Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex couples

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

samusaran253
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 7:46 pm UTC

Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex couples

Postby samusaran253 » Mon May 09, 2011 4:01 pm UTC

Good. Hopefully now the GOP will get with the times and support full rights for human beings.

A survey of more than 1,000 Republicans by Public Policy Polling shows that self-identified members of the party support legal rights for same-sex couples even if they aren’t backing gay marriage.

PPP compiled the results from national polling in March, April and May. The findings come on the heels of four national polls showing the majority of the American public is in support of gay marriage for the first time.

The poll asked Republicans, “Which of the following best describes your opinion on gay marriage: gay couples should be allowed to legally marry, or gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry, or there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship?” Twelve percent said that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry, 39 percent said they should be allowed civil unions, and 48 percent said that gay couples should have no legal rights. That means 51 percent of Republicans polled support relationship rights for same-sex couples.

Eighty-nine percent of liberal Republicans support either gay marriage (48 percent) or civil unions (41 percent). Fifty-seven percent of conservative Republicans said there should be no rights for same-sex couples. Still, 42 percent said there should be civil unions (35 percent) or full marriage (7 percent) for gay couples. That trend was almost identical among those that identify with the tea party.

Young Republicans were much more likely to support rights for same-sex couples. Among 18- to 29-year-olds, 56 percent supported either same-sex marriage or civil unions; among 30- to 45-year-olds, that number was 54 percent; 50 percent for 46- to 65-year-olds, and 48 percent for those over 65.

Read more: http://ainn.ly/kdIIZK

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 4:09 pm UTC

I still don't like this "sure they deserve rights, but I don't want them 'tainting' my idea of what marriage should be" attitude. It's basically still an expression of intolerance. Kind of a "separate but equal" thing.
Last edited by sourmìlk on Mon May 09, 2011 4:24 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Spambot5546
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Spambot5546 » Mon May 09, 2011 4:17 pm UTC

Besides, any republican that supports gay marriage is clearly a republican in name only!

Now please observe as I make a vaguely masturbatory gesture to express my contempt for such logic.
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."

AngelfishTitan
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:47 pm UTC
Location: A different post

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby AngelfishTitan » Mon May 09, 2011 4:39 pm UTC

Unfortunately, I have a feeling that this has more to do with a good chunk of the right leaners who oppose gay rights joining the Tea Party than large imprvement over the past few years. But I can still hope.
Belial wrote:Note: this means you should assume that every post I make has the thrumming, furious power of half a bottle of irish whiskey behind it. Yes, even the ones I make from work. ESPECIALLY the ones I make from work.

User avatar
Obby
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:37 pm UTC
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Obby » Mon May 09, 2011 4:42 pm UTC

AngelfishTitan wrote:Unfortunately, I have a feeling that this has more to do with a good chunk of the right leaners who oppose gay rights joining the Tea Party than large imprvement over the past few years. But I can still hope.


Doubtful:

Eighty-nine percent of liberal Republicans support either gay marriage (48 percent) or civil unions (41 percent). Fifty-seven percent of conservative Republicans said there should be no rights for same-sex couples. Still, 42 percent said there should be civil unions (35 percent) or full marriage (7 percent) for gay couples. That trend was almost identical among those that identify with the tea party.
The story so far:
In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.

Spambot5546
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Spambot5546 » Mon May 09, 2011 5:02 pm UTC

*gets some popcorn and prepares for the fireworks*
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."

AngelfishTitan
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:47 pm UTC
Location: A different post

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby AngelfishTitan » Mon May 09, 2011 5:03 pm UTC

Obby wrote:Doubtful:


Right, but that is a percentage that is not "Republican" anymore. If you lumped the the tea party in with the republicans, would a majority of that combined group still support gay rights? Obviously the Republican party must be a majority conservative leaning (as categorized by the article) for 89 percent of the liberal leaning to support gay rights and only 51 percent of the whole party to support them.

Edit:
kadak wrote:Gay people call for intolerance when they do that pride parade bullshit.


I hope you are not serious
Belial wrote:Note: this means you should assume that every post I make has the thrumming, furious power of half a bottle of irish whiskey behind it. Yes, even the ones I make from work. ESPECIALLY the ones I make from work.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 5:08 pm UTC

Spambot5546 wrote:*gets some popcorn and prepares for the fireworks*

It's okay, we recognize he's trolling.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Czhorat
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Czhorat » Mon May 09, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

That 48% support no rights at all and 39% support civil unions rather than marriage is far from encouraging from where I stand.

