I don’t quite get the opposition to gay marriage but I also don’t understand why gays would want to deal with all the nagging.
— Dirk Dachs (@SoapyJohnson) March 15, 2012
Not surprising North Carolina, shame on you.
Spare me the outrage. Keep in mind, you live in a state where you were never given a choice in the matter, it was decided for you. Your legislators didn’t trust you enough to make what they believed was the right decision.
Give credit to NC for actually allowing democracy to take place, not thinking it knew best or assumed the people would vote it down. I’m not saying I agree with the outcome, it is what it is. Bottom line, I’d rather be involved than not.
Polls had Amendment One passing north of 60%, so the vote isn’t a shock. Nevertheless, when the result went official, we’re all backwoods homophobes too dumb to handle a ballot and our BBQ sucks.
Piss off, Yankees.
Votes in NC’s future will never be below 39%. That’s a bummer? Bullshit. You should be saluting progress. Fifteen years ago, this would have been 20-25% — another fifteen years, a little over 10% and probably not enough signatures to put it on the ballot.
North Carolina wasn’t going to be the first state to vote in favor of gay marriage, it did what all before it have done with amendments — and affirmed the exact position of the president, until the day after the vote. On Tuesday, Obama was gay-hating bigot like the rest of us; by Wednesday, he had taken a sudden interest in gay rights. What could have prompted that?
I’m amazed how people think it’s their right to vote on what other people do in their private life. What gives any of us the right to decide who can marry and who cannot?
The moment you allow government to step in and trump voters — on ANY issue — we stop being a democratic society. Create an amendment in opposition, gather the votes and change the law! You’re suggesting 61% of the people in North Carolina should have a vote turned against them, because YOU don’t agree with it. They do that in Venezuela.
Night of the election, a gay friend who lives on the coast noted the results surprised him and agreed they’ll only improve. He was pleasantly shocked that the town he grew up in voted against and said that never would have happened when he used to live there. The GOP Speaker of the House admits that in 20 years, it will probably be repealed and no reason to believe it wouldn’t happen sooner. Even Carrie Underwood is on board.
Most of the negative comments I’ve heard are from people in states which have either voted the same way or never had the opportunity, it was socially-engineered into their lives. Our state’s own governor said the thought process reminded her of people in Mississippi, which is a nice stupid comment to piss off everybody in both states. It’s no wonder she’s not running for re-election.
Any process as ambitious as this involves patience. Granted, there will always be towns and regions stuck in time but you’re telling me you live in the one state that’s somehow void of that? That’s hilarious. Go for a drive, look around.
If gay marriage was placed on your November ballot — or any state which currently allows it some form — would it win? There’s a reason your state made every effort to side-step the process of asking your opinion.
NC allowed a public vote — not legislators or judges trusting the people so much to vote NO that they deny the right and slip it through anyway.
The fact you still think the people of NC have the right to vote for another person’s right to marry is disheartening. You want to vote, where I don’t think any of us have the right to decide who marries and who doesn’t.
This is the process involved, no point in drawing from a wish list of could be and want. Shifting opinion takes time but eventually this is less of an issue or thought process for most. The ebb and flow of social conditions will always dictate tweaks such as this and tweaks happen.
Above everything, the loss of democracy is disheartening. Keep giving it away.
I care enough about gay marriage to not care about it at all. Of things that drive me, this doesn’t register. I could care less if two homosexuals get married, just as I could care less if two heterosexuals get married. I don’t see where it involves me.
Don’t tell me gays can’t handle marriage. I know how to say “yes, dear” whenever the fuck I’m told to do something too. — Steven (@farleftcoast) August 8, 2012
Rewarding on many levels, marriage isn’t easy. As Rita Rudner says, “I love being married. It’s so great to find that one special person you want to annoy for the rest of your life.” That two people want to enter into it, that’s the extent of it. What business is it of anyone else to be concerned about the metrics?
You hear jokes about Kim Kardashian’s 72-day marriage and how that idiot is allowed to enter into any contract is mind-numbing, but someone like Neil Patrick Harris is unable to secure the same deal? That’s the single most moronic thing I’ve ever heard. In the grander scheme, who needs to know?
But … it’s the law of the land.
Majority rule takes place at the ballot box and amendments to the constitution require public vote, otherwise states like California would have abandoned this pesky hurdle years ago. This being a conversation about rights, why so eager to give yours away?
Majority rule on every issue could mean the loss of rights for many different kinds of people. Failing to offer and recognize rights to the same process as heterosexual couples is the same as imposing another person’s beliefs on them, be they religious or otherwise. If a law (or lack of) discriminates against a particular group, it’s the duty of the courts to protect those individuals.
You’d prefer the state or the courts just issue a decree and that’s the end of it? Or the feds mandate it nationally? Thirty states have a similar amendment — 60% of the country. The majority of the United States should essentially be ignored?
This is a faith issue, those who oppose — right/left, black/white — nothing wrong with that. Logically, fewer faith-based Republicans approve [9% support, 39% independents] but still just 58% of Democrats in favor.
Guided by religion, inspiring a political choice. Flip this and impose political beliefs onto religious organizations — i.e. Catholic church lawsuit against Obamacare — and the same people will say it’s okay for one but not the other. This is cherry-picking, it only confirms the need for a democratic process to decide, not elected/appointed officials.
