On The Other Hand, My State Government Still Sucks

[filkertom]

Once again, I'm proud of my city. Ann Arbor officially opposes two bills designed to eliminate domestic-partnership benefits in Michigan.

One of the Republican excuses for this crap is that it's a matter of fiscal responsibility. This one is always, always bullshit: A gay couple and a lesbian couple are four people, two male and two female, but they're eligible if they're paired off one way and not eligible if they're paired off another.

I realize that there are a whole bunch of Repubs 'n' such out there terrified by Teh Icky Gay, but... never mind the societal advantages to increasing the number of married couples; never mind the emotional advantages to our fellow humans that arise from being able to share their lives together openly and proudly. I see we have to work as Repubs do, and appeal to their cheap fear.

I can do that.

Repubs, and others who are freaked out in case Takei gets on you: If they're married to each other, they're off the market. Two less who can Takei you up. So, quick, make it more advantageous and easier for them to get married, before they suddenly realize how very sexually attractive you are, and they leap out from such bush and touch you, rendering you helpless and pliant, whimpering all the while as they do whatever it is that they do, you're not sure but it's related to sex and will probably addict you*, MY GOD WE'VE GOT TO MARRY THEM ALL OFF!

* Always weirds me out that the people who hate and fear Takei so much also seem so convinced that it's so good that it'll destroy your previous notions of sexuality.

Comments

[wednes]

People fear Takei?
That makes no sense...unless they too are auditioning to play Spiderman.

[filkertom]

Hey. Dude can be scary. Remember this?

[technoshaman]

ICON LUST! (you're welcome!)

There is, he says from personal experience, something immensely more *satisfying* about chosen-family, no matter who they are, who are there because - and only because - they *want to be*.... meanwhile, blood kin can be a right royal pain in the arse.

I think a whole lot of people are deathly afraid that us freethinkiers might *gasp* be having FUN, and, oh, NOES, we *can't* have *that*.

Fuck. That. Shit.

*hoists the freek flag* I'm a straight guy, but I am chosen-family to quite a few who are not... and I wouldn't have it any other way. My people are smart, funny, and caring; they catch me when I fall and kick my ass when I need it, and with their love they fill my heart and eyes with joy. *blinks* How can I not stand up for them? How - and this is the very first thing I learned - can they not be good people? They are, and I am and I will.

[alverant.livejournal.com]

Whatever happened to the "government should not interfere in business" mantra the GOP keep chanting? They're doing exactly what they accuse Democrats of doing. IOKIYAR strikes again.

Seriously, it looks more and more like the "morality" of conservatives has a built in "except when we do it" clause.

Maybe if Obama spoke out AGAINST equal rights for LGBT Americans, the GOP would be for it just to avoid agreeing with the President.

Oh but they do want the government out of people's lives!

[lizziecrowe.livejournal.com]

Namely, theirs. The rest of us, however, need to have the government shoved so far up our tailpipes that we can't see straight. That way, we never see how badly fucked we are. The government should only ever be allowed to meddle int he things THEY want regulated. Like keeping women in line, keep gays in the closet, and keeping the military at CONSTANT WAR. Because clearly, once you're super rich, you know what's right for everyone beneath you.

Pardon me, I need to go warm up my tank treads. I have a corset for that...

[shockwave77598.livejournal.com]

The logic being that the MM and FF pairings are not currently married. But by giving them the designation, more people would be married, thus the costs would rise. That's the explanation given to the dumbed down citizens.

It's absolute bullshit because if there is a wave of MF marriages, the exact same thing would occur. But one doesn't hear of any cap on the number of marriage licenses to avoid the "economic meltdown".

The only way a gay marriage could destroy my own straight marriage would be if the two beds were really close together. Course, having lived in an apartment with paper walls and a screamer in the next bedroom, another straight marriage with the beds too close causes the exact same problem. (Oh for the... I have work in three hours! Hurry up you two!)

[tcgtrf.livejournal.com]

The government has no business regulating marriage, period, as long as they're consenting adults.

Tom Trumpinski

[fabricdragon.livejournal.com]

like button

[alverant.livejournal.com]

So what about divorce trials, spousal privilege, end of life arrangements, inheritance, etc? Having an official government record of who is married and when is a necessary part of other things the government must do.

[catlin.livejournal.com]

I read a proposal once that took marriage completely out of all this. Instead you had a signed contract granting anyone you chose end of life rights, inheritance etc, rather then the current default to spouce. At that point disolving a relationship would only go to court if property rights were contested (And they almost always are) but that would be a civil case still, and family court would deal with custody.

[alverant.livejournal.com]

Civil and family court are still part of the government. There's also spousal privilege one spouse can't be forced to testify against the other in criminal cases.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Slight rewording, if you don't mind: The government has no business filtering marriage to its approved configuration, period, as long as they're consenting adults.

