# Same Sex Marriage now Legal in entire United States of America



## Explorer (Jun 26, 2015)

This is a current event, and central to many people's lives. 

On the plus side, there is not a single right in my private life which I've now lost over that Supreme Court decision. 

There is also no public official who has lost a right, only the mistaken idea that they can impose their own religious views upon others while acting as a secular public official. A public official should not be able to deny a marriage license because the potential marriage is Satanic, Hindu, or anything else the public official disagrees with in private life. 

For those who are upset about someone else's marriage, part of that person's private life, consider this: In a few decades, you'll be in the same position as folks who currently hate on "the blacks" and about interracial marriage. You might think they have a point, and you (and they) have a right to believe what they want, but the rest of society also has a right to repudiate that kind of thinking, just as happened with slavery and women being able to vote.


----------



## necronile (Jun 26, 2015)

Hope in the world has restored


----------



## ferret (Jun 26, 2015)

It's not quite over.... 

Abbott says state agencies may withhold benefits from same sex couples - Houston Chronicle 

The next phase is already beginning. Yeah, they can get married, but that doesn't mean they get the same benefits unfortunately. I don't understand how anyone can honestly believe withholding benefits or rights will fly, but they probably don't care and plan to fight tooth and nail, even if they know they'll ultimately lose again.


----------



## ferret (Jun 26, 2015)

Mississippi and Louisiana Attorney General's manage to find excuses to delay:

Louisiana AG to clerks: No need to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples just yet  LGBTQ Nation
http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2015/06/mississippi-attorney-general-same-sex-marriage-is-still-on-hold/


----------



## Alex Kenivel (Jun 26, 2015)

Baby steps, man


----------



## tacotiklah (Jun 26, 2015)

Oh I've been expecting the usual legal redtape that these crazy bigots like to make use of when they don't get their way. They'll stall, they'll stamp their feet and cry like little bitches, but SCOTUS has the final say in the matter. They'll have to just shut up and deal with it. In the meantime as a courtesy to your fellow man, if you see a hater complaining about this, just hand them a box of tissues. They'll need them.


----------



## flint757 (Jun 26, 2015)

FWIW, I know first hand that insurance companies and whatnot already plan on offering coverage (some already have been for awhile as a courtesy through domestic coverage). The only thing being added to the discussion is the issue of common law marriage apparently, since you don't technically have to get married to be married. The only knew requirement being added currently, or rather enforced, is that you have to get your marriage officiated, but insurance companies aren't planning on straight up denying coverage as of yet (or at least not at the companies in Houston I'm knowledgeable about).

On that note, you got to love that the people who whine about this being made a big deal are always the ones who seem to aid in dragging things out forever.


----------



## Necris (Jun 26, 2015)

When I hear conservatives screaming about how this should have been (and other civil rights issues should be) "left to the states to decide" I just remember that in 2000 Alabama had an unenforceable ban on interracial marriage in their constitution and when they allowed the public to vote on whether or not it should be removed from their constitution and 40.51% of voters voted against removing it.


----------



## flint757 (Jun 26, 2015)

When people say, 'leave it up to the states' what they really mean is, 'leave it in the place where I'm more likely to get exactly what I want despite having little actual stake in the matter (unless they're gay)'.


----------



## groverj3 (Jun 26, 2015)

I got unfriended on Facebook by like 5 people today because of voicing my support! OH NOES! I FEEL REALLY BAD ABOUT NOT BEING A BIGOT!


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 26, 2015)

Coheed and Cambria Sing Justice Scalia&#39;s Dissenting Opini...


----------



## MattThePenguin (Jun 28, 2015)

The political views on my Facebook are split down the middle amongst my friends. There are the normal people, who are excited, and then there are.. those people. 

Seriously, someone CRIED because of the ruling. Cried as in they were upset. Like, oh god what if we catch the gay GRAB THE CHILDREN WE'RE MOVING TO CANADA!...... slightly exaggerated... slightly 

Some of it actually made me a little upset. The bassist in my band is gay, and he and his boyfriend are perfect for each other and they are so happy together. To know that some of these people would want to have his rights taken away is a bit sickening.


----------



## groverj3 (Jun 28, 2015)

MattThePenguin said:


> Seriously, someone CRIED because of the ruling. Cried as in they were upset. Like, oh god what if we catch the gay GRAB THE CHILDREN WE'RE MOVING TO CANADA!...... slightly exaggerated... slightly



Funniest part about that is that it's been legal in Canada for quite so time now


----------



## MetalGravy (Jun 28, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Coheed and Cambria Sing Justice Scalia's Dissenting Opini...




The bassist looks like he doesn't know why he's there.


----------



## tacotiklah (Jun 28, 2015)

MetalGravy said:


> The bassist looks like he doesn't know why he's there.



Maybe he's still trying to figure out G, C, D...