I could read this to say that "88% of Republicans oppose same-sex marriage".

AngelfishTitan
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:47 pm UTC
Location: A different post

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby AngelfishTitan » Mon May 09, 2011 5:16 pm UTC

kadak wrote:Because I'm a monster that regenerates damage except from fire and acid and I should go back to medieval times?


FTFY

sourmìlk wrote:It's okay, we recognize he's trolling.
Belial wrote:Note: this means you should assume that every post I make has the thrumming, furious power of half a bottle of irish whiskey behind it. Yes, even the ones I make from work. ESPECIALLY the ones I make from work.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Heisenberg » Mon May 09, 2011 5:16 pm UTC

Twelve percent said that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry, 39 percent said they should be allowed civil unions, and 48 percent said that gay couples should have no legal rights. That means 51 percent of Republicans polled support relationship rights for same-sex couples.

If only the GOP used AV.

User avatar
Aikanaro
Posts: 1801
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:43 pm UTC
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Aikanaro » Mon May 09, 2011 6:06 pm UTC

Heisenberg wrote:
Twelve percent said that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry, 39 percent said they should be allowed civil unions, and 48 percent said that gay couples should have no legal rights. That means 51 percent of Republicans polled support relationship rights for same-sex couples.

If only the GOP used AV.

I recall that term from the other thread, too. What exactly is AV?
Dear xkcd,

On behalf of my religion, I'm sorry so many of us do dumb shit. Please forgive us.

Love, Aikanaro.

User avatar
Cathy
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 5:31 am UTC
Location: TX, USA

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Cathy » Mon May 09, 2011 6:10 pm UTC

AV = Alternative Voting System, or something like that. Rather than FPTP, or First Past the Post.

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2011/04/2 ... eferendum/
I know this is cats, but it actually does a pretty decent job of describing it? I'm sure there's a more official video.

edit for clarity
Amie wrote:Cathy, I now declare you to be an awesome person, by the powers vested in me by nobody, really.
yurell wrote:We need fewer homoeopaths, that way they'll be more potent!

User avatar
Aikanaro
Posts: 1801
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:43 pm UTC
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Aikanaro » Mon May 09, 2011 6:16 pm UTC

Cathy wrote:AV = Alternative Voting System, or something like that. Rather than FPTP, or First Past the Post.

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2011/04/2 ... eferendum/
I know this is cats, but it actually does a pretty decent job of describing it? I'm sure there's a more official video.

edit for clarity

OHHHHH, So it's the LOGICAL thing that I think everyone has had in the back of their minds for ages, that we should have been doing all along! Thanks, I just didn't know that was what it was called! Now I see why it's insane that it got shot down in the UK....
Dear xkcd,

On behalf of my religion, I'm sorry so many of us do dumb shit. Please forgive us.

Love, Aikanaro.

dedwrekka
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:39 am UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby dedwrekka » Mon May 09, 2011 6:23 pm UTC

Czhorat wrote:That 48% support no rights at all and 39% support civil unions rather than marriage is far from encouraging from where I stand.

I could read this to say that "88% of Republicans oppose same-sex marriage".

As long as we continue to fight over the semantics of the law, the first step will never be taken. There hasn't been a shift in granting rights yet that didn't appear gradually or take time to take effect. Take the civil unions, and when they try to stop civil unions from taking place in a church or acting as marriage, hit them with separation of church and state to remove the rights of the politicians from declaring what cannot be considered a "marriage".

AngelfishTitan
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:47 pm UTC
Location: A different post

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby AngelfishTitan » Mon May 09, 2011 6:38 pm UTC

dedwrekka wrote:As long as we continue to fight over the semantics of the law, the first step will never be taken. There hasn't been a shift in granting rights yet that didn't appear gradually or take time to take effect. Take the civil unions, and when they try to stop civil unions from taking place in a church or acting as marriage, hit them with separation of church and state to remove the rights of the politicians from declaring what cannot be considered a "marriage".


