Everyone is a number in this dystopian near-future where cameras track your every move. Score above 90 and your set for life. Score below 75 and you’re on your own, kid.
The Cycler Series
The Cyler Series: What would you do if you woke up one day as a member of the opposite sex? For Jill McTeague, this is no hypothetical question. It’s real life!
|
This picture is from the LA Times. In it Bob Knoke of Mission Viejo, Amanda Stanfield of Monrovia, Jim Domen of Yorba Linda, and J.D. Gaddis also of Yorba Linda celebrate the passage of Proposition 8 in California, a measure which outlaws gay marriage. Isn’t it fantastic?! Eighteen thousand California couples just had their marriages invalidated. Woo hoo! What a victory for love! What exactly do these people think they have gained? 11 Responses to “And Now For the Bad News”Leave a Reply |
|
RSS Feed
The odd thing is, most of the folks I know who are “against gay marriage” are against the promiscuous gay lifestyle. You’d think they’d be in favor of marriage, at least by any other name.
Irrationality knows no limits, Jeanne.
They know not what true love is.
They know not what true love is.
Or empathy, Hillary.
and in other, more optimistic, ballot news – massachusetts overwhelmingly voted to decriminalize carrying small amounts of marijuana. even my mom voted for it!
I didn’t know your Mom was a stoner. Rock on!
It is yet undetermined how California will deal with the 18,000 existing marriages, and my understanding is that there is reason to believe they may not ultimately be dissolved. What stikes me about the passing of Prop 8, however, is that it shows that gay marriage is an issue that seems to cut deeply accross party lines. In order to pass in such a blue state, Prop 8 obviously had significant support from within the democratic party. While this seems surprising on its face, in fact, as discussed previously in this blog, the Presidential candiates for the Democratic party in 2000, 2004, and in 2008 have all been openly opposed to gay marriage. So there is an absence of leadership and political courage on this issue, which means that this change will take longer than it probably should. And while I have yet to hear a reaonable argument against gay marriage, I have also not heard a single main stream candidate willing to take any argument in favor of gay marriage straight to the people and to any opponent who would come out against it.
You’re right, Missile. Fingers crossed that all those marriages are not invalidated. It’s frustrating indeed that the social climate makes it difficult for politicians–particularly democrats–to support gay marriage. You can almost smell the deceit when they try to explain their reasons for supporting gay civil unions while opposing gay marriage. It’s an uncomfortable compromise position, much like don’t ask/don’t tell. Hopefully, though, it’s just an awkward adolescent phase. I think, in the end, gays and lesbians will be recognized as equal citizens. Just not this year.
Mainstream politicians unfortunately pander to get votes, which is why both parties pushed for the “civil unions are okay but let’s not call it marriage” approach. Missile is correct that the applicability of the new gay marriage ban to already existing marriages is very much an open issue, with the law in California generally not favoring retroactivity.
Questions about civil liberties should be decided by the courts, IMO, not the public. If given the choice, a majority will always vote to oppress a minority. In fact, if we had put desegregation to a vote back in the 60′s, we’d still have “separate but equal” schools.
“If given the choice, a majority will always vote to oppress a minority.” Well put. Poetic and very very sad. I wish I could disagree, but I can’t.