Welcome To The Primitive States of America
Are there many (or any) atheists, agnostics, or anti-theists out there, who are against allowing gays to marry? Doubtful. A NY Times letter to the editor from a man in New York named Richard Yoder made me realize something: Marriage, as it's currently practiced, is unconstitutional. Here's what Yoder wrote:
The proponents of same-sex marriage make the mistake of treating marriage as primarily a legal issue instead of a religious one. In a logical world, any government that aims for separation of church and state would concern itself solely with defining civil unions and the legal benefits that accompany them, and leave it entirely up to the religions to define "marriage" in any way they see fit. Perhaps proponents of same-sex marriage would be more successful if they worked diligently toward that end.
We should not have the state in the marriage business, but the civil unions business -- civil unions for whomever wants to legally formalize their relationship...whether it's two men, three men, a man and a woman, or an entire sorority. Marriage belongs in the church, synagogue, or other institution where people practice the irrational worship of god...when they aren't too busy worrying about how everybody else is having sex, and with whom.
Here's another excerpt from another New York Times letter, from Michael Lee Jacobs, in Rochester:
I am gay. More important, I am an American. As a patriot, I have grown up in a society where the ideals of freedom, equality and independence define our very existence. America's strength comes from the diversity of its people and the plurality of their beliefs, the rights to which are defended and codified by the federal and state constitutions.I hold fast to the ideal that we as a people "hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" and that we are still endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. I do not accept that in order to be free and equal in the eyes of secular law, I need to emigrate to Canada.
Our values are indeed under attack by special interests with an agenda, and they have just enshrined discrimination into our constitutions.
Yes, but Saskatchewan just legalized gay marriage. It's the seventh Canadian jurisdiction to do it. Yeah, it's cold up there...but it's looking a lot more modern and civilized.
The real issue behind gay marriage is the right for gay people to foster children. You mentioned it: the religious definition of marriage is about procreation (some kind of an early marketing ploy IMO: "Let the little children come to Me") not about two people living together and the hand-in-hand pursuit of happiness, or whatever.
So civil unions provide a legal recognition which narrows the gap with 'marriage as an institution' (also as an hypocrisy, be it clueless comfy-conformity or a despicable tax-shelter), so the widespread 'social normality' perception is here at odds with the idea of gay peoples, then gay couples, and ultimately gay parents but at large with any legal (big government prying) step towards a shift in 'normality.'
'Normally' the Earth is flat.
viktor at November 7, 2004 7:42 AM
Reuters
Americans Flock to Canada's Immigration Web Site
Fri Nov 5, 2:22 PM ET
By David Ljunggren
OTTAWA (Reuters) - The number of U.S. citizens visiting Canada's main immigration Web site has shot up six-fold as Americans flirt with the idea
of abandoning their homeland after President Bush's election win this week.
"When we looked at the first day after the election, Nov. 3, our Web site hit a new high, almost double the previous record high," immigration ministry spokeswoman Maria Iadinardi said on Friday.
On an average day some 20,000 people in the United States log onto the Web site, www.cic.gc.ca -- a figure which rocketed to 115,016 on Wednesday. The
number of U.S. visits settled down to 65,803 on Thursday, still well above the norm.
Bush's victory sparked speculation that disconsolate Democrats and others might decide to start a new life in Canada, a land that tilts more to the left than the United States.
Would-be immigrants to Canada can apply to become permanent resident, a process that often takes a year. The other main way to move north on a
long-term basis is to find a job, which requires a work permit.
But please spare the sob stories.
Asked whether an applicant would be looked upon more sympathetically if they claimed to be a sad Democrat seeking to escape four more years of
Bush, Iadinardi replied: "There would be no weight given to statements of feelings."
Canada is one of the few major nations with an large-scale immigration policy. Ottawa is seeking to attract between 220,000 and 240,000 newcomers
next year.
"Let's face it, we have a population of a little over 32 million and we definitely need permanent residents to come to Canada," said Iadinardi. "If
we could meet (the 2005) target and go above it, the more the merrier."
But right now it is too early to say whether the increased interest will result in more applications.
"There is no unusual activity occurring at our visa missions (in the United States). Having someone who intends to come to Canada is not the same as
someone actually putting in an application," said Iadinardi.