----------



## michblanch (Jun 28, 2015)

ferret said:


> It's not quite over....
> 
> Abbott says state agencies may withhold benefits from same sex couples - Houston Chronicle
> 
> The next phase is already beginning. Yeah, they can get married, but that doesn't mean they get the same benefits unfortunately. I don't understand how anyone can honestly believe withholding benefits or rights will fly, but they probably don't care and plan to fight tooth and nail, even if they know they'll ultimately lose again.





"Abbott's directive ordered the heads of state agencies to prioritize religious freedom, writing that no adverse action should be taken against a state official "on account of the person's act or refusal to act that is substantially motivated by sincere religious belief." 

Your refusal to act as a public employee directly violates the rights awarded by the SC. 

If you don't want to issue licenses for gays and feel so strongly about it then resign from your F'ning job. 

It's very simple. You work for the state , you are not a privately owned cake shop. 
This opens the door for judges, JOP's , clerk's of court and other agencies to cry "It's against my religion". 

He's an idiot who fails to see that he is in the shrinking minority just like the people I played golf with yesterday. 

Jesus it's aggravating. 
I argued with a guy yesterday who said it diminished his marriage. 
I told him the only thing that diminished his marriage is the fact that he drinks 15 beers playing golf, loses any sense of decorum and hits on the cart girl hoping he can .... her. Told him that he hits on women nonstop while his wife and kids are at home and that is what hurts his marriage. 

I'm still pissed off and in a bad mood over dumb .... like this. 
Even in the clubhouse, old farts, homophobes and jag offs were acting like the sky feel.

There was a gay rights parade here in Houston yesterday and I'm proud of my kids for going and I tell people they went. 
This bull.... has to end!!


----------



## estabon37 (Jun 28, 2015)

michblanch said:


> I argued with a guy yesterday who said it diminished his marriage.
> I told him the only thing that diminished his marriage is the fact that he drinks 15 beers playing golf, loses any sense of decorum and hits on the cart girl hoping he can .... her. Told him that he hits on women nonstop while his wife and kids are at home and that is what hurts his marriage.



No doubt he can rely on double-think to be at peace with his behaviour not lining up with his claims. Hell, Donald Trump's recent response to the question "What's traditional about being married three times?" was to say "...good point. I've been a very hard-working person, and actually, I have a great marriage". When pressed to stick to the topic, he responded: "I really don't say anything ... I'm for traditional marriage". 

When someone hasn't spent any time actually questioning their beliefs, the only two things you can virtually guarantee is that they'll be pissed off that somebody asked them to justify their stance, and that they'll translate their feelings of anger into an accusation that you're attacking them and whatever belief system they're using to support their stance. I'm not even talking about religion here; I live in an area where anytime you call someone out on a homophobic remark, the 'defence' is always tied to 'being a man', or 'I just don't want some dude checking me out', or some other masculine bullshit. When people model their behaviour off an ideal, or a belief, it's really tricky to get them to realise that the existence of alternative beliefs suggests that theirs is not an absolute reality, and they'll fight tooth and nail to maintain the illusion. 

If one seriously considers their marriage to be diminished by another's marriage, then you have to wonder on one hand how little their partner means to them, and on the other hand whether other marriage practices have already diminished their marriage into virual non-existence. People get married to subvert visa laws. People get married to obtain wealth. People spontaneously get married in Vegas because they think it's funny. People get married because their families want them to. Hell, there are likely thousands of cases of heterosexual couples having families and living fantastic, fulfilling lives that never bothered getting married. At this stage, if factors exterior to your relationship actually diminished your marriage, it would have shrunk into nothingness by now. 

So, I agree with your assessment of your fellow golfer:



michblanch said:


> He's an idiot...



But then you started picking on minorities:



michblanch said:


> ...who fails to see that he is in the shrinking minority just like the people I played golf with yesterday.



Shame on you!


----------



## ferret (Jun 28, 2015)

More from Texas, looks like it's already gone to needing to sue.... "The forms are updated and I'm not going to ask for them to be updated, so you can't get married."
Lesbian Couple In East Texas Sue After Being Denied Marriage License

Though the article isn't very clear whether or not they've sued or are planning to do so.


----------



## mongey (Jun 28, 2015)

power to USA for getting this through . sad Australia is still quite a distance off 

In the day and age with so much bad stuff in the world it blows my mind people still get upset about who people fall in love with and choose to spend their lives with 

its so self indulgent to think that if there is a God he ( or she) gives an F about what you do with your bits .


----------



## flint757 (Jun 28, 2015)

The attorney general here is playing the "I'm mad that things didn't go my way so I'm going to subvert/break the law in retaliation".

Funny thing is a lot of people in the anti crowd down here are playing the 'Supreme Court is overreaching its authority' card, but it's BS. Anytime the conservatives have gotten their way using whatever means they can (including the Supreme Court) they don't question the method...until it doesn't work for them. At the very least it's amusing (sad?) to see how many people don't understand how the law and our government operates. The ignorance is so strong they don't even realize when they're being gigantic hypocrites. Sadly, I get to see this more often since anytime religious related laws come up the same ignorance peaks its head out to play some more.