[fabricdragon.livejournal.com]

i can totally understand not wanting Public Displays of Affection (het or gay)
i can get that certain types of sex squick people out
i can support a right to feel and preach that certain behavior is sinful...

but one basic tenet of america is that as long as you are a responsible adult, you are ALLOWED to do things that risk yourself (like extreme sports, for instance) as long as you dont endager any non consenting people. (ie, keep it away from the mundanes)

so......
legislator/church feels that gay sex is teh evil (ok)
they dont want it done in public (WAY OK)
they dont want "innocent bystanders" endagered by teh gay. (dont see how it works, but ok)

this still doesnt have SHT to do with marriage in the eyes of civil law.
EXCEPT that we have conflated civil "marriage" with religious marriage.

therefore..
all civilly govt recognized marriage must have a "civil union/domestic partnership corporation" paperwork filing. all of them MM, MF, FF, whatever

what any religion recognizes is not a factor.

(and for the record i still dont see why my MF marriage in a church has anything to do with my tax status)

[siliconshaman.livejournal.com]

There's a far amount of evidence to suggest that overt and exaggerated homophobia is actually repressed homosexuality, which would explain why they're afraid that 'The gay' is catching and would convert them...

and yay for Ann Arbour.

[tigertoy.livejournal.com]

To amplify that and entwine it with what Tom said about using conservative's fear against themselves, what we need is to loudly and obnoxiously proclaim that we know that the homophobes who are so afraid of gay marriage are fighting their own homosexual feelings. They're terrified that if they aren't shouting the loudest about how evil gay is, everyone will recognize how gay they really are.

We need to make it clear that WE ALREADY KNOW, you slimy hypocrites. We need to rub their faces in it in a way that all their Republican friends will see and understand, and keep the spotlight on it until they explode or miraculously gain some englightenment from the experience. Either one is fine with me.

Somebody needs to write a good song, with an insidious hook and simple, straightforward, memorable lyrics, produce a slick YouTube video, and have it go viral. Too bad we don't know anyone who's good at writing satirical songs... oh wait. :-)

[rowangolightly.livejournal.com]

*like*

Reminds me of a dear old college buddy who shocked me years ago by saying, "the ones who scream loudest are the very ones who throw their legs up in the air when nobody's looking." And yes, he was speaking from personal experience; he once listed off to me all the homophobic guys he'd proudly buggered.

[aulayan.livejournal.com]

before they suddenly realize how very sexually attractive you are, and they leap out from such bush and touch you, rendering you helpless and pliant, whimpering all the while as they do whatever it is that they do, you're not sure but it's related to sex and will probably addict you*

Given all the scandals that generally hit the Republican party ... This is exactly what they (secretly) want.

[bridgeweaver.livejournal.com]

No guys, you've got it all wrong. The pitch is the number of jobs that would be created in the suddenly revitalized wedding planning industry. Convince them there's a market for the service and that it's possible to screw the little guy while obtaining it, knowing full well that we won't let them do that, and you've got marriage through the state legislature and signed in (pardon me) a New York minute.

[jovan-scorn.livejournal.com]

Hey it would help the economy. Weddings are expensive.

[scruffycritter.livejournal.com]

Never ever understood the fiscal responsibility argument against insuring same sex partners.

Which group health insurance plan do you think will have higher costs? Ones where gay people are encouraged to pair off, or ones that don't.

[batyatoon]

Tom, the trouble with that logic is that being married doesn't actually stop you from having sex with other people.

Believe me, Republican politicians have every reason to know this.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

True enough. I keep forgetting, I really can't apply logic to these situations, no matter how much I would like to.

[bayushisan.livejournal.com]

This is one of those issues where I'm conflicted in a way.

On one hand I think that LGBT couples should be treated the same as any other couple. Equal treatment under the law and all that.

On the other hand there's my religious beliefs. Though I should say that I don't think that the government should be involved in upholding religious doctrine.

I make a point of not mistreating anyone because of the things I went through growing up. I know what it is like to be picked on, put down and persecuted so I don't ever want to be someone who does the same.

Honestly I just don't know on this one, and I'm comfortable enough in my beliefs to say that.

[realinterrobang.livejournal.com]

So if you think that the government should treat LGBT people the same way as everyone else, even if your personal religious beliefs forbid it, so long as the government isn't forcing people who have religious objections to same-sex marriage into having them or performing them (and they're not), what's the problem? I honestly don't see a grey area here -- you keep your personal beliefs to your person, and allow the rest of secular old godless us to do what we're going to do, and everyone goes home happy at the end of the day.

[bayushisan.livejournal.com]

Actually while I do believe that certain behaviors are sinful, I don't treat anyone differently because of them.

Like I said this is an issue about which I'm conflicted and I don't really know what to say or do about it.

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

I think only people on my Flist can see this, but this is the ThReAtdown!

Not so strange

[capplor.livejournal.com]

I'm in awe that the anti-abortion crowd seems to be arguing that having kids is so terrible nobody will do it unless they're forced (never mind the multi-million dollar fertility industry)

Robin

Re: Not so strange

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

They don't seem to realize that the title of Dave Barry's Babies and Other Hazards of Sex was a joke.

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

When I hear someone tell me that being gay is a choice, I like to ask them; "Alright, what would it take to make YOU choose it?"

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Yeppur.