"We'll only find out whether there has been an increase in applications in six months."
The waiting time to become a citizen is shorter for people married to Canadians, which prompted the birth of a satirical Web site called
www.marryanamerican.ca.
The idea of increased immigration by unhappy Americans is triggering some amusement in Canada. Commentator Thane Burnett of the Ottawa Sun newspaper wrote a tongue-in-cheek guide to would-be new citizens on Friday.
"As Canadians, you'll have to learn to embrace and use all the products and culture of Americans, while bad-mouthing their way of life," he said.
Lena at November 7, 2004 8:16 AM
> The real issue behind gay marriage is the
> right for gay people to foster children
I agree. You're one of the few people in the world to get that.
> ..as an hypocrisy, be it clueless comfy-
> conformity or a despicable tax-shelter)...
Tell ya what, let's all double down for 2008. Gay marriage proponents can use the same instrusive condescension, wielding government for their own bludgeoning, as they've done for the past four years. And we'll see if goes better at the polls. The precious, plucky little soldiers should just keep on keepin' on, marching in spunky, deaf rhythm toward electoral defeat. Then on the Morning of 05Nov08, we can do this all again.
Honestly I haven't paid any attention. Did gay marriage have ANY electoral victories? At all, anywhere? Was it even vaguely close?
Anonymous at November 7, 2004 10:41 AM
me
Cridland at November 7, 2004 12:10 PM
"Did gay marriage have ANY electoral victories? At all, anywhere?"
Of course not, silly. Didn't you know that this country is filled with intellectually stunted neanderthals who've never even heard of Swann's Way or Leaves of Grass? Their voting behavior is so predictable, and the very thought of them is enough to make a cultural elitist like me hurl chunks.
Our Lena of the Most Offended Sensibility at November 7, 2004 7:56 PM
> intellectually stunted neanderthals who've
> never even heard of Swann's Way or Leaves of
> Grass?
Umm... Huh?
Cridland at November 7, 2004 8:57 PM
Give it time, give it time..... Even the thought of white man marrying anthing other than a white woman a generation ago, was well...
Atticus Finch, Tom Joad, and even my favorite Ben Franklin reside soundly though slumberly in the American psyche...
sleep that ye may awaken stronger again...
eric at November 7, 2004 10:04 PM
But I don't want to get married. I just want to play with your butthole while we listen to Appalachian Spring (conducted by Leonard Bernstein).
Lena at November 7, 2004 10:47 PM
Cridland > Did gay marriage have ANY electoral victories? At all, anywhere? Was it even vaguely close?
Come tilt my popular vote:
-Do you think marriage should be
defined as a union between a man and a woman? (official tilt)
-Do you think gay people should be barred from rights like civil unions or marriage? (an alternative that should be given a shot IMO)
-How come all those fags multiplying everywhere, do you think legal action should be taken to restore our Great Values and prevent that Scum of the Earth from procreating? (courtesy DeLay-Ashcroft translator)
viktor at November 8, 2004 4:56 AM
> -Do you think marriage should be
> defined as a union between a man
> and a woman? (official tilt)
What's an official tilt?
> -Do you think gay people should
> be barred from rights like civil
> unions or marriage?
Compound inquiry, babe.
> -How come all those fags multiplying
> everywhere, do you think legal
> action should be taken to restore
> our Great Values and prevent that
> Scum of the Earth from procreating?
> (courtesy DeLay-Ashcroft translator)
What translator is that? Lefties this week are getting really pissy, attributing the ugliest possible motives to others: Tony Pierce is saying the voters not only voted conservative, they then stepped out of the booth and lied to pollsters, just to be extra mean. (It's not clear how this could have advanced the interests of any conservative voter.)
This week lefties seem to think they lost because they just didn't want it enough. So if they focus and get even angrier and stay angrier and hold their breath and turn blue, the magic just has to happen next time. I think this is unlikely to work.
> ...fags multiplying...
Fags don't multiply. Blacks do, Jews do, Mexicans do, even moonshine hillbillies do, but fags don't, when left to their own devices.
