people will have sex. It seems to me encouraging monogamous relationships would reduce the spread of STDs...<BR/><BR/> Then again, I've just my computer back after 5 days and I'm more excited about being able to use it again than I am in seriously conducting this debate which is at least more entertaining with people who do have strong opinions on the subject carry it out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168463927325962592007-01-10T13:18:00.000-08:002007-01-10T13:18:00.000-08:00Amen Sister c.I. hanson!!! In additon to that, I ...Amen Sister c.I. hanson!!! In additon to that, I would like to add the fact that making gay marriage legal would be a tremendous boost to the economy. Think of the additional ceremonies, cakes, jewelry, flowers, party favors, honeymoons, etc. Then when/if it doesn't work out, lawyers will have more clients. Plus, employees should be able to add their committed partners onto their health insurance if they wish.Freckle Face Girlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13324960438835000817noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168457746023598932007-01-10T11:35:00.000-08:002007-01-10T11:35:00.000-08:00Hey M.M.M.!!!Cool, I heartily encourage additional...Hey M.M.M.!!!<BR/><BR/>Cool, I heartily encourage additional research!!! Be sure to tell me what you find out!!! :DC. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168456134241911832007-01-10T11:08:00.000-08:002007-01-10T11:08:00.000-08:00Hi! Yep I agree the institutions are promoting the...Hi! Yep I agree the institutions are promoting the marriage rules. As I said it's a sub-theory. I'd have to go back and read some Eliade to figure out who I think "invented" the rules hehe. They probably have to do with humanity's dark and pagan past ;P<BR/><BR/>I just got an idea now, I should try to dig out some studies on matriarchal societies. I'll post later if I find any interesting info. :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19053670.post-1168446792643783222007-01-10T08:33:00.000-08:002007-01-10T08:33:00.000-08:00Hey M.M.M.!!!Wow, your theory's even wackier than ...Hey M.M.M.!!!<BR/><BR/>Wow, your theory's even wackier than mine!!!<BR/><BR/>Hehe, just kidding!!! ;-)<BR/><BR/>I essentially agree with you although I'd add the precision that I wouldn't say that the religious and power institutions <I>invented</I> these rule sets. However, those institutions that promote rules favorable to their own reproduction tend to thrive and grow.C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.com