I know it is probably not what you meant, but the bolded part is completely allowed with the separation of church and state. Forcing churches to marry homosexuals would actually be against that.

However, the fact that religion is pretty much the only reason there isn't same-sex marriage (or civil unions even) is against it...
Belial wrote:Note: this means you should assume that every post I make has the thrumming, furious power of half a bottle of irish whiskey behind it. Yes, even the ones I make from work. ESPECIALLY the ones I make from work.

dedwrekka
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:39 am UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby dedwrekka » Mon May 09, 2011 6:57 pm UTC

AngelfishTitan wrote:
dedwrekka wrote:As long as we continue to fight over the semantics of the law, the first step will never be taken. There hasn't been a shift in granting rights yet that didn't appear gradually or take time to take effect. Take the civil unions, and when they try to stop civil unions from taking place in a church or acting as marriage, hit them with separation of church and state to remove the rights of the politicians from declaring what cannot be considered a "marriage".


I know it is probably not what you meant, but the bolded part is completely allowed with the separation of church and state. Forcing churches to marry homosexuals would actually be against that.

However, the fact that religion is pretty much the only reason there isn't same-sex marriage (or civil unions even) is against it...


Not forcing it to be done in a church, but allowing churches that do want to marry homosexuals to do so. Currently even if it's done in a church it's not legally recognized. Once there is a legally recognizably homosexual union, then if the government attempts to step in and prevent the churches that are willing to perform the marriage from doing so, they can bring in the separation.

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Tirian » Mon May 09, 2011 7:08 pm UTC

Spambot5546 wrote:Besides, any republican that supports gay marriage is clearly a republican in name only!


In seriousness, the Republicans have always been a fragmented group. While there is a branch of fundamentalist Christians who have a socially conservative bias, there would also be a segment of pragmatic limited government fans who would argue that the state should have no standing to regulate religious ceremonies and hamper small local businesses like florists and jewelers. (I couldn't point to newspaper columns espousing such libertarian viewpoints, but I know I've read them before.) In the middle, you've got probably a large crowd who are more and more getting to know that they know some out gay folk and recognizing that they're normal Americans who deserve equal treatment under the law.

538 once estimated that the percentage of people in favor of same-sex intolerance was shrinking by 2% per year across the board for quite a few years and expected that it would continue at that rate for quite a while into the future. However, I expect that the amount of anti-gay rhetoric to dominate society and particularly the GOP for quite a while longer than that, since the pro-civil union conservatives are generally apathetic on the issue while the homophobes are apoplectic. But it's pleasant to see the tide is continuing to rise.

User avatar
Silknor
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Silknor » Mon May 09, 2011 8:05 pm UTC

AngelfishTitan wrote:Right, but that is a percentage that is not "Republican" anymore. If you lumped the the tea party in with the republicans, would a majority of that combined group still support gay rights? Obviously the Republican party must be a majority conservative leaning (as categorized by the article) for 89 percent of the liberal leaning to support gay rights and only 51 percent of the whole party to support them.


Actually the Tea Party, despite the name, is not a political party. Almost exclusively so far, candidates who identify themselves as "Tea Party" are running as Republicans and are only identifying themselves with a movement. The Tea Party does not have a central organization, candidates, voter registration, etc. As such, when someone says they identify with the Tea Party, it's more analogous with someone identifying as progressive (major candidates who call themselves progressive are almost always Democrats). So it's entirely possible to be a Republican who identifies with the Tea Party, but they're still registered Republicans who would vote in Republican primaries.

No doubt some people who were Republicans in 2008 no longer think of themselves that way and have become independents who identify with the Tea Party. But I'd wager this is not the driving factor behind the story.
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon May 09, 2011 8:13 pm UTC

This is great. At the risk of starting an argument, I think it's perfectly valid to not mandate religions allow gay marriage, but allowing civil unions, assuming civil unions have the exact same legal status as a marriage.

I'd rather not see governments demanding things of religion; I'd rather they basically ignore one another as much as possible.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Spambot5546
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Spambot5546 » Mon May 09, 2011 8:17 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:I'd rather not see governments demanding things of religion; I'd rather they basically ignore one another as much as possible.

This is actually why I'm opposed to a legal recognition of marriage entirely.
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 8:18 pm UTC

Spambot5546 wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:I'd rather not see governments demanding things of religion; I'd rather they basically ignore one another as much as possible.

