tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post2223727903626063142..comments2024-03-26T13:46:42.738-05:00Comments on 4 Quarters, 10 Dimes: On Gay Marriage - A RantDavidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03463621516644789183noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post-39615422950716710192013-03-27T17:23:51.516-05:002013-03-27T17:23:51.516-05:00Yeah, that line made me laugh. :)Yeah, that line made me laugh. :)Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03463621516644789183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post-4577132875896102702013-03-27T15:27:03.665-05:002013-03-27T15:27:03.665-05:00I grok that, David: ironically, the issue you cite...I grok that, David: ironically, the issue you cite and matters of child welfare frankly may be the only really good reasons for the state to be involved in marriages in the first place, but if the state's going to be involved with recognizing and sanctioning relationships for any reason, it needs to do so equally, fairly and justly. But you make a good point, anyway.<br /><br />I have to confess I'm inordinately pleased with myself for "little Pope", though.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18275812152895151542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post-7429181349440509992013-03-27T12:59:07.420-05:002013-03-27T12:59:07.420-05:00Eric, I understand and agree with your point - tha...Eric, I understand and agree with your point - that particular bit of hypocrisy is grating.<br /><br />On the other hand, there are groups opposed to both marriage equality and divorce, and I worry about their ability to infect the body politic with that position too. Divorce, historically, has been a way for women to protect themselves against exploitative or abusive men (yes, I know, counter examples exist all over, but the plural of anecdote is not data), and cutting off that avenue of escape fits nicely into the same truncated world view that refuses to acknowledge the validity of social bonds other than those familiar and approved of by such people.<br /><br />Sometimes I'm glad for the hypocrisy, just because it's one less battle to fight.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03463621516644789183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post-62128074250403419102013-03-27T10:01:47.034-05:002013-03-27T10:01:47.034-05:00I think the most offensive bit of verbal chicanery...<i>I think the most offensive bit of verbal chicanery I've been subjected to by the folks who would deny gays the right to marry is the idea that they are somehow "defending the institution of marriage" by doing so. This is pure unadulterated horse byproduct.</i><br /><br />I'd add a third objection, which is: if they're sincere, where's their opposition to divorce? Where's their campaign to amend the state constitution of Nevada to redefine marriage as a union between one man and one woman <i>that lasts longer than 48 hours</i>. Not a particularly original objection--at this point there's even a cute Facebook meme featuring serial bride Britney Spears making the rounds--but still salient. The greatest threat to "traditional" marriage, if there is one, is the same one that's been around since around the time Henry VIII decided his "little Pope" should have more voice in doctrinal matters than the dude with the funny hat in Rome: straight people.<br /><br />Just had to throw that in.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18275812152895151542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post-86934796399029168692009-05-14T10:50:00.000-05:002009-05-14T10:50:00.000-05:00Kerri - When I was growing up (in a public school ...Kerri - When I was growing up (in a public school district where we got Rosh Hoshana and Yom Kippur off), there was a great deli called "Hymie's" where you could actually get a bacon cheeseburger on a Friday night.<br /><br />Religion is such a personal thing that way.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03463621516644789183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post-64319645700062875662009-05-13T21:47:00.000-05:002009-05-13T21:47:00.000-05:00I once (accidentally) brought a bacon cheeseburger...I once (accidentally) brought a bacon cheeseburger to a lecture on Jewish ethics. Given by a rabbi. I walked into the room, opened my take-out box, and promptly closed it again.<br /><br />Kudos to you, David. And to the various individuals who have seen fit to finally stand up and <B><I>lead</I></B> on this equal rights issue.tellthestorieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07773569364597441359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post-15878381511402754562009-05-10T12:00:00.000-05:002009-05-10T12:00:00.000-05:00Yeah, I know - shameful of me. But theological ic...Yeah, I know - shameful of me. But theological ickiness is a two-way street and those who play that card risk falling under its purview themselves. Further, the applications of this doctrine under US law are somewhat limited - see US v Boiled Okra, 336 US 65, 73, 77 SCt 632, L. Ed. 224 (1963) acknowledging intent of the Framers to provide legal haven for things other people inexplicably enjoy, particularly when societal benefit ensues. Nutrition, human rights - it's all good.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03463621516644789183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5977625681756554695.post-30315983929979588372009-05-10T11:15:00.000-05:002009-05-10T11:15:00.000-05:00Now, see, you're neglecting the most important arg...Now, see, you're neglecting the most important argument of all. The theological argument is that "It's icky," and then there's old legal maxim, <I>ickius ergo nope</I>. I'm surprised you, a historian, would neglect such obvious Constitutional reasoning.Jack Lynchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13440417116228365588noreply@blogger.com