Me? Personally? Thanks for asking. I think the best possible arrangment for a child, born or adopted to a family, is a loving mother and a loving father. The male-female pairing is the central bond of the human experience, whether or not it's what happened to any particular individual in high school. Our social policies should reflect this centrality.
I don't much care what gays do with each other. I'll happy buy them gifts at wedding ceremonies, honor their wills and trusts, and so forth.
We COULD have meaningingful, rewarding national legislation protecting the rights gay unions within four years. I doubt we will, because no one seems interested in compromise. But who knows what will happen.
Gays who insist that it be called "marriage" and that they receieve the same respect as Rob and Laura Petrie are probably going to be disappointed. Straights who insist that no certification at all be given to these unions will DEFINATELY be disappointed.
It's coming.
cridland at November 8, 2004 10:02 AM
And regarding Mr. Finch, can we please not be too precious about that? Can we acknowledge that the excellence of Mockingbird as a film is dependent on the transparent sillyness of its politics, to say nothing of its history? It wasn't courageous white lawyers and plucky little schoolchildren who made change in the south happen, folks. This is not the end of the world! You lose no moral authority by being real about this! It just the willing suspension of disbelief... Some of my favorite movies have little men from outer space, and some have teenagers who go back in time, and some have middle-aged men who get to nail Ingrid Bergman in wartime.
Cridland at November 8, 2004 10:14 AM
"no one is interested in compromise"
Actually, Crid, I don't really care. Marriage, the army, children -- you can keep them all. I'm travelling light through this life.
Lena, Bastion of Justice at November 8, 2004 10:15 AM
Me too. Muh-ningningningnignful. Spelcjhek iz fer wimpz.
Cridland at November 8, 2004 2:45 PM
Why do all righties on the web sound exactly the same?
The "fags" in my American neighborhood sure do multiply (or just plain raise kids, which is really what matters) - there's more children of same gender couples around here than one can count - many of them sharing genetic materials with at least one, sometimes both, parents.
Don't know if these same couples have all read Proust and Whitman though.
Curtis at November 8, 2004 6:10 PM
"there's more children of same gender couples around here than one can count"
Curtis, we're all friends here. "Same gender couples" is a little too formal. "Fag couples" will do.
Lena, Fag Supreme at November 8, 2004 7:25 PM
Lena-
If someone makes a movie about your life, whom would you request play the lead?
eric at November 8, 2004 7:38 PM
> Why do all righties on the web sound exactly
> the same?
The truth is a melody!
Anonymous at November 8, 2004 8:02 PM
Tommorrow belongs to me!
eric at November 8, 2004 8:07 PM
Lena - Are lesbians "fags" too? If so, I'll bet they wouldn't like to hear it (even virtually) from my lips. I'm not cool enough to call my gay friends and neighbors "fag." Maybe like the use of the word cunt, it's a generational thing.
Curtis at November 8, 2004 8:48 PM
Curtis -- You can call the lesbians "dykes." Or just call us all "homos." One size fits all!
Eric -- My life isn't movie material by any stretch of the imagination. But your question got me to thinking about my heroes. In particular, about a lady aviator in Africa who once wrote:
ìI have seldom dreamed a dream worth dreaming again, or at least none worth recording. Mine are not enigmatic dreams; they are peopled with characters who are plausible and who do plausible things, and I am the most plausible among them. All the characters in my dreams have quiet voices like the voice of the man who telephoned me at Elstree one morning in September of nineteen-thirty-six and told me that there was rain and strong head winds over the west of England and over the Irish Sea, and that there were variable winds and clear skies in mid-Atlantic and fog off the coast of Newfoundland.
ìíIf you are still determined to fly the Atlantic this late in the year,í the voice said, ëthe Air Ministry suggests that the weather it is able to forecast for tonight, and for tomorrow morning, will be about the best you can expect.í
ìThe voice had a few other things to say, but not many, and then it was gone, and I lay in bed half-suspecting that the telephone call and the man who made it were only parts of the mediocre dream I had been dreaming. I felt that if I closed my eyes the unreal quality of the message would be re-established, and that, when I opened them again, this would be another ordinary day with its usual beginning and its usual routine.