If my family and close friends didn't live here I definitely wouldn't be...


----------



## asher (Jun 28, 2015)

IOKIYAR: It's O.K. If You Are Republican.


----------



## ihunda (Jun 28, 2015)

If it's like in France, "marriage for all" is the easy part. About time!
Then the difficult, chaos inducing discussions are around the right to adopt children and the right to use artificial procreations methods. That's when the fun starts.


----------



## AxeHappy (Jun 29, 2015)

A Facebook friend of mine's husband just broke up with her because can't be with someone who is a, "Faggot loving ass." 

Unbelievable to me.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 29, 2015)

AxeHappy said:


> A Facebook friend of mine's husband just broke up with her because can't be with someone who is a, "Faggot loving ass."
> 
> Unbelievable to me.


 
Good riddance, sounds like.


----------



## AxeHappy (Jun 29, 2015)

I agree, the guy sounds like a real piece of ..... 

I have just never actually experienced someone express that kind of hatred for minorities in my personal life. It...is...my brain has trouble processing it honestly.


----------



## asher (Jun 29, 2015)

AxeHappy said:


> A Facebook friend of mine's husband just broke up with her because can't be with someone who is a, "Faggot loving ass."
> 
> Unbelievable to me.



Kitten that guy.


----------



## KristapsCoCoo (Jun 29, 2015)

AxeHappy said:


> A Facebook friend of mine's husband just broke up with her because can't be with someone who is a, "Faggot loving ass."
> 
> Unbelievable to me.



Haha, this seems to actually affect some friendships and relationships, as I got into some serious argument over this with my girlfriend... I wonder how many breakups like this have already happened because of this...


----------



## flint757 (Jun 29, 2015)

Some people were super serious when they said it diminished their marriage.


----------



## michblanch (Jun 29, 2015)

AxeHappy said:


> A Facebook friend of mine's husband just broke up with her because can't be with someone who is a, "Faggot loving ass."
> 
> Unbelievable to me.




That relationship has deeper issues than gay marriage. 

If gay marriage can break up your heterosexual marriage, then there wasn't much substance to it. 

Just this morning at the office 2 coworkers a female and male were talking about how it's wrong. 
The male coworker tried to justify the ban by saying it hurts our tax system and now the government gets less money. 

He is currently engaged. So I asked him if he will be moving from the higher tax rate of single to the less taxed rate of married? And when he has kids , if he will claim them. 
Guess the answer. 
So I then shot holes in his thinking. 
Then it all came down to, "well I don't want a gay guy hitting on me". 
I then explained that he was balding , overweight and not exactly prime rib for the rampant gay loving making circuit that is everywhere including our parking lot. 

And besides if he gets tricked into some gay love making, then props to the gay guy that convinced him. Cause he is a player.
Cause We can't even get the guy to clean up his coffee mess on the counter. 


"The times they are a changing"


----------



## flint757 (Jun 29, 2015)

I never understood the fear of being hit on aspect in general, but especially when it pertains to gay marriage, as whether or not they can get married they would still be gay AND they could still theoretically hit on you. Makes no sense.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 29, 2015)

If women aren't lined up to hump you, why would gay men? They're usually more attractive/better groomed anyway so if one thinks I look good despite doing little to nothing to maintain my appearance then I'm a sexy bitch.


----------



## ferret (Jun 29, 2015)

flint757 said:


> I never understood the fear of being hit on aspect in general, but especially when it pertains to gay marriage, as whether or not they can get married they would still be gay AND they could still theoretically hit on you. Makes no sense.



It's a masculinity thing. Homophobes fear being treated the same way they treat women.


----------



## elkinz (Jun 29, 2015)

Its hard for me to understand why people get SO uncontrollably upset over something that doesn't directly affect them. If youre not gay, don't worry about it! Its not going to affect you. 

Its so sad to hear that people are intentionally not giving out marriage licenses... Why do people have such a strong vendetta to deny others their own personal happiness? 

But still we hear stories like the one a few comments above this, and that in itself is pretty heartbreaking.


----------



## asher (Jun 29, 2015)

Because they're bigots.

SATSQ


----------



## michblanch (Jun 29, 2015)

The clerk of courts here in Houston is being smart about this until it gets sorted out. 
He is transferring anyone who can't issue a marriage license because of their religious beliefs to other departments. 
And licenses are being issued to couples wanting them. 
That's not the answer but at least it stopped the those hoping to bring their bigotry to the PUBLIC job.


----------



## estabon37 (Jun 29, 2015)

asher said:


> SATSQ



Dude, you're making up acronyms like it's going out of fashion!

