tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post6218427753429072572..comments2024-03-17T08:27:53.658-05:00Comments on Stonekettle Station: Uncivil RighteousnessJim Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11259550121437562338noreply@blogger.comBlogger85125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-77425441182883027222013-06-29T18:14:32.621-05:002013-06-29T18:14:32.621-05:00The problem I have with all of this is that I used...The problem I have with all of this is that I used to know what a word meant and now I don't know because it has had its focus set so broad that it is now meaningless - like folks who feel but do not think. I have one spouse, who's been around for 45 years. We understand one another (mostly) and we know what our relationship is and what it includes - but if our relationship is a marriage, well, I'm not so sure I know what it means now. If you want to call it a civil partnership, then I'm OK, because the contract implied will have stated what the limitations and privileges are.<br /><br />I'm not trying to be contentious - most of the time I can agree pretty easily with your points, although my reasoning is not always the same - but I remember a time (from my Air Force days) when a certain group decided that the only noun that could appear in a sentence was 'change' - and they were spectacularly difficult to understand sometimes. <br /><br />The one I'm waiting for is NAMBLA - because they are sure to stick their oar in to this redefining game - and lots of folks are REAlLY gonna hate that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-14487540608435121052012-12-09T13:49:59.392-06:002012-12-09T13:49:59.392-06:00Heather, I was talking to the people in charge of ...Heather, I was talking to the people in charge of the pro-marriage campaigns at the HRC, who absolutely refuse to turn gay marriage into a civil rights campaign for fear of offending black civil rights activists. The HRC accounts for probably 95% of the funding and political groundwork involved in the pro-marriage movement within the gay community. You are of course correct about them not being *all* pro-marriage activists in the gay marriage community, but they are the people with the money and are the main political force in the pro-marriage campaign.<br /><br />Your accusation of me as being some kind of bigot who hasn't ever encountered gay people, or whatever, is just stupidity. Until you address the fact that the HRC absolutely refuses to couch gay marriage as a fundamental civil right no different from inter-racial marriage (a refusal verified with multiple top people in the HRC), you have not addressed my point.<br />BadTuxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345749557330760251noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-33451826425181563102012-12-08T17:34:30.645-06:002012-12-08T17:34:30.645-06:00I do know this is from quite a while ago too, so m...I do know this is from quite a while ago too, so maybe you've met more people by now. :)Heather Leighhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13154798618976679853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-26296344632406184842012-12-08T17:32:56.422-06:002012-12-08T17:32:56.422-06:00Sorry BadTux, but as a gay womyn for most of my 42...Sorry BadTux, but as a gay womyn for most of my 42 years on this planet, I've known lots of different people and dated a few different kinds of people, including womyn of color...I've even been to P-Town and been totally surrounded by people of all races, genders, colors, & sexual orientations, but I have never, in my life, met anyone that would agree with the statements you made above:<br />"gay right advocates gasp in shock at the very thought that their struggle for civil rights might have some similar to the struggle of black people for civil rights (I wonder -- does the fact that every gay rights advocate that I've ever encountered is *white* have something to do with that reaction on their part?), and black civil rights activists blow several dozen different kinds of fuses at the thought that there might be some discriminated-against minority other than themselves"<br />I won't even start on the Hitler thing.<br />The rest of it was fine.<br />Just my 5 cents. (Inflation don'tchya know) <br />I guess all us gay folks do thank you for your support of our rights though. O.oHeather Leighhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13154798618976679853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-40303509635569872292012-12-08T17:22:06.492-06:002012-12-08T17:22:06.492-06:00Wow. I know this was written a while ago, so all I...Wow. I know this was written a while ago, so all I can hope for is you have met more gays and/or minorities by now than you knew a year ago BadTux, because I've been a gay womyn all my 42 years (which means I know LOTS of gays. Maybe spend some time in P-Town for Womyn's Week, it may help), have dated womyn of color, and known many different people of many different colors, male & female, but I have never...not once...known any one that would agree with any of your statements made above. Just wanted to throw my 5 cents in... Really sorry, but your ignorance was showing. Only trying to help.Heather Leighhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13154798618976679853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-7448918245399227362012-08-22T19:22:54.377-05:002012-08-22T19:22:54.377-05:00neurondoc,