I appreciate a process that trusts the citizenry, rather than an order that’s dictated. If it’s an issue you’re in favor of, sure, no skin off your back. What happens when it isn’t?
And don’t tell me that 39% is not a step forward. This is from 1961:
We don’t base civil rights on the whim of the majority, because you get unjust laws such as NC. You also fail to realize when people vote they bring their biases, religious beliefs and personal feelings into play. What right do they have to mix church and state in that manner? None but, they do it anyway.
Attach each voter to a random generator and let the computer tell us what to do. People shouldn’t consider feelings and beliefs when forming a voting opinion? That’s definition of a robotic, nanny state and explains why you live where you do.
While you’ve never put words into action on any level beyond speaking them, I expressed my opinion on gay marriage by voting against the amendment. Did I not consider feelings, beliefs? EVERYONE DID. We celebrated democracy in North Carolina and it didn’t end in the result that 39% of us wanted.
You’d prefer a system where a command is given and gay marriage is legal. While I’d be fine with the outcome, it’s not how our government works — and let’s be thankful it isn’t because what happens when they rule on something you have feelings, beliefs and biases AGAINST?
The talk is tough at Christians or Mormons, never Muslims — who’d don’t vote on gay marriage. They kill gays for existing, but let’s talk about softer targets instead.
If a straight guy doesn’t support gay rights, then he shouldn’t be allowed to watch lesbian porn
— Obscuria (@Obscuria514) April 21, 2012
The result is still unacceptable in today’s society, behind the curve. I’m proud we have a president supportive of gay rights. Hopefully Obama’s endorsement will sway minds and opinion.
Then he should have said something — I don’t know — maybe a day earlier, when it actually mattered.
Prior to evolving, the LGBT community believed the president had ignored them. Donors were boycotting. The Obamas campaigned and fundraised in North Carolina repeatedly (the importance of a swing state) up until the primary and had dodged the issue completely. Had he spoken out, plus maybe 3-4 point boost in the polls — a 6-8 point swing. That could have happened. Obama canceled an election day campaign event in Asheville specifically to avoid questions or take a position. Voting present.
The amendment approved, 15 electoral votes turn red and Obama “comes out,” so to speak. Campaigning in NC declines and rumors suggest he may not even stay overnight when he accepts the nomination in Charlotte.
Now he’s the first gay president, a champion of gay rights who’s still not discussing it to the extent that a champion might do. The votes lost in support of gay marriage are overshadowed by donations he otherwise would never secure from the LGBT community — and those funds are concentrated on beating up Mitt Romney in swing states, not helping push the position or change attitudes.
Have you seen a single Obama TV ad touting it?
Thanks for raining on the parade. It’s people like you who make the fight impossible.
Not raining on a parade, but more can be done besides an interview with Robin Roberts to say what apparently has always been believed. Beyond that clip, nothing’s elevated the argument. Gays are used as an ATM to raise campaign funds and little else. So the question is: what was being advanced, the argument or the career?
Gay marriage is finally an official part of the Democrat platform. This happened last month, why not 10 years ago? In September, DNC planners intend to support gay marriage but do so specifically without featuring actual gay couples — Gay soldier and fellow (straight) soldier who served together in Iraq or Afghanistan (ideally the straight soldier was helped by the gay soldier, i.e., medic, in fire fight).
Give the Democrats and gays one thing in common, they know how to choreograph a show.
Still think there hasn’t been progress? The trailer for In and Out, from 1997:
Caught this not long ago from the opening credits, while surfing HBO. I’d seen it in the theatre, when people used to do that. Remember laughing then, but an uncomfortable vibe due to the subject. Now, no. Then, yes.
Loaded with killer one-liners, very old school comedy; Kevin Kline is straight from a Jack Lemmon mold. Solid cast, Joan Cusack at her Joan Cusack best; written well and even the small roles get lines. Bob Newhart is on my Mount Rushmore and he repeatedly destroyed me, where most of it is him selling it and the line is good. Too many Streisand references, I remember saying that at the time. Cheapened a good joke. Liza, Bette, Judy, mix it up.
It was #1 on opening weekend and the “gay thing” was a taboo marketing feature. This is 15 years ago, it doesn’t work now. To pay off, it must mirror what’s believable in the times we live in. As well as the story holds up today, that’s the least believable aspect of the movie — the town’s reaction to even the hint that Kline’s character might possibly be gay.
Matt Dillon’s character says it, people don’t react the same way. It’s less of a thing.
The delta between the Ellen Degeneres and Anderson Cooper coverage is a good measure of our social progress. — Jon Henke (@JonHenke) July 2, 2012
In the film, the ultimate test was the ability to not dance to Gloria Gaynor’s “I Will Survive.” Howard Brackett is unable to resist, proving he’s gay. Today’s equivalent would be inviting a female friend to see Magic Mike and having her tell you she’s not interested — a good chance she’s a lesbian.
To “bit surf” Dennis Miller’s Boy on a Dolphin theory, here’s Kate Upton on a break from shooting, dancing the Cat Daddy in a tiny bikini. Watch it all the way through. At the end, if you’re a guy and you still want to fuck the photographer — you’re gay.
>> Follow: @SoapyJohnson on Twitter.
>> Comment: Place it on Lucky Dan on Facebook.
© 2012, Soapy Johnson. All rights reserved.