Closer to topic, the 'mascilinity thing' is stronger in my experience than any other factor. I live in a regional area, where 'how to be a man' is a more common conversation than religion. It's not even about fear of receiving the treatment they hand out; it's about maintaining the status quo. Part of the status quo is the idea that gay guys just aren't 'real men', because if you're loudly proclaiming your lust toward womenfolk, you're not a dude. I'm ashamed to admit, I bought into that crap until my late teens, and I found it hard to shake even in my early twenties (even though I wasn't replicating the behaviour by the end, I still believed it to an extent). 

Such is the power of a belief system. Michblanch's golfing buddies, my old schoolmates, and many other men have a very narrow conception of 'acceptable' masculine behaviour. Not only do they consider these unwritten rules to be above reproach, but they treat each element as both a rite of passage and a means of social status: you're 'more' a man if you chase more tail, drink more booze, play / watch more sport. A single backward step means revoking man-status, and there's consequences for those that don't fit the mould in the form of constant verbal harassment, if not physical abuse. You don't need anybody to be in charge, and you don't need a written guide; you just need everybody to police one another's behaviour. Shit, now that I look at it, the belief in a certain form of masculinity is just Part A; Part B looks more like the Stasi (East Germany's secret police - the crazy fuckers were so obsessed with the lives of citizens that they even tried to profile people's scents. Thankfully, nobody would pull that sort of stuff these days.).

I don't know to what extent this sort of behaviour is prevalent amongst men in the US, or elsewhere in the world. I'm sure that it's more common to specific areas or subcultures, which is pretty much the case here in Aus. In any case, it sounds as if the Supreme Court decision is more of an extremely important legal landmark in a process of change that is still far from finished. It's great that the larger Western culture has changed enough to enable this decision, and it's great that it has been generally well received internationally. It's just a shame that some golfing partners, some dickhead public officials, and some complete-fuckwits-with-scary-hair-that-are-currently-running-for-president think that when the whole world is leaving them behind, it must be the world that's wrong.

EDIT: I wrote 'the' where I should have written 'be', and have had my man-status revoked accordingly.


----------



## tacotiklah (Jun 29, 2015)

Be honest, who didn't see crap like this coming?

JOBE WILL NOT ISSUE SAME SEX MARRIAGE LICENSES - The Levisa Lazer


If you can't do your job, gtfo and let someone else in that is capable of doing.


----------



## flint757 (Jun 29, 2015)

I wish I still worked at an ice cream shop like I did in high school. I'd start denying people mint chocolate chip ice cream because I don't like it. 

What these people are doing isn't much different honestly...


----------



## tacotiklah (Jun 29, 2015)

You don't like mint chocolate chip ice cream??? 


YOU ARE PERSECUTING MY RIGHT TO ENJOY ICE CREAM!!! STOP THIS BLASPHEMOUS HEATHEN AND REPENT OF YOUR WAYS!!!


----------



## metaldoggie (Jun 29, 2015)

flint757 said:


> I wish I still worked at an ice cream shop like I did in high school. I'd start denying people mint chocolate chip ice cream because I don't like it.





I love mint chocolate!


On topic - I love it when the law is changed to tell bigots to go f*ck themselves. Sadly it won't remove them from the planet, but eventually the general populace of apathetic non-thinkers will come to accept equality as the norm and those who are single mindedly hateful will be shunned.


A happy result on behalf of many friends and potentially one of my kids (going through an uncertain time).


----------



## asher (Jun 29, 2015)

estabon: I didn't make it up, it flies around another place I lurk quite a bit 

Urban Dictionary: SATSQ

(though I like Silly over Stupid)

what else did I make up?  I got IOKIYAR there too.


----------



## AxeHappy (Jun 30, 2015)

I've had plenty of guys hit on me. I paint my nails, style my hair, have been known to wear makeup (BLUE EYELASHES FOR THE ....ING WIN), and used to be able to do chin ups with one arm. Not the more epic one handed chin ups though. *sigh* 

My response to them was the same as too women I was not interested in. I really don't get why it bothers people. Also, gay marriage being legal or not really has nothing to do with getting hit on. Single people hit on and .... each other all the damn time. Crazy homophobes and their completely flawed, ridiculous and offensive logic.




Yes, the marriage had many more problems than just this issue. It appears it was a pretty abusive situation. Which just ups the number of people I know who have been in abusive relationships. The number is...staggering high. And includes literally all of my closest friends. Disgusting.

TLDR;
Mint-Chocolate Chip ice cream is one of the most over-rated flavours.


----------



## tacotiklah (Jun 30, 2015)

And even more blowback from this ruling...
East Tennessee hardware store puts up 'No Gays Allowed' sign


But yeah, people will claim that this isn't a civil rights issue. Jeez...


----------



## ferret (Jun 30, 2015)

Really wish I could move away from the South.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Jun 30, 2015)

tacotiklah said:


> And even more blowback from this ruling...
> East Tennessee hardware store puts up 'No Gays Allowed' sign
> 
> 
> But yeah, people will claim that this isn't a civil rights issue. Jeez...