This is actually why I'm opposed to a legal recognition of marriage entirely.

So, things like hospital visitation rights and the ability to file a joint tax return... you just think those shouldn't be there?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Spambot5546
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Spambot5546 » Mon May 09, 2011 8:22 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Spambot5546 wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:I'd rather not see governments demanding things of religion; I'd rather they basically ignore one another as much as possible.

This is actually why I'm opposed to a legal recognition of marriage entirely.

So, things like hospital visitation rights and the ability to file a joint tax return... you just think those shouldn't be there?

More like I think they shouldn't be forcibly associated with a christian ceremony.
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5098
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Xeio » Mon May 09, 2011 8:26 pm UTC

Spambot5546 wrote:More like I think they shouldn't be forcibly associated with a christian ceremony.
Marriage is a secular legal agreement.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon May 09, 2011 8:26 pm UTC

Spambot5546 wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Spambot5546 wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:I'd rather not see governments demanding things of religion; I'd rather they basically ignore one another as much as possible.

This is actually why I'm opposed to a legal recognition of marriage entirely.

So, things like hospital visitation rights and the ability to file a joint tax return... you just think those shouldn't be there?

More like I think they shouldn't be forcibly associated with a christian ceremony.


Specifically, they should be granted with civil unions, which should be the legal part of a marriage.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 8:27 pm UTC

Spambot5546 wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Spambot5546 wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:I'd rather not see governments demanding things of religion; I'd rather they basically ignore one another as much as possible.

This is actually why I'm opposed to a legal recognition of marriage entirely.

So, things like hospital visitation rights and the ability to file a joint tax return... you just think those shouldn't be there?

More like I think they shouldn't be forcibly associated with a christian ceremony.

And that's what legalizing gay marriage would do: remove that association. If those rights exist, then that's marriage.

Izawwlgood wrote:Specifically, they should be granted with civil unions, which should be the legal part of a marriage


So it's just a renaming thing? What's the point?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon May 09, 2011 8:29 pm UTC

The point is a religion should be able to decide who it wants to include in it's ceremonies, and if a religion doesn't recognize homosexuality, I'd rather not see government make it do so.

Just like the reverse is true; a religion shouldn't be able to tell a government that it cannot allow same sex legal unions.

If you believe in the separation of Church and State, then you should be in favor of this bugaboo.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 8:31 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:The point is a religion should be able to decide who it wants to include in it's ceremonies, and if a religion doesn't recognize homosexuality, I'd rather not see government make it do so.

Just like the reverse is true; a religion shouldn't be able to tell a government that it cannot allow same sex legal unions.

If you believe in the separation of Church and State, then you should be in favor of this bugaboo.


I don't get it: what does any of this have to do with why legal marriage shouldn't exist?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Spambot5546
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Spambot5546 » Mon May 09, 2011 8:35 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:And that's what legalizing gay marriage would do: remove that association. If those rights exist, then that's marriage.

Legalizing gay marriage simply makes marriage rights available to gay people. It doesn't disassociate them from marriage. It's better, but it's not what I consider Ideal. I would still have to be fucking somebody to be allowed to have them visit me in a hospital or file a joint tax return with them. Why can't I do that with my best friend? My sister? Multiple people?
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon May 09, 2011 8:36 pm UTC

Okay, I'll back up to explain it:
The article is about Republicans supporting rights for same sex couples, even if they don't support same sex marriage. Myself and a couple other people said we don't think the government should have any say in marriage rights, because those should be under the purview of religion, which government should keep it's paws off of. However, legally binding unions for the purposes of legal and tax purposes are something the government should allow to anyone who wishes it, man man, woman man, woman woman, she-man and he-woman, undecided and undecided, etc.

A government should not be able to tell a religion what to do, and a religion should not be able to tell a government what to do. I.e., the Fed should not be able to demand Church of the Vengeful Smiting and Burninating Sword of Christ/Allah/Yahweh start letting woman leaders unite same sex couples, and the same organization should have no power over a government allowing a same sex couple live a life with the same legal and financial protections of a 'traditionally married' couple.

