or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Over one thousand married queers in San Fran....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Over one thousand married queers in San Fran....  

post #1 of 160
Thread Starter 
and there are more on the way.

This movement is putting a face on the once-abstract issue of homosexual marriage, and soon enough resistance will break down and all those who screamed and gnashed teeth about how it should be illegal will forget they ever opposed it.

"You see the older couples who waited so long just to go through this process," he said. "I realize all these things I take for granted, the benefits of marriage I didn't even think about."

And we'll have some gay boys coming home to Texas with a marriage license.

David Miller, 34, and Curtis McAdams, 42, of Austin, Texas, tied the knot after 10 years together.

"I don't believe anyone should be denied the right to marry the person they choose and the person they love," Curtis said. They said they plan to file a lawsuit to be recognized as married in Texas.


Right on, David and Curtis. Fight your asses off for all of our sakes.

Freedom is important.
proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #2 of 160


I still can't agree with gay marriage. It's just not right. I don't like to see this happening.
Come waste your time with me

In a world without doors or walls, there is no need for Gates or Windows
Come waste your time with me

In a world without doors or walls, there is no need for Gates or Windows
post #3 of 160
I don't like the term "marriage" applied to the relationship, and I have a lot of friends from work who are gay. But the other morning I realized that my feelings are based from my religious upbringing and that there are a massive amount of people who are "married" and do not share my faith. So then if it really is just a word in a secular world, who am I to complain?

I'll still laugh a bit whenever I hear any gay friends refer to themselves as married, but that's just because I'm a product of my times and it just sounds damned silly.

As far as the benefits and pitfalls of marriage go, hope they know what they're getting into.

I'll -always- think of Man & Woman when I hear the word Married.
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
post #4 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
and there are more on the way.

This movement is putting a face on the once-abstract issue of homosexual marriage, and soon enough resistance will break down and all those who screamed and gnashed teeth about how it should be illegal will forget they ever opposed it.

"You see the older couples who waited so long just to go through this process," he said. "I realize all these things I take for granted, the benefits of marriage I didn't even think about."

And we'll have some gay boys coming home to Texas with a marriage license.

David Miller, 34, and Curtis McAdams, 42, of Austin, Texas, tied the knot after 10 years together.

"I don't believe anyone should be denied the right to marry the person they choose and the person they love," Curtis said. They said they plan to file a lawsuit to be recognized as married in Texas.


Right on, David and Curtis. Fight your asses off for all of our sakes.

Freedom is important.

Great post, Groverat.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
post #5 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat


Fight your asses off for all of our sakes.





Freedom is important? No one is denying any of my gay employees the RIGHT to live together, or to be monogamous, or anything of the sort. In this country we ALL have the right to love who we want, and rightfully so. I just don't see how the LBG community is being denied "freedom" - they have the freedom to do whatever they want as far as life choices and partners, just like the rest of us. My gay employees are sick of this issue, because they were happily living together and not being the focus of attention... true "integration." Now, the backlash that is sure to follow will mean another round of problems. Truly a no-win for them.

There may be a bunch of married queers in SF, but that is a hollow victory before

A) the court rulings and upcoming anti-gay marriage lawsuits and
B) the second Civil War over the Feds dictating these new rules to states.

"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #6 of 160
Good to see the hate groups masquerading as christian organisations are showing their true colours.

So what if two people who just happen to be both male or female want to marry?

It is not up to the government or a hate group to tell them they cannot.
http://freehenson.da.ru/ - chased out of America because he exposed the evils of Scientology. So much for freedom.
http://freehenson.da.ru/ - chased out of America because he exposed the evils of Scientology. So much for freedom.
post #7 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by xenu
..."evils of Scientology"

THAT's not very tolerant, now is it?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #8 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by DMBand0026


I still can't agree with gay marriage. It's just not right. I don't like to see this happening.

yeah, from a Christian stand point, it's not good in my book either
post #9 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by DMBand0026


I still can't agree with gay marriage. It's just not right. I don't like to see this happening.

Your view on this issue offends me. It's just not right to think that way.

That's fine that you don't like to see this happening. You know what? Suck it up, you can handle the stress of other people being happy, I'm sure.
post #10 of 160
If just about anyone else here in AI except the groverat had started a post with this title, they would have been accused by probably most of you of out and out trolling, or at the very least some insensitivity and lack of sophistication. I myself will call his post title a lack of sophistication considering the source.

Because groverat posted it, many of you are going to kiss his ass and jump on the "damnned queers are going to ruin our civilization" bandwagon. Pretty ****en assinine and pathetic. Humanity will NEVER move ahead to the next spiritual and intellectual level until we get beyond these rediculous predjudices.

The evolutionary and biological imperative is so strong that heterosexuality will ALWAYS be the norm and homosexuals in the minority. Don't worry straight people. We will continue to rule over the social politics of human society for a long time to come. The United States of America has many more dire problems to worry about than gay people wanting to enjoy the benefits of being married.

