Don't Ask, Don't Tell Deemed Unconstitutional

jplanet wrote: Epignosis wrote: I'm just one fellow.  When Bush got elected over Gore I was 18 and more concerned with about a hundred other things instead of politics.  My opinion of judicial power has been taking shape over the past year or so, and has extremely little to do with their making rulings I disagree with... How do you feel about the ruling that takes limits off of corporate campaign contributions? That was very recent. Epignosis wrote: ... Honestly, I spend very little of my time thinking about gay people. All I ask is that what little time you do think of them, is to think of them as equals. .

Why can't companies do what they want with the money they've earned?  You don't want the government telling you whom you can't marry but it's okay for the government to tell businesses what they can't do with their profits?

Regarding thinking of people as equals, I do that.  To you, probably not equal enough.  But I've discussed my views on this subject before.  I believe marriage is at its essence between one man and one woman and for life, but even more, I don't believe the government should be involved in marriage at all.

Here's a common anti-gays in the military argument:

-Allowing gays to serve openly will hurt troop morale and be a distraction.

Substitute:

-Allowing blacks to serve openly will hurt troop morale and be a distraction.
-Allowing women to serve openly will hurt troop morale and be a distraction.
-Allowing Middle-Easterners to serve openly will hurt troop morale and be a distraction.

There is no getting around it: this is a bullsh*t argument. It doesn't matter if it hurts troop morale: the top brass better goddamn whip the troops into shape better if they're getting pissy about having to get along with their comrades. I'm generally a pro-troop kinda guy, but there's no give on this argument. The military should not pander to prejudice because they're afraid of the specter of "troop morale." You goddamn learn to accept people who are doing nothing wrong, are in no danger of molesting you in your sleep or something, and just want to serve this country. Here's the word for denying them that: SHAMEFUL.

Goddamn right it's unconstitutional.

JLocke wrote: Epignosis wrote:  I believe marriage is at its essence between one man and one woman and for life, but even more, I don't believe the government should be involved in marriage at all. Not to get all patriotic on ya, here, but what you believe and what the constitution states are two very different things. It's equal rights across the board, or it's not freedom at all.  I don't believe in marriage. At this point, I have no plans to ever get married. But as long as people are getting married, the inequalities surrounding it need to go away.

*sigh*

We have equal rights.

A gay man can marry a woman.
A straight man can marry a woman.
A gay man cannot marry a man.
A straight man cannot marry a man.

That's equal.  As I've said before, what is being sought is not equal rights, but more rights.  It's not the same thing as black people not being allowed to vote.

Also, you ignored the latter half of my sentence- that government not be involved in marriage at all.  Every reason I've ever seen people fight for gay marriage would be completely satisfied if my ideal system were in place.

Epignosis wrote: *sigh* We have equal rights. A gay man can marry a woman. A straight man can marry a woman. A gay man cannot marry a man. A straight man cannot marry a man. That's equal. ...

*sigh*

No it's not, that's bigotry.

A straight man or woman can marry who they love.
A gay man or woman cannot.

Epignosis wrote: I'm off to bed, but here's a question: If you support gay marriage, do you support polygamous marriages, group marriages, and/or incestuous marriage?  Why or why not?

Yes.

For the same reasons I support the legalization of drugs. 

If you want me to be more specific, I will do so. But the bottom line is that as long as it doesn't hinder the rights of someone else, a human being should be able to do whatever the hell he wants. If he's a lunatic, put him away. If his desires are dangerous to other people, then he'll obviously be denied. But beyond that, it's nobody's business, especially not the governments, what he does with his life. 

Edited by JLocke - September 11 2010 at 20:02

Epignosis wrote: I'm off to bed, but here's a question: If you support gay marriage, do you support polygamous marriages, group marriages, and/or incestuous marriage?  Why or why not?

I guess. As long as it's not coerced, though that can be hard to tell with weird power relationships in families and cults. The incest thing is kinda icky, but I don't really see any reason why not except our norms tell us itt's kinda icky. it might be a different thing for having kids, with the lessened variation in the gene pool there. I don't know stats about incest, shocking as that might sound.


Edited by stonebeard - September 11 2010 at 20:03

I actually have no problems with polygamy as long as it is a consensual adult arrangement.  Just let women collect as many husbands as they want to and see how popular that becomes amongst those who support men having multiple wives. 

Edited by Slartibartfast - September 11 2010 at 21:45

I can't believe this discussion is still carrying on like this. This should be simple. Epignosis, you in particular hold some repugnant views. 

Sometimes when people say homophobic, I think what is really meant is homo-adverse, (although I guess that isn't really word). There should be a difference between being afraid of something and just plain being adverse to something.
Although the dread of the shower together does sound like irrational fear.
Personally I don't like communal showers with men, gay or otherwise, but it didn't keep me from high school PE class.

Edited by Easy Money - September 11 2010 at 23:22

Harry Hood wrote: This is a great thing the judge has done, a quantum leap forward for gay rights. But what am I going to do when the little man from the draftboard comes to take me away from my loving boyfriend? Clearly, I can't use the "don't take me away from my loving boyfriend" line like i used to. Guess it's time to amputate some toes.

^ Knocking on Joe anyone?