Do you see what we're saying? That 'marriage' is a religious process that includes legal benefits, and the religious process should remain a religious process, while the legal benefits should be available to everyone.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3685
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Dark567 » Mon May 09, 2011 8:38 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Spambot5546 wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:I'd rather not see governments demanding things of religion; I'd rather they basically ignore one another as much as possible.

This is actually why I'm opposed to a legal recognition of marriage entirely.

So, things like hospital visitation rights and the ability to file a joint tax return... you just think those shouldn't be there?

I should allow hospital visitation rights to whoever I feel like(my parents, Brother etc.) in written form and have the hospital honor that.

Joint filings are stupid. If you have two people with two incomes, I see no reason you shouldn't have to file twice, or any reason you should get preferable tax treatment to being single.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 8:47 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote: we don't think the government should have any say in marriage rights


Izawwlgood wrote: However, legally binding unions for the purposes of legal and tax purposes are something the government should allow to anyone who wishes it, man man, woman man, woman woman, she-man and he-woman, undecided and undecided, etc.

Those two statements are contradictory. You think that governments shouldn't have a say in marriage rights, but also should grant marriage rights.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon May 09, 2011 8:49 pm UTC

Marriage != Civil Union. Which is why I didn't use the word 'marriage' in the second quote.

Here: Marriage is a religious ceremony that includes with it, the assumption of civil union like status.

Civil Unions are a legally binding, uh, thing, that includes with it no religious connotation.
Last edited by Izawwlgood on Mon May 09, 2011 8:50 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 8:49 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:Marriage != Civil Union. Which is why I didn't use the word 'marriage' in the second quote.

How are they different (legally) in anything other than name?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon May 09, 2011 8:50 pm UTC

I... Said a few times in this discussion. Read back and see for yourself.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5098
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Xeio » Mon May 09, 2011 8:51 pm UTC

Religious marriage =\= Secular Marriage = Civil Union

I assume that's the equality Izawwlgood is advocating? Though I don't see a reason for the name change at all...
Last edited by Xeio on Mon May 09, 2011 8:52 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 8:51 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:I... Said a few times in this discussion. Read back and see for yourself.

No, you haven't. You've talked about religious marriage plenty, but not legal marriage.

Xeio wrote:Religious marriage =\= Secular Marriage = Civil Union


then it is just a naming issue?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Nordic Einar » Mon May 09, 2011 8:53 pm UTC

The word "Marriage" is enshrined in our secular, civil legal code. Abrahamic religions don't own it, and legalizing gay marriage does not require churches to marry gays.

The libertarian thought-exercise of "Lets just remove marriage from the legal code!" is ultimately a bullshit distraction from actualizing equality for LGBT peoples. It isn't going to happen and it's a waste of time to talk about, even if I ultimately agree with it. Marriage is a secular institution, period. It's secular for heterosexuals - who are allowed those SUPER SACRED RELIGIOUS MARRIAGES w/o ever having to consult a priest or ever step foot in a church - so it should be secular for us faggots too.

**EDIT**

Further, it's dangerous because allowing two separate statuses - even with similar or equal legal status - may provide de jure protection against discrimination and allow for equality, but very well may not provide de facto protections. "Marriage" and "Civil Union" are not the same thing, legally, and they won't be without a comprehensive rehauling of existing legal code.
Last edited by Nordic Einar on Mon May 09, 2011 8:55 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon May 09, 2011 8:54 pm UTC

Yeah, basically. Civil union is the word for the legal status traditionally afforded by marriage. Marriage is a religious activity that should be allowed to continue in whatever manner people want it to (religious freedom and all that noise), without excluding the legal benefits from those who aren't religious.
sourmìlk wrote:No, you haven't. You've talked about religious marriage plenty, but not legal marriage.

I'm not sure what your misunderstanding is; I've clearly delineated the difference on I think three occasions now, and described why I think they should remain separate. I have specifically said 'Civil union is the legal status afforded by marriage'.

Would you prefer a Venn Diagram?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Majority of Republicans support rights for same-sex coup

Postby sourmìlk » Mon May 09, 2011 8:55 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:Yeah, basically. Civil union is the word for the legal status traditionally afforded by marriage. Marriage is a religious activity that should be allowed to continue in whatever manner people want it to (religious freedom and all that noise), without excluding the legal benefits from those who aren't religious.


Okay this is wrong. Marriage is both a legal status and a religious status.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ijuin and 10 guests