Well I guess Adam and Steve won't be shopping there .


----------



## celticelk (Jun 30, 2015)

tacotiklah said:


> And even more blowback from this ruling...
> East Tennessee hardware store puts up 'No Gays Allowed' sign
> 
> 
> But yeah, people will claim that this isn't a civil rights issue. Jeez...



Odious, but legal. Tennessee has no statewide anti-discrimination protections for sexual orientation, and there's a state law preventing municipalities from supplementing the state protections after Knoxville, Memphis, and Nashville implemented local anti-discrimination ordinances. Clearly there's more work to be done.


----------



## Demiurge (Jun 30, 2015)

tacotiklah said:


> And even more blowback from this ruling...
> East Tennessee hardware store puts up 'No Gays Allowed' sign
> 
> 
> But yeah, people will claim that this isn't a civil rights issue. Jeez...



In a way, stuff like that is kind of a good thing. 

Think about the confederate flag- it has been flying in too many places kept cozy by mealy-mouthed, polite language trying to obfuscate what it really stood for. Eventually, the jig had to be up- but look how long.

If you're going to be a bigot, don't be a coward, too. Go whole hog: let everybody see who you are and don't mince words. Only then will it be put upon people in the community to have to confront that ugliness and decide how to proceed.


----------



## estabon37 (Jun 30, 2015)

asher said:


> estabon: I didn't make it up, it flies around another place I lurk quite a bit
> 
> Urban Dictionary: SATSQ
> 
> ...



HOLY SHIT! I totally forgot about that segment in MAD magazine, and it was often my favourite part of any issue. Gonna storm the internet to find a bunch of 'em. If we still had a rep system, I'd find a way to make you king of sevenstring, you magnificent bastard.

I didn't think you were actually making any acronyms up, it just makes me feel old and out of touch when I see one I don't recognise, so it makes me feel better to accuse people of wrongdoing rather than admitting to a gap in my knowledge  Which, when I think about it, is exactly how the people we're complaining about are reacting to gay marriage. I'm an acronym homophobe. An acrophobe? 



Demiurge said:


> In a way, stuff like that is kind of a good thing.
> 
> Think about the confederate flag- it has been flying in too many places kept cozy by mealy-mouthed, polite language trying to obfuscate what it really stood for. Eventually, the jig had to be up- but look how long.
> 
> If you're going to be a bigot, don't be a coward, too. Go whole hog: let everybody see who you are and don't mince words. Only then will it be put upon people in the community to have to confront that ugliness and decide how to proceed.



Sure, but wasn't the confederate flag used as a rallying point to an extent? When people can get behind a symbol, or 'go whole hog' in numbers, they tend to think their stance is justified without any need for reasoning. I mean, we've seen the following suggestion on this forum fairly often over the last couple of months (especially after the 'cake shop' story): let people be publicly hateful, and then watch their connections to the community disappear as they lose all of their friends and / or customers. But our conversations on the social realities we encounter suggest that won't happen. The likeminded will support one another - *for better or worse*. 

When I think about it, the ability to form subcultures, to create and stand behind symbols, and supporting fellow members of a small community while slowly winning the support of society at large were huge contributors to the dramatic shift in social and legal acceptance of equal rights for gay people. They might even have been as influential as using education, logical arguments, or basic appeals to human rights (which are three elements the homophobes pretty clearly don't have going for them). In theory, wouldn't 'going whole hog' actually help sustain the anti-gay movement far beyond its natural life span?


----------



## Demiurge (Jun 30, 2015)

estabon37 said:


> In theory, wouldn't 'going whole hog' actually help sustain the anti-gay movement far beyond its natural life span?



My thought is that it would do the opposite. I guess my point is that the confederate flag situation was something that, using your words, lived beyond its natural life span _because_ it was allowed to become a moving target, collecting a variety of meanings (southern heritage/identity, states' rights, historical appreciation, etc.) that could be claimed to be less-insidious. It's much harder to confront something when the opponent can reply, "aw, well, it doesn't mean that..."

I'm not saying it's great for homophobes to be emboldened to go HAM with their beliefs, but I think if they're going to be homophobes then they should just tell it like (they think) it is, then the animus will be easier to identify and to challenge. Allowing their position to be a moving target (religion, tradition, "natural order", SCOTUS overstepping, state rights, etc.) provides the same plausible deniability as referenced above.


----------



## Captain Butterscotch (Jun 30, 2015)

Guys, it is SO fun being in Arkansas right now


----------



## tacotiklah (Jun 30, 2015)

I live in SoCal and it's fun as hell to be here. Sure, we get the occasional nutbag that thinks this is the coming of the apocalypse, but for the most part a LOT of people are supportive of this. I have over 300 friends on my fb friend's list, and like 75% or more had either a rainbow or trans pride filter over their pics. I was so damn proud of them.