I'm glad you brought this up. I ...neurondoc, <br /><br />I'm glad you brought this up. I was a little sad that Jim didn't quite address this point in his brilliant-as-usual post.<br /><br />Without defending the dog-in-the-manger types who want to reserve marriage unto themselves at the expense of others, they do have something to be concerned about. In a nutshell, they are worried that extending the right of marriage to any old riffraff that comes along will dilute the franchise.<br /><br />Before we jump immediately to whether that is *rational* or not, think about this analogy:<br /><br />In many neighborhoods in the US, if you move into the neighborhood and proceed to neglect your lawn, the neighborhood association will eventually come and mow the lawn for you and bill you for the service. While technically infringing on your right to maintain your property as you please, their reasoning is that your neglected property is reflecting badly on the neighborhood and therefore on them, and may even be lowering the property values and thereby causing real fiscal damage to everyone in the neighborhood. As the individual in question, you have two choices: either submit to the community's standards or else move to some community where your standards are tolerated (or the property values are already low enough that your behavior doesn't matter).<br /><br />Now, it can be said that LGBT (Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender) folks are in general perfectly okay about having other LGBT folks marry and the only people who will feel that the franchise of marriage has been debased are the Dogs-In-The-Manger. However, the opinions of another Manger Dog are really the only ones that matter to a Manger Dog.<br /><br />The crux of the issue is that the Manger Dogs DON'T see LGBT folks as mattering. In the past, they didn't even SEE LGBT folks. Out of sight, mostly out of mind. <br /><br />The Manger Dogs never actually had to confront the idea that they themselves are in any way, shape or form similar to someone who is so nasty, evil and perverted as to be LGBT. However, when they not only move into the neighborhood, but belong to the same institutions (marriage, parenthood) and call themselves by the same names (husband, wife, father, mother) it becomes increasingly hard for a Manger Dog to look in the mirror and not notice similarities.<br /><br />This puts the Manger Dogs on the horns of an emotional dilemma: either they have to admit that they were wrong about LGBT folks being so darned awful (how could they be bad if they're so much like me? I'M not bad) or else they have to recognize their own personal failings and wonder if they aren't themselves, a little bit icky and perverted. <br /><br />In this situation, is it any wonder that avoidance (No! LGBT can't marry! Manger Dogs marry. If the LGBT marry, they share something in common with us and they CAN'T be ANYTHING like us. WE'RE NOT perverts! Marriage is just not applicable to them. It's applicable to… to… Manger Dogs. That's it! You have to be a Manger Dog to be married. Anyone else is just, um… wrong.) is a popular response? Compounding this is the "we were here first, quit forcing yourselves into our sandbox and go play in your own" feeling.<br /><br />So while ETHICALLY, no one should be able to tell anyone else that they can't marry, as a practical matter it's easy to see why Manger Dogs feel like they are the ones who are hurt by LGBT folks pressing to join the club and they are vocally fighting back to protect their right (to not feel inadequate). <br /><br />How does this end? The same way it ended for the Grinch: his nose was rubbed in his failings until his heart "grew three sizes that day" and he was able to take his place as an emotionally responsible member of society.<br /><br />Like the racial bigots before them, the Manger Dogs will have to experience the pain of emotional growth before they will be able to reap the benefits of being part of a larger and more culturally diverse world. In the meantime, everyone else will have to put up with managing the havoc they cause.<br /><br />-- Mack<br /><br />Mack Mackenziehttp://www.facebook.com/mack.mackenzie.1noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-22846247199755009562012-03-10T00:30:20.421-06:002012-03-10T00:30:20.421-06:00True story: my mother is extremely coservative, ...True story: my mother is extremely coservative, however she admits to loving my gay brother in law. I never thought I would I would ever see this in my lifetime. I feel that when the individual is separated from the "group" it is harder to make stereotypes stick and bigoted beliefs don't hold tgether as well.sundaysuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01320570627763923498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-8170078759121597862011-12-16T08:01:22.120-06:002011-12-16T08:01:22.120-06:00LOVE IT, LOVE, IT, LOVE IT!!!! Seriously man, you...LOVE IT, LOVE, IT, LOVE IT!!!! Seriously man, you make point after point! I have told every person I know about Stonekettle Station, because this fulfills a need in my life to find people who think the way I do. <br /><br />I live in the south and most everyone I know is a devout christian and a gun totting republican. Don't get me wrong, I own a gun, but I don't yell out ye-haw.....EVER. Anyways, I just wanted to tell you that my wife and I enjoy your blog immensely and we always look forward to your posts. <br /><br />Thanks!!!Ethan Edgellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-3057261671424225962011-12-13T10:46:22.837-06:002011-12-13T10:46:22.837-06:00"[].. for the last two and a half centuries, ..."