31
   

Who doesn't back gay marriage?

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Feb, 2013 11:57 am
@JLNobody,
Quote:
Indeed, I enjoy friendship with two successfully married gay couples.


Does the friendship permit the telling of "off colour" jokes? Are they rigidly PC friendships? Could you sing The Green Street Girls at a jolly-up?
0 Replies
 
The Pentacle Queen
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Feb, 2013 05:46 pm
Hello Spenidus, how lovely to see you in all your opaque genius; and I think I understand about 40% more of you than I used to, too.

I was going to ask you about what you meant by the comment that a man's love for a woman always involves an element of pity but is maybe not best to entice conversation that makes me angry. Thank you for answering my questions.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Feb, 2013 06:18 pm
@The Pentacle Queen,
One thing rarely considered is that most people outside of sophisticated cities don't take marriage all that seriously. In the peer groups they came from as teenagers they could just as easily have been paired off by drawing straws and be no less content than they are with what they got.

"It might as well have been him as anybody" Molly Bloom says in the last section of Ulysses.

These homosexuals we see on TV declaring their undying love are too serious about it all. They are missing the point and are unable to see the funny side of the subject.

They are narcissists and as such unfit to guide our future policies. The myth teaches the suicidal nature of narcissism.
edgarblythe
 
  4  
Reply Thu 7 Feb, 2013 06:32 pm
Gay people have as much right in my opinion to marry as anybody else. Spendi said something about liberals messing up the institution of marriage, but I am pretty sure I recall that statistics show divorce to be more prevalent in the conservative states.
The Pentacle Queen
 
  2  
Reply Thu 7 Feb, 2013 06:44 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
These homosexuals we see on TV declaring their undying love are too serious about it all. They are missing the point and are unable to see the funny side of the subject.


Yeah, I see your point, but I think that you tend not to see the funny side of much until you stop being discriminated against.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Feb, 2013 11:49 pm
@maxdancona,
And we all now how incredibly successful the Mosuo culture has been.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 7 Feb, 2013 11:55 pm
@edgarblythe,
You know edgar there are plenty of liberals who live in the "conservative states."

Take yourself for example.

Whether or not divorce is more or less prevalent in states that are designated Red or conservative because of voting patterns, it is a stretch to suggest that divorce is a conservative practice.

Conservatives may take advantage of the lowered expectations of committed marriage, but it has been post-modernist progressive thinking and activism that has lowered those expectations.

Perhaps this something for progressives to be proud of and perhaps not, but it's silly to try and turn the thing on it's head with statistics about divorce in "conservative states."
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 12:33 am
On the face of it, I've no problem with same-sex marriages.

Two people in love commited to a faithful monogamous relationship...what's wrong with that?

Of course marriage hardly any longer means a committed faithful monogamous relationship of two people in love, which gives rise to my skepticism about this issue as a burning matter of fairness and equality.

I'm sure there are plenty of gay couple who want to have the rest of society officially recognize their loving and faithful monogamous relationship and, again, I've no problem with that, at all.

I'm also sure there are plenty of gays who want to get married simply because they haven't been able to.

This is all a temporary tempest in a teapot.

Most, but by no means all, gays tend to be liberal. Liberals, as can be intimated by some of the posts in this thread don't hold marriage as all that grand of an institution.

Within the next 5-10 years most if not all states will recognize gay marriages (which is as it should be) and within the next 10-20 years, the divorce rate among married gays will be as great or greater than it is among straight couples.

Gays want the right to particpate in and then trash the institution of marriage.

If I thought the sanctity of the institution had been preserved and was not on the decline, I'd like to think I would still be OK with same-sex marriages, but who knows?

Being conservative means one has an inherent faith in traditions and institutions that have held up over time (and particularly long periods of time).

I get why people don't want to see the institution of marriage fundamentally changed so as to include other than one man and one woman unions. It doesn't necessarily mean that they want to stone gays, but it does mean that they want to preserve the traditions and institution of marriage as they have been for a great many years.