----------



## estabon37 (Jul 1, 2015)

Demiurge said:


> My thought is that it would do the opposite. I guess my point is that the confederate flag situation was something that, using your words, lived beyond its natural life span _because_ it was allowed to become a moving target, collecting a variety of meanings (southern heritage/identity, states' rights, historical appreciation, etc.) that could be claimed to be less-insidious. It's much harder to confront something when the opponent can reply, "aw, well, it doesn't mean that..."
> 
> I'm not saying it's great for homophobes to be emboldened to go HAM with their beliefs, but I think if they're going to be homophobes then they should just tell it like (they think) it is, then the animus will be easier to identify and to challenge. Allowing their position to be a moving target (religion, tradition, "natural order", SCOTUS overstepping, state rights, etc.) provides the same plausible deniability as referenced above.



Ah, that makes sense. Admittedly, being an outsider to American cultures / history makes it tricky to fully understand why anybody would rally behind a flag that most people tend to describe as a symbol of racism and / or dissent. In other words, I've only ever heard "what it really stood for" (from your previous post), as opposed to what its defenders might argue it stands for. The 'moving target' analogy works well.


----------



## vilk (Jul 1, 2015)

That's funny, I haven't seen anyone on my fb complaining about it. I guess no one who is very bigoted could be friends with me though 


The thing I like best about this is that now we can shove it in their faces about how wrong they are. _Your stupid opinion is so bad and wrong that the government had to make a law to stop your imbecilic beliefs._ It doesn't matter how fuming mad they get; they can shout, they can cry, they can rant on fb, they can shoot steam out their ears but I can just put my thumb on my nose and say "I wonder how many gays are kissing each other on the alter right now while you speak. You know there's nothing you can do about it, right?"


----------



## TheFranMan (Jul 1, 2015)

I've found the public opinion to be overwhelmingly supportive of the ruling among my peers. There are a few who try to lump this together with the Confederate Flag issue (what?). There are a few who said their Christian rights are being trampled. Blah blah, but overall I've been fairly content that most of those I associate with aren't totally backwards haha.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 1, 2015)

Time to end the kicking and screaming down here.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/appeals-court-takes-formal-step-to-end-texas-louisiana-same#.svQ6XlOGnz

EDIT: Bobbeh still don't get it. This guy makes me sick of my state.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidne...l-step-to-end-texas-louisiana-same#.svQ6XlOGn


----------



## Explorer (Jul 4, 2015)

According to the anti-marriage-equality people, they are in favor of a religious group like Muslims to deny others their legal rights, and to allow Muslim government employees to impose their religious beliefs upon others and to deny others the right to follow another religion, or to follow no religion at all. 

In other words, Sharia law is okay.

Oh, it's *not*? It's treasonous to suggest that such a thing sould be okay?

Except when you're the treasonous one?

Special pleading fail. 

Oh, it's okay for some hippies or communists to say they won't follow the rule of law, and the system of Constitutional law?

Oh, it's treasonous when someone else goes in that direction... but not when *you* do. 

They wrap themselves in the flag, and eat Freedom Fries, but when it really comes down to it, they are the enemies of the American way. 

And just like we look back at the racists and their idiocies, including their fights against civil rights for all, we are now looking at them in the present day and seeing their actions and bigotry for what they are. 

It's ironic to see Jindal sideing with George Wallace, a man who wouldn't have let Jindal into white schools. I imagine when Jindal's children learn a bit more about US history, there will be some interesting conversations. 

It's also interesting to see that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who feels the Supreme Court decision is "lawless," is on the verge of indictment for securities fraud. 

Texas Attorney General Facing Possible First Degree Felony Indictment - The New Civil Rights Movement

----

Regarding my Christian fundamentalist friends, they've been told that if I hear them acting against Jesus' law about treating others as they themselves would want to be treated, I'll loudly call them out as judgmental hypocrites. They've been silent on the matter to me all week.


----------



## andremacedo (Jul 4, 2015)

Love won. I'm happy for that. We need to learn to love each other differences. We are all equal, regardless.


----------



## russmuller (Jul 4, 2015)

All I can say is, it's about damn time!

It was just about a decade ago when one of my high school friends had to travel to Massachusetts to marry her wife, and getting other states, insurance companies, etc... to recognize that has been a challenge.

Marriage equality landed here in Arizona last October. Interestingly enough, when comparing things before and after gay marriages were recognized by the state, my father and his wife experienced no difference in their marriage. It's so crazy, it's like letting gay people marry doesn't affect straight marriages at all!


----------



## estabon37 (Jul 5, 2015)

The folks at 'Cyanide and Happiness' seem to be on point once again.


