Comments on: Kushner/Harris on Gay Marriage http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/ Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:46:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: rob adams http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-103936 rob adams Thu, 28 Jun 2007 23:58:50 +0000 http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/#comment-103936 While i rhetorically sympathize with the idea of "If i can't do it as a Citizen then you won't either, over my dead body" method of civil-rights, it isn't the best, wisest way. It's more of an adolescent-stage response in terms of how a struggle/revolution evolves and matures towards compromise without sell-out in achieving its goals. This is what matters, really; Marriage is a contract between two individuals, or so it should be State-by-State in the Union. Marriage is a hugely valuable contract to our NAmerican culture, and world. One need only ponder the visceral meaning of the phrase "Sanctity of The Marriage" to fully understand this contract's unique catalytic power of social cohesiveness. Nothing else equals in force: Work? Guild? Dorm? Local club? Bar? Nope... None (...none...!) of these offer the power and force of "stay together against all else or odds" that does our ideal notion of what is marriage. That's why it is penultimately important (vital & life-expanding) in our own civil-rights struggle as a bsexual minority to obtain marriage as a civil-right. Marriage protects and provides numerous types of shelter, both in terms of fundamental economics and basic emotions --- Straights know this, and we shouldn't so quickly disregard the power of the public association. It's hugely empowering. And that's why, exactly, some of them don't want us to have it. rob@egoz.org While i rhetorically sympathize with the idea of “If i can’t do it as a Citizen then you won’t either, over my dead body” method of civil-rights, it isn’t the best, wisest way. It’s more of an adolescent-stage response in terms of how a struggle/revolution evolves and matures towards compromise without sell-out in achieving its goals. This is what matters, really; Marriage is a contract between two individuals, or so it should be State-by-State in the Union.

Marriage is a hugely valuable contract to our NAmerican culture, and world. One need only ponder the visceral meaning of the phrase “Sanctity of The Marriage” to fully understand this contract’s unique catalytic power of social cohesiveness. Nothing else equals in force: Work? Guild? Dorm? Local club? Bar? Nope… None (…none…!) of these offer the power and force of “stay together against all else or odds” that does our ideal notion of what is marriage.

That’s why it is penultimately important (vital & life-expanding) in our own civil-rights struggle as a bsexual minority to obtain marriage as a civil-right. Marriage protects and provides numerous types of shelter, both in terms of fundamental economics and basic emotions — Straights know this, and we shouldn’t so quickly disregard the power of the public association. It’s hugely empowering.

And that’s why, exactly, some of them don’t want us to have it.

rob@egoz.org

]]> By: Daniel http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-103579 Daniel Wed, 27 Jun 2007 17:32:06 +0000 http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/#comment-103579 Another thought -- if marriage is supposed to be for the sake of raising children, as Blankenhorn asserts -- it should be limited then only to those who have or intend to have children. There ought to be an expiration date on your marriage license: "You must conceive or adopt by XX/XX/XX or this license is void." Another thought — if marriage is supposed to be for the sake of raising children, as Blankenhorn asserts — it should be limited then only to those who have or intend to have children. There ought to be an expiration date on your marriage license: “You must conceive or adopt by XX/XX/XX or this license is void.”

]]> By: Daniel http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-103572 Daniel Wed, 27 Jun 2007 17:12:30 +0000 http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/#comment-103572 I just wish there was a way to abolish civil marriage entirely, root and branch. The government has no business whatsoever interfering in any citizen's private domestic relationships. People should be free to have whatever ceremonies -- religious or otherwise -- they want to formalize their commitment, but marriage should not be some special state that grants special rights and privileges. Alas, there are too many straight people who believe that civil marriage has some meaning or value -- and too many queer people who buy into the bourgeois ideology. So instead of true equality -- each individual free to form their own private partnerships without government regulation -- we have to have gay marriage on top of it. Does this mishegas really benefit anyone besides lawyers (no offense meant to the author of this blog)? I just wish there was a way to abolish civil marriage entirely, root and branch. The government has no business whatsoever interfering in any citizen’s private domestic relationships. People should be free to have whatever ceremonies — religious or otherwise — they want to formalize their commitment, but marriage should not be some special state that grants special rights and privileges.

Alas, there are too many straight people who believe that civil marriage has some meaning or value — and too many queer people who buy into the bourgeois ideology. So instead of true equality — each individual free to form their own private partnerships without government regulation — we have to have gay marriage on top of it.

Does this mishegas really benefit anyone besides lawyers (no offense meant to the author of this blog)?

]]> By: homer http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-103558 homer Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:55:53 +0000 http://www.tinmanic.com/archives/2007/06/27/kushnerharris-on-gay-marriage/#comment-103558 Mr. Blankenthorn is a bigot, plain and simple. I could care less about the strengthening marriage argument. If straights have troubles staying married, it certainly isn't something that gays and lesbians have been doing. Mr. Blankenthorn is a bigot, plain and simple. I could care less about the strengthening marriage argument. If straights have troubles staying married, it certainly isn’t something that gays and lesbians have been doing.

]]>