The most horrendous crimes commited now and in human history were concieved and implemented for the most part by so called heterosexual men.
You know, what's interesting about our country is that for years we were isolated from the world by two great oceans, and for a while we got a false sense of security as a result of that. We...
You know, what's interesting about our country is that for years we were isolated from the world by two great oceans, and for a while we got a false sense of security as a result of that. We...
post #11 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by hardhead

The most horrendous crimes commited now and in human history were concieved and implemented for the most part by so called heterosexual men.

Heterosexual men are getting tired of having that thrown in our face. I, for one, have done nothing to fsck up humanity simply by being hetero and male. Neither have 99.9999 percent of the other hetero men. There is plenty of blame for Humans as a whole, not just heterosexual males of the species.

How would you react if I blamed the women who gave birth to those eeeeeeevil men? Yea, sure, maybe it was THEIR fault. </logic right out the window>
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #12 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by Jubelum
Heterosexual men are getting tired of having that thrown in our face. I, for one, have done nothing to fsck up humanity simply by being hetero and male. Neither have 99.9999 percent of the other hetero men. There is plenty of blame for Humans as a whole, not just heterosexual males of the species.

How would you react if I blamed the women who gave birth to those eeeeeeevil men? Yea, sure, maybe it was THEIR fault. </logic right out the window>

Right, his stupidity in saying that is only surpassed by your own in being offended by two people expressing their love for one another.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #13 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by DMBand0026


I still can't agree with gay marriage. It's just not right. I don't like to see this happening.

I don't even see why the state should recognize marriage at all. What's the point? It just results in custody battles when things go awry. Why not eliminate that annoying fixture? As an extra, if people actually had to work things out themselves, I guarantee that the divorce rate wouldn't be so high, and the number of confused children would drop in response. There's no reason I can think of for the state to recognize marriage.

If you ask me, marriage is a religious thing.
Cat: the other white meat
Cat: the other white meat
post #14 of 160
I'm not gay but I know a lot of people who are. (Atlanta's the S.F. of the east) and I have no problem with anyone getting married who wants to. If they're in love and committed then they should be allowed to live as anyone else.

Why do people care so much what other people do? Will a gay marriage (call it civil union, whatever) make your marriage any less special? Homosexuals have been wrongly mistreated for way too long. Constantly being the butt (ok ok ok.... no pun) of a lot of jokes only because they are different than you.

And it's really irresponsible for the moderator to be referring to a group of people in an offensive way (queers, "And we'll have some gay boys coming home to Texas...").
post #15 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
If you ask me, marriage is a religious thing.

What about people who aren't religious who get married in the courthouse?
I'm not religious, does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to get married?
post #16 of 160
I would say it began as a "religious thing" (a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away), but is now a deep-rooted societal custom.
post #17 of 160
Hey Jubelum, you had me going there for awhile...
Obviously you're kidding about taking my "hetero...men" comment personally. Right? You are kidding? Good one!
You know, what's interesting about our country is that for years we were isolated from the world by two great oceans, and for a while we got a false sense of security as a result of that. We...
You know, what's interesting about our country is that for years we were isolated from the world by two great oceans, and for a while we got a false sense of security as a result of that. We...
post #18 of 160
Custom or no custom, the government should not be involved. This whole debate should not be taking place. This whole thing is one big excuse for gays to bitch and moan and for bigots to hate gays. Thanks, social conservatism.

Of course you never hear the lefitsts playing the personal responsibility card, all they (and you people) can do is bitch about how gays should have the same rights as straight people. BULLSHIT. Marriage is not a right, it's a ****ed up piece of contract with the government.
post #19 of 160
I hope you don´t take it personally then if I said that all those "heterosexual" men actually was screwed up homos that (as we know) get of sexually by inflicting pain on others?

I noticed one funny thing in the opening post. I my job I have made a huge database containing over 2000 women that have been artificial inseminated, most of them lesbians. One of the informations I have had access to was if they had a partner and the age of her. What struck me was that while to norm in heterosexual couples is a 2-5 year age difference the trend in my dataset was either almost no age difference or a ten year difference. I have not the slightest idea why.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #20 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by Ganondorf
Custom or no custom, the government should not be involved. This whole debate should not be taking place. This whole thing is one big excuse for gays to bitch and moan and for bigots to hate gays. Thanks, social conservatism.

Of course you never hear the lefitsts playing the personal responsibility card, all they (and you people) can do is bitch about how gays should have the same rights as straight people. BULLSHIT. Marriage is not a right, it's a ****ed up piece of contract with the government.