----------



## Duosphere (Jul 5, 2015)

I'll never understand why somebody could care what others do in their beds, I mean it's their lives so go take care of yours.
Life is such an amazing game, so many places and cultures to know, so many batles to fight and things to learn plus this amazing beautiful nature which we can't live without still seems like some minds are soooooo tiny that they care about other people sex lives.
As a musician and having dedicated all my life playing at night and during the day playing different sports, I had a bunch of moments with guys hitting on me, I thought it was funny, I just replied I like chicks and they just walked away.Even though I'm straight still I felt happy cause it's always good having people wanting to know me(us), that's never a negative thing.
To me the dumbest thing is when somebody claims being gay is a choice, yeah somebody woke-up one day then decided to like the same sex and be treated as sht.I never ever chose to like chicks, one day at school I started looking to them, their sexy boobs growing and their hair waving with the wind and finally I felt attracted to them, it was never a choice, it just happened.......maybe......genetics? 
We're dropped in this world without any choices, we don't choose our countries, families, looking, social classes etc, we choose nothing but still to a dumb part of humankind being gay is a choice.The only thing we can choose is our characters, if we're good or bad persons.

One thing that makes me really proud is I never met a musician who had any kind of prejudice, all of them just wanted to make music and friends no matter their looking, social classes, colors or..............what they do in their beds.
Well.....focus on being a good person instead of being a bad one and trying to make other people lives a nightmare, if you don't agree to something different than you, just walk away, this planet has a lot of room to walk alone, I prefer walking together and the more different people are from me, the better my journey will be cause I'll learn a lot more things.

BTW why in 2015 we still have problems about sex and skin colors, why?!
There's only one race = human race, skin colors(looking) has nothing to do with races, so are fat people and skinny people different races?Why the hell different skin colors mean different races?
What a dumb race we are, the only race that's covering nature with concrete and garbage = extinction BUT waste time with sex(the most natural thing ever) and skin colors(another natural thing).
I'm really tired of those closed-minded "people".


----------



## vilk (Jul 6, 2015)

Duosphere said:


> I'll never understand why somebody could care what others do in their beds



It might be hard for someone not religious to understand, but there are people who wholeheartedly believe that there is an infinitely powerful being whose intention is to torture all homosexuals after death for eternity. I'd imagine some of them might even think that God will start interjecting with mortal affairs just because homosexuality upsets him so much. Or, at least that's what they say they believe.

But all I'm saying is that you have to cut these people some slack--we all might be saying/doing ludicrous things if we believed such inane nonsense. That's why we have a gov't system where we can make laws like this, because there's no changing certain inherent problems with people.

I do sometimes wonder if it's a good thing that I take the same approach to accepting religious people that I do for accepting people with mental disabilities. I kinda do believe that once this country gets some kind of psychological health-care system running smooth, people who use religion to ratify bigoted ideas will probably have to go through counseling. Which is probably exactly what they need.


----------



## pfizer (Jul 6, 2015)

I live in a country with a strong Catholic background combined with Confucian ideals; in short, a HIGHLY homophobic setting. 

We treat gays and transgenders here as kind of a sideshow attraction -- we have a lot of openly gay celebrities but they are tended to be a looked at in a perpetually comedic light. 

Here's my take; if you follow the law, if you pay your taxes, if you are both consenting adults, then you deserve all the rights of any other citizen. Bible thumpers love quoting Leviticus when the thing mentions women as property in the very same breath as homosexuality.

And I just fricking love being assumed gay when I say I support gay rights and marriage. Here's an actual conversation I had:

"Why do you support it? You're gay too, aren't you?"
"Well, not now."
"Huh?"
"I mean, so FAR, I'm straight. Maybe I just have really high standards and I just haven't met the right man to make me re-consider. You never know, I might do a late-in-life turn."

The faces the homophobes make gives me life.


----------



## ElRay (Jul 6, 2015)

michblanch said:


> ... The male coworker tried to justify the ban by saying it hurts our tax system and now the government gets less money. ...


More ignorance. Married couples are TAXED at a higher rate; however, withholding is less. The assumption is still that married couples will have a lower average income due to either one spouse (e.g. the female) not working, one spouse (e.g. the female) having a much lower income, or increased deductions for children, therefore, they can get by with lower withholding.

If a married couple is dual-income-no-kids/no-mortgage and the average income doesn't move the higher income spouse into a lower tax bracket, then the couple will get NAILED if they withhold at the married rate. Especially on state taxes.

When my wife and I were D-I-N-Ks, we had to set our withholding to S-2/S-0 (Fed/State) in order to not owe taxes each year.


----------



## Duosphere (Jul 6, 2015)

vilk said:


> It might be hard for someone not religious to understand, but there are people who wholeheartedly believe that there is an infinitely powerful being whose intention is to torture all homosexuals after death for eternity. I'd imagine some of them might even think that God will start interjecting with mortal affairs just because homosexuality upsets him so much. Or, at least that's what they say they believe.