I think it is narrow-minded and offensive to consider all of these people bigots.

If your mind-set is that everthing has to change; that progress for the sake of progress is sacred, then obliterating centuries old institutions is a good thing. Such a mind-set may make you many things, but evil is not, necessarily, one of them, and yet many of these folks are all too quick to assume that those who do not share their mind-set are, in fact, evil: You have a problem with gay marriage, you're a bigoted hater! You don't like Obama's policies, you're a racist hater!

Pro-Choice people are not murderous scum and Pro-Life people are not cavemen wanting to drag women around by the hair.

It works both ways but what I find so amusing is that progressives who love to see themselves as nuanced and worldly are just as quick to condemn the "other" as are the conservative folks who we might have reason to expect such a reaction from, and which progressives so vehemently deplore.

Reminds me of colonials who hated the Wogs while smug in the belief that they were bringing them the benefits of an enlightened civilization.







welovefrobos
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 12:46 am
@maxdancona,
party in only one day on marriage day but at divorce ??????????????
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 05:55 am
As I understand it, churches are free to opt out and refuse to "marry" homosexuals.

I think that those that do "marry" homosexuals, as a business proposition, will be shunned by heterosexuals and will be known all around as the (*******'s) church.

The legislation has also to pass the House of Lords and receive the Queen's assent. Should the Queen sign the bill She opens up the possibility of a heir to the throne "marrying" a same sex partner in a televised ceremony in Westminster Abbey without the trumpets, the bridesmaids, the veil, the train, the bouquet, and, one hopes, the Archbish saying "I pronounce you man and wife--you may kiss the bride".

Media under a D-notice to avoid the word "honeymoon". And an adopted First in Line is something for the Family Division of the High Court of Justice to mull over.

Maybe it is the republicans entering stage left.

There is something so incredibly ridiculous about it all, once the euphemisms are excluded, that I, with my reputation, am lost for words.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 07:06 am
@The Pentacle Queen,
Quote:
Yeah, I see your point, but I think that you tend not to see the funny side of much until you stop being discriminated against.


I don't think homosexuals are being discriminated against Queenie. Quite the contrary.

I don't believe the protestations of undying love. I've seen too many actors and actresses perform that routine. And what does undying love have to do with a formal institution like marriage?

There are plenty of heterosexual couples living together without being married. And they have the same rights as married people. I have met a fair number.
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 07:18 am
@spendius,
And you can tell which side contains the bigots from the down-thumbing.

Especially bearing in mind that you specifically asked--

Quote:
I'd also ask everyone else with a liberal mindset to try not to lambast the people sharing their opinions. I feel the same way you do, but it would be nice if people felt they weren't going to get screamed at for their opinion on this thread.


So much for the liberal mindset eh? None of those exposing a phoney liberal mindset have been down-thumbed. There you have scientific proof of where the bigots are. Irrefutable.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 07:33 am
@The Pentacle Queen,
Quote:
I was going to ask you about what you meant by the comment that a man's love for a woman always involves an element of pity but is maybe not best to entice conversation that makes me angry.


It's an idea Tolstoy has Prince Andrew express to his bride. Maybe "a" bride. I have forgotten. In fact that was one of the two things I thought worth remembering from that book. The other was the sleigh ride through the park in the snow.
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 07:40 am
@spendius,
Try if you will imagining a gentleman looking into Uncle Toby's eyes as Mr Sterne has Widow Wadman do in the sentry box scene in Tristram Shandy.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 07:56 am
@spendius,
Here you are--give yourselves a literary feast at the table of a maestro.

Quote:
Famous Love Passages From English - Literature - Tristram Shandy

By Laurence Sterne

The Widow Wadman is one of the most famous ladies in English literature. Sterne's strange style reveals her to us in flashes, interspersed with endless digressions. But we gather that for eleven years she thought about Uncle Toby before he thought about her.