If marriage or no marriage had absolutely no meaning for your legal or economical status and was nothing more than a ceremony in a cult I would agree. But like it or not marriage is entangled into our legal status and before that changes you are completly wrong.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #21 of 160
Do I think that gays deserve some kind of "special" treatment? Hell no. Most of them just want to be treated like "regular" folk. Yes, like any segment of society, they have whiners and aggressive adgenda hounds. I kind of look at the entire institution from Ganondorf's comment. Kind of.

Anders, secondly, I don't take anything personal from any internet forum. As too many people will willingly and easily say stupid and ignorant things that they would never have the courage to speak in person to said target.

Thirdly, you have the gall to say that you have a HUGE database of OVER 2000 women, mostly lesbians... You sir, take yourself just a little too seriously.
You know, what's interesting about our country is that for years we were isolated from the world by two great oceans, and for a while we got a false sense of security as a result of that. We...
You know, what's interesting about our country is that for years we were isolated from the world by two great oceans, and for a while we got a false sense of security as a result of that. We...
post #22 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by hardhead
Anders, secondly, I don't take anything personal from any internet forum. As too many people will willingly and easily say stupid and ignorant things that they would never have the courage to speak in person to said target.

I am happy you feel that way about your post. Then we are in agreement

Quote:
Originally posted by hardhead
Thirdly, you have the gall to say that you have a HUGE database of OVER 2000 women, mostly lesbians... You sir, take yourself just a little too seriously.



Its not my own little black book. Its a file on my clients shiny white iBook
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #23 of 160
Quote:
But like it or not marriage is entangled into our legal status and before that changes you are completly wrong.

And exactly what am I wrong about?
post #24 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by Ganondorf
And exactly what am I wrong about?

Woooops. Reread you post. I am actually saying almost the same as you. Sorry

I read it like you were saying "gays are whining losers" but its clearly not what you are saying.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #25 of 160
I'm hitting the sack now. Anders, very weak comments from you sir. I look forward to the groverat's responses. I don't see how he can justify the title of this post.

I remember when it was a big deal to be a moderator here at AI a few years ago. Change is inevitable. Sometimes for the better, and sometimes for the worse...
You know, what's interesting about our country is that for years we were isolated from the world by two great oceans, and for a while we got a false sense of security as a result of that. We...
You know, what's interesting about our country is that for years we were isolated from the world by two great oceans, and for a while we got a false sense of security as a result of that. We...
post #26 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by hardhead
I'm hitting the sack now. Anders, very weak comments from you sir. I look forward to the groverat's responses. I don't see how he can justify the title of this post.

I remember when it was a big deal to be a moderator here at AI a few years ago. Change is inevitable. Sometimes for the better, and sometimes for the worse...



You said you are not offended by comments on a message board and noone should be. I say I am happy you see that your post can offend people. Whats "weak" about that?

About the title of this thread. Could you please point out what is wrong with it? Its describes excatly what is happening.

EDIT: Oh. Is it the database thing that somehow puts you off?
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #27 of 160
Obviously I don't mind homosexual unions.

However what I do find funny, in a sad sort of cynical way, is how bare knuckled many of you are in your political views.

Aren't most of these posters here the same one's who in a different thread were screaming about "state's rights!"

California, as a state, has decided on this issue. The city of San Francisco is acting in opposition to the laws passed by the entire state.

But hey, lets have a win at any cost right?

That is complete bunk, and has serious ramifications when people do not respect the rule of law.

When people are burning down abortion clinics to "win at any cost" or such nonsense, let's see if the same crowd is cheering the lack of respect for acting for the rule of law, while encouraging anarchy.

When it is a mayor cheering on his or her ignoring a law you happen to agree with, let's see if you are declared hateful if you protest.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #28 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders

About the title of this thread. Could you please point out what is wrong with it? Its describes excatly what is happening.

The word "queer" is not very PC. It implies that gay people are freakishly different.
post #29 of 160
Oh the old negro/coloured/black/afro-american debate again.

Its clear what Groverats intention is with his post if one reads more than the headline. He is for not against gay marriage

For me queer is a word accepting people as they are (as it is used in "queer theory"). To be offended by that word is a signal to me that one wants to adopt to the hetero-sexual norm, which I don´t subscribe to. To live in a close knitted lifelong relationship is not better or worse than everything else people do with eachother (and the mandatory: with the consensus of each involved over the legal age) IMO. So to be against the word queer is actually the same as to say I live morally wrong. So I should actually be offended by anyone NOT using the word queer.

Oh how funny word games are
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #30 of 160
Thread Starter 
"Queer" is only a slur if used as such. If I offended any homosexuals (out, latent or closeted) then I am sorry, but toughen up a little and learn to read the actual posts and not just the titles.

Marriage (as a practice or a word) is not the Christians' ball to take home in a huff. The practice existed before Jebsu came to preach and in cultures outside of Christianity's reach. Sorry, lambs, but you can get over it or just pout, watch your churches literally split in half over the issue and pray for armageddon so God can come kill everyone who isn't like you.