I know, the problem with religious people(of course not all of them) is they apply human feelings to God(or whatever they believe), I mean imagine you're God, you're not only able to travel through the whole universe but you can CREATE universes, you can create whatever you want and do whatever you want, would you care about what humans do in their beds?Or about their colors?
OF COURSE NOT, those are stupid humans feelings! 
Even worse, religious people think they can do things in the name of God like God asked them to do whatever they think is right in His name, that's absurd, so isn't God able to defend Himself or speak by Himself?
Nonsense.
He's God, He can do whatever He wants including "deleting" any planet/universe He got bored about it.
A creature so powerful to me is against life cause life is all about balance, look to nature, 100% in perfect balance so God is against balance = against life.But still people are free to believe in whatever they need BUT NEVER to act in His name, never.
Psychos are bad, killers are bad, drug addicts are bad, bad people are bad, dumb people are bad..........gays.........they never made sex in front of me, what are their bad powers?Making sex with the same sex and helping this crowded planet with birth control and adopting abandoned children?I can't see how God would be against that


----------



## Glosni (Jul 10, 2015)

If anyone wants to read a best-of-the-worst reactions, here you go: Stalin! Hitler! Man Marries Bacon! The Religious Right

SATAN!


----------



## Explorer (Jul 10, 2015)

One thing which I constantly run across on other forums is the "slippery slope" argument, about how allowing two consenting adults to marry will lead to sex with children, animals, etc.

It's strange that everyone seems to have the same blind spot when asking what could possibly stop bestiality and child marriages. Really? You really aren't familiar with the idea of adult consent? 

What's extremely shocking about this is that a lot of the groups which have argued that another adult human doesn't deserve the same rights is that they also don't mind having sex with someone who can't consent. 

Women and young girls in some US religious groups are viewed as property, with child marriages happening without adult consent. Nazis and American slave owners would assert that Jews and blacks (respectively) weren't fully human... and then would decide to have sex with those same animals. 

wut. 

I do have friends who are evangelical fundamentalist Christians, and who have occasionally made positive arguments for those weird old-church-dude/young-underage-bride marriages. No one has argued about the claimed "slippery slope" thing in my presence since I promised to point out the huge logs in their eyes, but if they do bring it up in the future, I am curious if they now feel that the religious freedoms they previously argued for are actually dangerous and in favor of the slippery slope they claimed was a bad thing....


----------



## vilk (Jul 13, 2015)

I think that they don't really believe that. They've just been told it is an appropriate excuse/ratification for saying gays shouldn't marry. I'd fathom that many people who allegedly don't want gays to marry/ gay people to exist actually don't really have any investment that "belief", but they've just been pulled really deep into whatever religious fervor the people around them have. For whatever reasons (and I'm sure there are many that are varied), old people feel very uncomfortable about homosexuality. I think that as a society we are slowly doing away with that. Eventually people will be comfortable with homosexuality, and they'll all still be "christians" who claim to have a problem with whatever their preacher has a problem with.

I guess I got kinda off point, but I'm just saying no one at the core of gay haters is saying so because they're actually concerned with a "slippery slope". They just plain don't like gays.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Jul 13, 2015)

I think the more accurate thing to say is that they believe it, but only because they've been taught since birth and they haven't put any critical thinking into it. 

It'll definitely get better, but just like racism it'll never completely dissappear. 

My favorite joke involving the slippery slope thing is "a man asks another man to have sex, he can accept or deny. Ask a horse and they'll always say nay."


----------



## Explorer (Jul 14, 2015)

vilk said:


> ...I'm just saying no one at the core of gay haters is saying so because they're actually concerned with a "slippery slope". They just plain don't like gays.



Bingo!

There is a lot of animus hidden behind claims of religious beliefs. 

One of the clerks who denied a marriage license to a gay couple, based on her Biblical beliefs, has been divorced 3 times and married 4. She's down with Leviticus as long as she can ignore what it says about divorce. 

It would be interested if the courts decided to investigate if something is genuinely a firmly held religious belief, as opposed to just hiding behind a claim of such.


----------



## celticelk (Jul 14, 2015)

Explorer said:


> It would be interested if the courts decided to investigate if something is genuinely a firmly held religious belief, as opposed to just hiding behind a claim of such.



For all that I'm critical of the uses to which "religious freedom" is currently being put, I think that having courts decide whether a particular person's religious beliefs are sincere is a really horrible idea.


----------



## Explorer (Jul 16, 2015)

I agree that it's hard to have *anyone* judge what is an actual religious belief, and what is just someone taking on religious camouflage for some perceived advantage. 

However, my great suspicion is that a lot of politicians who try to extend their faith upon others through the use of their public office will be the some ones who fight to get courts to stop recognizing faiths like the Satanic Temple. 

Personally, I think it would be easier if the new interpretation of "no law regarding" a religion also meant that no religion should be treated differently from other organizations, including having to pay taxes on property instead of getting special treatment. That special treatent is written into the law, so it should be removed.


----------