' Now as Widow Wadman did love my Uncle Toby, and my Uncle Toby did not love Widow Wadman, there was nothing for Widow Wadman to do but to go on and love my Uncle Toby - or let it alone.

' Widow Wadman would do neither the one or the other.

"She stood, however, ready harnessed and caparisoned at all points, to watch accidents.

The Fates, who certainly all foreknew of these amours of Widow Wadman and my Uncle Toby, had, from the first creation of matter and motion (and with more courtesy than they usually do things of this kind), established such a chain of causes and effects hanging so fast to one another that it was scarce possible for my Uncle Toby to have dwelt in any other house in the world, or to have occupied any other garden in Christendom, but the very house and garden which joined and laid parallel to Mrs. Wadman's ; this, with the advantage of a thickset arbour in Mrs.wadman's garden, but planted in the hedgerow of my Uncle Toby's, put all the occasions into her hands which love-militancy wanted; she could observe my Uncle Toby's motions, and was mistress likewise of his councils of war ; and as his unsuspecting heart had given leave to the corporal, through the mediation of Bridget, to make her a wicket-gate of communication to enlarge her walks, it enabled her to carry on her approaches to the very door of the sentry-box ; and sometimes out of gratitude, to make an attack, and endeavour to blow up my Uncle Toby in the very sentry-box itself."
Famous Love Passages From English Literature Trist 600433

The Widow Wadman And Uncle Toby

Now of all the eyes which ever were created - from your own, madam, up to those of Venus herself .... there never was an eye .... so fitted to rob my Uncle Toby of repose as the very eye at which he was looking " From the painting by R. Leslie Copyright Hanfstaengl

So she plans her campaign, which is to be much interested in his campaigns, which Uncle Toby is for ever remembering with the aid of big military maps. She leans over him as he sits, and ". . . . The world will naturally enter into the reasons of Mrs.wadman's next stroke of generalship - which was to take my Uncle Toby's tobacco-pipe out of his hand as soon as she possibly could ; which, under one pretence or other, but generally that of pointing more distinctly at some redoubt or breastwork in the map, she would effect before my Uncle Toby (poor soul) had well march'd above half a dozen toises with it.

" It obliged my Uncle Toby to make use of his forefinger.

The difference it made in the attack was this : that in going upon it, as in the first case, with the end of her forefinger against the end of my Uncle Toby's tobacco-pipe, she might have travelled with it, along the lines, from Dan to Beersheba, had my Uncle Toby's lines reached so far, without any effect; for as. there was no arterial or vital heat in the end of the tobacco-pipe, it could excite no sentiment - it could neither give fire by pulsation, or receive it by sympathy - 'twas nothing but smoke.

' Whereas, in following my Uncle Toby's forefinger with hers, close through all the little turns and indentings of his works-pressing sometimes against the side of it - then treading upon its nail - then tripping it up - then touching it here - then there," and so on - it set something at least in motion.

" This, though slight skirmishing, and at a distance from the main body, yet drew on the rest ; for here, the map usually falling with the back of it close to the side of the sentry-box, my Uncle Toby, in the simplicity of his soul, would lay his hand flat upon it, in order to go on with his explanation ; and Mrs. Wadman, by a manoeuvre as quick as thought, would as certainly place hers close beside it; this at once opened a communication, large enough for any sentiment to pass or repass, which a person skill'd in the elementary and practical part of love-making has occasion for."

• • • •

' ' I am half distracted, Captain Shandy,' said Mrs. Wadman, holding up her cambric handkerchief to her left eye, as she approach'd the door of my Uncle Toby's sentry-box - ' a mote - or sand - or something - I know not what, has got into this eye of mine - do look into it - it is not in the white.'

" In saying which, Mrs. Wadman wedged herself close beside my Uncle Toby, and squeezing herself down upon the corner of his bench, she gave him an opportunity of doing it without rising up. ' Do look into it,' said she.