[].. for the last two and a half centuries, senators and representatives exactly like Michele Bachmann have used their religion, bigotry, and shameless lust for power to define who exactly gets to be a human being in America and who doesn’t."<br /><br />This leads me directly to the question of why you, Jim, would support such an arrangement with your life, your sacred honor or even your vote; given that we still have to battle this system itself daily, tooth and nail, to get any surcease?<br /><br />Believe me, I'm not being a dick; just trying to figure out why most people[who live within US borders(sic)] support the arrangement, by commission or omission. And no, I don't have an alternative, except that whatever it is would be a hell of a lot more organic in the socio-chemical sense<br />(and by Dog, I do love Heinlein!).<br /><br />Actually, a bunch of anti-government ministers spent some nasty time in pre-revolutionary Pennsylvania jail, because they refused to acknowledge the governments right (sic) to demand that marriage be liscenced (anointed) by the state (and permit fees collected there on). I think they had a point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-89831941430716590032011-12-12T17:41:05.780-06:002011-12-12T17:41:05.780-06:00And frankly, one spouse drives me crazy enough, I ...<i>And frankly, one spouse drives me crazy enough, I sure as hell wouldn't want another one... ;)</i><br /><br />Everybody wants two wives... nobody wants two mothers in law.Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10675280510229786608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-62835429652757188752011-12-12T14:11:38.662-06:002011-12-12T14:11:38.662-06:00To clearly divide church and state when I was wed ...To clearly divide church and state when I was wed my wife and I got married twice.<br /><br />I am an Orthodox Jew (not actively practicing, though). To clearly delineate between the religious institution and the civil contract we had a wedding performed by a female Judge, and then the person who led the formal ceremony was not registered in the state.<br /><br />Neither one is legally recognized by the other, <i>as it should be.</i><br /><br />My wife and I are firm believers of separation of Church and State, and this was a simple, painless, but crystal clear way to show our support for all our gay couples who still can not wed.lonebearhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12565622633536466690noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-20003227173994163392011-12-11T11:57:21.981-06:002011-12-11T11:57:21.981-06:00It seems to me that we are missing the point in th...It seems to me that we are missing the point in the argument about gay marriage being a threat to traditional marriage. (Note: I do not agree with the following line of reasoning, merely doing my best to illuminate the train of thought that leads to this stance.) I don’t think that the people who posit this argument are under any assumption that gay marriage will somehow ruin their marriage. What I think they do believe is that if we allow people to start marrying others of the same sex, future generations will see this as an increasingly attractive option. This will lead to a country full of sexual deviation, a sort of Sodom and Gomorrah writ large across the whole country. Once that happens, God will clearly no longer be on our side and it is only a matter of time before this once great country collapses into a cesspool of sin and iniquity.<br /><br />PS: I have been reading this blog for a few months now without commenting. I just wanted to say I love your writing and your style of argumentation really drives the point home in a way that is difficult to disagree with.xiangtaohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17842662045374809652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-32507991138283495302011-12-11T11:04:04.265-06:002011-12-11T11:04:04.265-06:00Great post....excellent! I really think you speak...Great post....excellent! I really think you speak for a lot of us out here with your writing. I would hazard a guess that a great majority think like this, we are just never the one polled...LOL.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-26941844970437472332011-12-10T20:44:30.349-06:002011-12-10T20:44:30.349-06:00couple of things...
First, Jim, you are my god wh...couple of things...<br /><br />First, Jim, you are my god when it comes to putting complex seeming responces into easy to understand prose. Thanks once again for your post.<br /><br />Second, Canada survived the economic crisis because Canada regulates their banking industry. I tend to use that point when arguing with the idiot right about "free market" and "not too big to fail". While I do get a few chuckles about Canada being a "free marriage" country and not having the issues economically we are, they are not related.<br /><br />Third, the word you should be using (especially in reference to Heinlein) is Polyamory, not polygamy. Polyamory is the state of "loving more than one" and there are well in excess of 100,000 poly relationships in America alone. While they can't get married in the traditional sense, civil unions in many states have resolved the legal issues.