As for all the other "it just ain't right, that ain't how we did it in mah daddy's time". Hang on for the ride and please dispose your chewing tobacco in the proper receptacles. Don't spit on the sidewalk.

Jebulum:

tee-hee-hee
I say "fight for all of us" and you laugh because it makes it sound like I am gay.
tee-hee-hee
Gay boys like other boys.
tee-hee-hee

proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #31 of 160
None of these SF marriages are legal.


Unfortunately these judges and mayor are crafting a right where none exists. Unfortunately it's going to backlash on them too.
post #32 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
None of these SF marriages are legal.


Unfortunately these judges and mayor are crafting a right where none exists. Unfortunately it's going to backlash on them too.

possibly, but it is making people think about the issue. it's modern civil disobedience, pure and simple. i wonder if we will see the fab five speak "out" on this.

queers 1
segregationist 0

you go girl.
post #33 of 160
a side issue who are DMBand0026 and DMBFan920? Note the name similarities, the regional proximity, are they the same person?
post #34 of 160
Yeah, trumptman's comments about the "rule of law" issue is interesting in this SF case....when any group defies the law en masse in civil disobedience it's something to be watched by all. I don't think that firebombing abortion clinics can be compared to gays marrying, there's certainly a better comparison out there.

The outcome of this is where the bets should be the hottest. Will SF's actions result in arrests? Lawsuits? Challenges of the law? Probably.

Why has the (activist) homosexual community decided that they must seize the word "Married" though....that's a direct attack at the throat of "flyover country". I agree that this will most certainly result in a whole lot MORE hateful activity in the meantime. I would have advocated that they take a much more surreptitious approach, petitioning for "civil unions" then simply using the word "married" in social situations. To have been "squatters" on the term.

I suppose the argument will be made that they just couldn't wait any longer.

I'll still laugh when I hear it, even from friends.
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
post #35 of 160
Thread Starter 
There is no reason at all to have a carbon copy of marriage called "civil unions" that apply to homosexuals. There is no reason for it. It is illogical.

Not to mention it is improper discriminatory behavior on the government's part.
proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #36 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
There is no reason at all to have a carbon copy of marriage called "civil unions" that apply to homosexuals. There is no reason for it. It is illogical.

Not to mention it is improper discriminatory behavior on the government's part.

So you as one person get to decide what is proper and improper discrimation for society as a whole.

My those shoulders must be sore from the burden.

Silly me, I thought this was a government of the people, not a government of the groverats.

Walter Williams makes some very good points about fair play, and the rule of law.

People have been claiming this is a state's rights issue. Well California, as a state, has decided this issue and the municipality of San Francisco has decided to put itself above the law.

Perhaps all I should have to do is convince one city, say Riverside that they shouldn't honor unfair custody agreements granted in other states or cities. It could become a safe haven for father's who are not kidnapping their own children, but just using the city as a safe haven to get their due and true civil rights. The city should refuse to honor any custody agreement that is not joint 50% physical and legal. It should have the right to refuse requests by other entities wanting influence over the children and should ignore the laws, judgements and courts of other cities, counties and states. It's an okay form of civil disobedience allowed to bring about civil rights for dads.

Of course Grove, you would have no trouble with this I'm sure.

Of course you would, but a win at any cost mentality shows the true hypocrisy of those who claim to stand for laws and rights, while running roughshod over both.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #37 of 160
You know Ratty old friend he's got a point when it comes down to The Law, blind justice and all.
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
post #38 of 160
is it a states rights issue or is it a civil rights issue? and how exactly does this effect you one way or the other, trump? is the government suddenly taking something away from you?
post #39 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman

People have been claiming this is a state's rights issue. Well California, as a state, has decided this issue and the municipality of San Francisco has decided to put itself above the law.


if i may interject

not for or against this issue in particular.
i do believe the law should be equal for everyone &
religion should be a purely personal thing.

that being said what the mayor has done is a very ballsy
move.it takes a lot to stand up for something you believe in.

lest we forget this bastion of freedom had segregation
not all that long ago & interacial marriages were frowned at.heck i still get wierd looks in parts of the country whenever my wife & I travel together (I'm indian, shes caucasian)

sometimes it just takes an event to cause a change
& get the blinkers of peoples eyes
in hindsight in a few years all this wont seems like a big
deal.

regards,
pete
post #40 of 160
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
People have been claiming this is a state's rights issue. Well California, as a state, has decided this issue and the municipality of San Francisco has decided to put itself above the law.

But the whole point of what they're doing is to challenge the law. They can't put it to the test unless people defy it. Perhaps the California Supreme Court, or even the US SC will overturn this law. Damn California Ballot measures.

And yet again conservatives back states' rights, but only when it is a means to reduce individual rights.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Over one thousand married queers in San Fran....