Cheney on Gay Marriage

[Aerich]

"Marriage" is just a word, though. I personally do not ascribe a special meaning to it. Linguistically, words change all the time.

Back on the original topic - I wonder if Cheney and Bush have had a serious discussion about this issue? They seem to be sending mixed signals.

[Timber Loftis]

I don't know if their signal is mixed. Bush has said he supports equal rights for gays, but doesn't want it called marriage.

In other words, I do not think he would oppose Civil Union systems like the one Vermont has.

As I've said before, the gay rights movement is doing itself a lot of harm by getting all hung up on nomenclature. If you've got the rights, what do you care?

Does an African American demand to be called "Caucasian"? Does a Woman demand to be legally recognized as a "Man"? No. In each case, there is a nomenclature distinction between people who are legally equal.

[Aerich]

I think much of the problem is in perception. Most of the (admittedly few) gays I know aren't pushing for "marriage" per se. They wanted equality before the law and "marriage-like" rights; things relating to pensions, loans, adoption, etc. They have those rights in many places now. In BC, the province allows for civil unions that are, to the best of my knowledge, legally indistinguishable from marriage - just like common-law marriage.

Getting back to the perception - the problem is on both sides. The militant gay rights groups perceive anyone against the gay marriage idea as anti-gay, although the person in question may fully support civil unions. They also find it hard to trust someone's commitment to equal rights when he contemplates a constitutional amendment and actually tries to pass it. The fear is that he and others are hiding anti-gay sentiments behind the facade of protecting the definition and institution of marriage. That fear is often misplaced.

On the other side, the most vocal groups tend to be the fringe, radical elements of gay rights groups. Some people perceive that they are trying to force themselves into the public mindset and dictate all types of policy (which can be true); that's threatening, because the fringe often does not have a realistic view of the world. IMO, the vocal radicals only represent a small minority of gays. They don't do themselves or their cause any good by labelling so many people as anti-equality homophobes. It turns off people who would otherwise support or tolerate their position and cause - not only liberals, but many conservatives.

[ 08-25-2004, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: Aerich ]

[Dreamer128]

Originally posted by Magness: Marriage == "The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife." Not seeing anything in there about man/man or woman/woman.

mar·riage ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mrj)
n.

1. a.The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
b.The state of being married; wedlock.
c.A common-law marriage.
d.A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.

[Aerich]

LOL. The definition is only as good as the dictionary. [img]graemlins/happyteeth.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Magness: Can you summarize it? I don't feel like reading the entire article. Thx.

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman: Waiting... Waiting....

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: No. You can quit waiting, Ronn.

Okay guys, you have got to stop this... I nearly cracked a rib laughing. Probably one of the best routines since "Who's on first?"
This is the perfect distillation of the right / left theatre of the absurd. Thanks for the laugh.

[aleph_null1]

Originally posted by Illumina Drathiran'ar: The cynic in me doesn't like this... [snip] Disclaimer: Am I this cynical? I really don't know, but this is the impression I get.

No, I got exactly the same impression; maybe I'm not a trusting person, but this seems too perfectly orchestrated to satisfy me...

[Ronn_Bman]

We're here to please.

[Jonas Strider]

Well well well. I have a new found respect for Dick Cheney since this event. He does have a heart.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Nightwing: I don't get what is so harmfull with gay mariage. People are people, i'm no different in what rights I have compared to any other male in our society. According to our constitution we are all equal. But why spend so much time and energy trying to prevent people from expressing their love for each other. People are saying it will ruin the family unit. Give me a break there already from a family unit formed from "strieght" marriages. I think people need to grow up and be more optimistic and understanding. I have not heard one argument as to why gay marriage is a bad idea. Every argument i've heard has been from a belief standpoint not factual.

You made two very good points that I feel need to be highlighted, Nightwing.

1. I also have not heard any argument against gay marriage that was founded on a "belief" standpoint. As a Christian, I disagree with the homosexual lifestyle. I consider homosexuality to be a sin - but no greater or lesser a sin than adultery (both are sins of sexual immorality, IMHO). However, DESPITE my personal beliefs, I cannot give you one, valid, legal argument against gay marriage. And I simply do NOT believe we need a Constitutional Amendment to protect the sanctity of a word or title.

2. The "family unit" is already royally screwed here in America. Two parent homes (where BOTH spouses are the biological parent) are increasingly rare. We have many single-parent families and even more second and third marriages for people. Kids are growing up without a full set of parents, or with parents that are separated or divorced and often remarried - bringing in step-siblings and half-siblings.

I would say that at least half of America's "family units" do not meet the "traditional definition" (and I'm probably being overly generous in that esitmate).