<br /><br />Thanks again, Jim.Moorcathttp://www.moorcat.com/roadlesstravelednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-37838790766740178422011-12-10T06:38:33.732-06:002011-12-10T06:38:33.732-06:00Reading all that gave me two thoughts. So, someone...Reading all that gave me two thoughts. So, someone is born a woman and decides later in life to become a man. She goes through all the legal mumbo jumbo and gets her identification changed over to male. Time for the last thing, she gets an operation and is officially legally a male. Who does "he" marry? Say "he" marrys a woman. By law "he" is male. Wait though, "he" was born a she. Do a DNA test and, ta-da, reads female. So "he" can't do that, same sex and according to her not aloud. So "he" marrys a man. Oh, wait, can't do that either. "He" is legally a male, so no-no-no. Seems "he" would be screwed, but she has to give "him" a right to marry. That would be the kicker, either one she approves of could be concidered same sex depending on your view point. So, which one? 2nd question, what if you are born with both sex organs? Either way you go would be same and different sex at the same time. What then? Ok, I know that often one is chosen and the other discarded, or one set works but the other doesn't, but ignore that when you think of it. So according to her not all Americans have the same right, how do you marry the opposite sex if you were born both? If you were born one and became the other, what then? They have a right to marry, but who?<br /><br />Just a thought.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-88924907626485538462011-12-10T00:21:14.516-06:002011-12-10T00:21:14.516-06:00Sadly, that sort of conservatism is pretty much de...<i>Sadly, that sort of conservatism is pretty much dead and gone. Instead we have radicals on the right who want to dictate what happens in the bedroom, wishy-washy do-nothings on the left who don't have a problem with that, and traditional conservatism like Heinlein embodied... eh.</i><br /><br />You're going to love tomorrow's post.Jim Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11259550121437562338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-58083088064829099112011-12-10T00:18:16.592-06:002011-12-10T00:18:16.592-06:00Polygamists do have the right to marry, they just ...<i>Polygamists do have the right to marry, they just have to marry somebody of the opposite sex and only one at a time...</i><br /><br />Quit making fun of Newt Gingrich! <br /><br />(Sorry, couldn't resist ;). <br /><br />One of the things that often confused critics of Robert Heinlein's supposedly "militaristic" views was his rather... free... handling of the whole polygamy thing. In his personal life he was decidedly monogamous -- I doubt Ginny would have put up with anything else, she was made of sterner stuff than that, but given the way he always talked of Ginny (almost worshipfully) it's doubtful he was ever tempted to test that -- but in his novels marriage agreements were loose and free and might be between any number of people of any sexual orientation (though given his generation, he didn't quite "get" some of the new permutations of such that have become common lately). "But... free love... starship storm troopers... does not compute... szzzzzzzzl". But in a sense that was an expression of an old kind of conservatism that doesn't seem around anymore, what I might call "MYOB Conservatism". Not exactly Libertarianism, though with some libertarian tendencies, but more along the lines of, "a strong government for what needs strong government to deal with, and MYOB for everything else." A sort of conservatism that was *not* about dictating who could marry who or what kind of sexual acts they could do in the bedroom. <br /><br />Sadly, that sort of conservatism is pretty much dead and gone. Instead we have radicals on the right who want to dictate what happens in the bedroom, wishy-washy do-nothings on the left who don't have a problem with that, and traditional conservatism like Heinlein embodied... eh. Was a good idea, I guess.<br /><br />- Badtux the Traditionalist PenguinBadTuxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345749557330760251noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-89371606366940298752011-12-09T23:54:27.094-06:002011-12-09T23:54:27.094-06:00Polygamists do have the right to marry, they just ...Polygamists <i>do</i> have the right to marry, they just have to marry somebody of the opposite sex and only one at a time...<br /><br /><br /><br />Sorry, couldn't resist.<br /><br />My personal feelings on polygamy? I don't care. As long as everybody is of legal age, in their right mind, and under their own free will I really don't see what difference it makes or what business it is of mine. <br /><br />Hell, come to think of it, there's even biblical precedent, isn't there?<br /><br />Now that said, I will qualify that answer with this: same-sex marriage requires no changes to existing legal structures or laws (excepting those laws specifically enacted to bar same-sex marriage). <br /> We just have to stop acting like assholes about it.<br /><br />Polygamy would require that serious and complex legal questions be addressed, such as child custody, property ownership, inheritance, beneficiaries, insurance, and so on. All of which could be done, certainly, but would require significant effort and a change of attitude at a number of levels.