ìBut of course I could not close my eyes, nor my mind, nor my memory. I could lie there for a few moments ñ remembering how it had begun, and telling myself, with senseless repetition, that by tomorrow morning I should either have flown the Atlantic to America ñ or I should not have flown it. In either case this was the day I would try.î
Beryl Markham
ìWest With The Nightî
Lena at November 8, 2004 9:21 PM
Beryl Markham- I had never heard of her, so I googled her and now want to know all about her. What a life- from England to Kenya, rescue missions, flying only by compass. Truly a life of adventure- I need to get off my butt and use up some air miles!
I am ordering the book today. Thanks for the comment.
eric at November 9, 2004 8:50 AM
Have you been to Africa? I've wanted to go ever since I read Markham's book. You'll enjoy it, Eric.
Fly me, I'm Lena! at November 9, 2004 8:52 AM
Nope, never been to Africa. I was just thinking of The English Patient, Out of Africa, and a few other movies that all have the theme of flying some simple aircraft over the plains, waterfalls, and lakes, seeing the animals scatter in hugely colorful patterns. I think I need to read more about traveling in Africa, maybe a travel group the first time.
On the other hand, a 60 something woman friend of mine just went to Mongolia last year by herself and had the time of her life. I think her philosophy was "who cares if I die at 60 doing something adventurous. I got my money out of this ride."
Reading more about Beryl, Ernest Hemingway sure had a high regard for her personally and also as a writer. I could tell I liked her writing from your passage. Any friend of Papa's is a friend of mine. (PS- Papa is buried here in Idaho!)
eric at November 9, 2004 10:36 AM
There's this one scene where she describes landing her plane at night on a makeshift runway lit up by candles in paper bags. Lots of views of treetops too, in that book.
Why are you in Idaho? You must be an academic. Or a masochist.
Lena, Bastion of Justice at November 9, 2004 10:59 AM
Landing by luminaries- remarkable!
The why I live in Idaho is it is a beautiful place, though way too conservative. My nearest neighbors tend to be the four legged variety, like bears, moose, elk, and cougar. I think people go insane when you pack too many of them into a square mile. Amy has a postcard she can show you sometime if she kept it. Otherwise you can visit my neighbors website at www.cougarcrestlodge.com, and you will see what I mean.
You got me into such a traveling mood today I made reservations to go dog sledding and ice climbing up in Banff Canada in May- not exactly Africa, but I can't easily drive to Africa!
As far as what I do, my chosen profession is one notch above child molesting- I design demographic databases for direct mail and telemarketing. It's something I always dreamed of as a kid.
eric at November 9, 2004 12:59 PM
Can we play interview?
"Have you always lived in Idaho?"
"How did you get introduced to dogsledding?"
"You don't actualy enjoy iceclimbing, do you?"
Lena, Couch Potato at November 9, 2004 1:08 PM
Moved here in 1992 after getting caught in the LA riots. Born and raised in Orange County, lived in San Juan Capistrano. Jerry Garcia said he was moving to the mountains so he could "see them coming", and it sounded like good advice to me.
My wife loves dogsledding, so that much will be a surpise for her. It is sorta like snowmobiling, except you sit back wrapped in blankets and drink brandy or scotch. There is a whole culture that lives for dog sledding events- like the Iditarod in Anchorage. That conservative city turns into Bourbon Street for two weeks every year.
I watched people ice climbing in Banff two years ago, up a frozen waterfall. It was incredible, and I want to try a beginners version of it. Anything outdoors is good for me. Rent "touching the void" to see what I mean.
Now, I have so many questions for you, I don't even know where to begin. Maybe someday all of us will meet at a bar on the beach and hash it all out! I get down to LA every now and then to see family. I seem to remember you like Spagos...
eric at November 9, 2004 2:01 PM
It would be great to meet sometime. Let me know when you're around. Amy will come and dazzle us with her beauty too.
Lena at November 9, 2004 5:51 PM
Neither present-day Canadian judges nor Canadian Members of Parliament are the ultimate authority on the lawful definition of marriage in Canada.
The Lawful Definition of Marriage in Canada
http://www.ocii.com/~dpwozney/marriage.htm
David Wozney at December 24, 2004 6:57 PM