<br /><br />I will also say that I don't believe the two situations are directly analogous. I don't think same-sex marriage is a special-right, or a "gay-right." I think it's a <i>civil right</i>. <br /><br />I'm not sure polygamy is - I'm not sure that it's not, but I note that there aren't a lot of people at the moment demanding the right to marry multiple partners either. That could change in the future. Until then, I reserve judgement.<br /><br />And frankly, <i>one</i> spouse drives me crazy enough, I sure as hell wouldn't want another one... ;)Jim Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11259550121437562338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-30620060750224370972011-12-09T22:42:44.550-06:002011-12-09T22:42:44.550-06:00Question: let's presume the LGBT lobby wins ou...Question: let's presume the LGBT lobby wins out, and homosexuals are indeed accorded the same right to marry the person they love. The way things are going, the only conjecture about this is "when?" not "if?"<br /><br />Cannot the same cogent argument that you just posted be used by polygamists?<br /><br />What's YOUR feeling on the rights of polygamists to marry the oneS they love?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-34225256630659706262011-12-09T21:48:25.641-06:002011-12-09T21:48:25.641-06:00I don't think anybody, not even Jim (long may ...I don't think anybody, not even Jim (long may he wave!) has explicitly remarked on the inherent contradiction of Bachmann's pronouncement:<br /><br />BACHMANN: No, I said that there are no special rights for people based upon your sex practices. There's no special rights based upon what you do in your sex life.<br /><br />But that's EXACTLY what she's saying. If you and your loved one engage in only hetero sex, you can get married. That's a special right based on your sexual practices.<br /><br />And the whole "if gays can marry, then people can marry their dog and their tractor" argument is just like saying that if we allow people to eat meat, then next thing you know we'll have cannibals chasing you and your kids down the streets with forks and steak sauce. Same stupid argument.<br /><br />I challenged a fundamentalist once to go find the Bible verse where Jesus condemned homosexuals. Neither of us had a Bible on us at the time or I could have shown her, especially promptly in the red-letter edition, that there is no such verse. What Jesus did condemn-- repeatedly-- was being rich, but those verses have been torn out. He also said that divorce and remarriage was the same as adultery, which the Ten Commandments was rather down on, but that's been torn out too. Ron and Nancy Reagan were both divorced, and they were the right wing's darlings until they got too damn liberal and socialist for the looneys in charge of the GOP now. And Newt's okay with them because he's been "forgiven." Isn't that nice?<br /><br />A slight majority of Americans-- especially young people-- now believe that same-sex marriage should be legal, and the percentage is increasing all the time. That is one of the few things that give me hope for this benighted country.<br /><br />I copied a photo off the internet somewhere that shows a couple of young women in nice dresses and a middle-aged man and woman, all with big smiles and their arms around each other. The man is holding a sign that says, "We love our daughter and her new wife." When I'm fed up, I look at that picture, and it makes me feel better about humans.Tina Rheanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-34015942668245142762011-12-09T20:03:52.125-06:002011-12-09T20:03:52.125-06:00and we couldn't even get him to come that far ...<i>and we couldn't even get him to come that far for a beer</i><br /><br />Yeah. There's a little more to that storyJim Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11259550121437562338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-69960225620908649472011-12-09T19:20:17.275-06:002011-12-09T19:20:17.275-06:00fng, we Ohioans have no worries about Jim collecti...fng, we Ohioans have no worries about Jim collecting on those drinks, heck, this summer 4 of his fans, including the one right above (Jane) were in Anchorage and we couldn't even get him to come that far for a beer. I wish he would come collect some, I feel like he's doing all the giving, Maybe it's time to buy another bird house.Stuartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-29767259504787966082011-12-09T18:37:54.395-06:002011-12-09T18:37:54.395-06:00Thank you, thank you! As usual you have crystaliz...Thank you, thank you! As usual you have crystalized so many of the thoughts and arguments that have been trying to organize themselves in my brain. I can try to refute and dispute the anti-gay sentiments I hear but you do it so much better. Now I can just copy and paste your blog's address and let them read it.Janenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-37082896585848533522011-12-09T02:05:17.397-06:002011-12-09T02:05:17.397-06:00I know you have probably 40 comments like this, bu...I know you have probably 40 comments like this, but I love you and you rock so very much. Preach it, Warrant.anissa_royhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03894777903420200863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-69331205739486162362011-12-08T23:08:39.206-06:002011-12-08T23:08:39.206-06:00I hope you won't mind, but I'm going to fo...I hope you won't mind, but I'm going to forward a link to your post to the Pastor of my church. I think he and his (male) partner of 25 years will very much enjoy reading it.Nick from the O.C.noreply@blogger.com