" Honest soul ! thou didst look into it with as much innocency of heart as ever child look'd into a raree-show-box ; and 'twere as much a sin to have hurt thee.

" .... If a man will be peeping of his own accord into things of that nature - l've nothing to say to it.

• " My Uncle Toby never did : and I will answer for him that he would have sat quietly upon a sofa from June to January .... with an eye as fine as the Thracian Rodope's beside him, without being able to tell whether it was a black or blue one.

" The difficulty was to get my Uncle Toby to look at one at all.

" 'tis surmounted. And " I see him yonder with his pipe pendulous in his hand, and the ashes falling out of it - looking - and looking - then rubbing his eyes - and looking again, with twice the good nature that ever Galileo look'd for a spot in the sun.

" In vain ! for by all the powers which animate the organ, Widow Wadman's left eye shines this moment as lucid as her right - there is neither mote, or sand, or dust, or chaff, or speck, or particle of opake matter floating in it. There is nothing, my dear paternal uncle! but one lambent, delicious fire, furtively shooting out from every part of it, in all directions, into thine.

" If thou lookest, Uncle Toby, in search of this mote one moment longer - thou art undone.

" An eye is for all the world exactly like a cannon, in this respect : That it is not so much the eye or the cannon, in themselves, as it is the carriage of the eye, and the carriage of the cannon, by which both the one and the other are enabled to do so much execution. I don't think the comparison a bad one. However, as 'tis made, all I desire in return is, that whenever I speak of Mrs. Wadman's eyes (except once in the next period), that you keep it in your fancy.

" ' I protest, madam,' said my Uncle Toby, ' I can see nothing whatever in your eye.'

" ' It is not in the white,' said Mrs. Wadman ; my Uncle Toby look'd with might and main into the pupil.

" Now of all the eyes which ever were created - from your own, madam, up to those of Venus herself. . . . there never was an eye of them all so fitted to rob my Uncle Toby of his repose as the very eye at which he was looking. It was not, madam, a rolling eye - a romping or a wanton one - nor was it an eye sparkling - petulant or imperious - of high claims and terrifying exactions, which would have curdled at once that milk of human nature, of which my ' Uncle Toby was made up - but 'twas an eye full of gentle salutations - and soft responses - speaking - not like the trumpet stop of some ill-made organ, in which many an eye I talk to, holds coarse converse - but whispering soft - like the last low accent of an expiring saint - How can you live comfortless, Captain Shandy, and alone, without a bosom to lean your head on - or trust your cares to ?

"It was an eye " But I shall be in love with it myself, if I say another word about it.

"It did my Uncle Toby's business."


Read more: http://chestofbooks.com/food/household/Woman-Encyclopaedia-4/Famous-Love-Passages-From-English-Literature-Tristram-Shandy.html#.URUAzfJu7eU#ixzz2KJcSwgiX. to see the painting which is wonderful.


0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 10:01 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
I want to trash the institution of marriage. And I am not gay.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 10:30 am
@maxdancona,
And what would you put in its place?

Huxley in BNW cheated by having babies made in bottles in the Hatchery to save himself having to describe the embarrassing details of BNW reproduction. Amongst other things.

He thus broke Henry Fielding's rule of there being nothing in a work of fiction which could not happen in real life no matter how far-fetched.

Not that I agree with such a rule when it comes to eschatological matters. Star Trek was utterly ridiculous and anybody who defends it on the basis that it is an analogy of the US political structure is doubly ridiculous.
JLNobody
 
  3  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 02:16 pm
@spendius,
But do keep in mind that the genre is called "science FICTION".
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 02:19 pm
@JLNobody,
That constant source of madness.
0 Replies
 
Berty McJock
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2013 04:03 pm
as far as my opinion goes, marriage, be it gay, straight, inter-religion, whatever, is just an ostentatious display of status. "Look at my engagement ring", "come to my absurdly expensive wedding, and look at me in my ludicrously expensive dress/tux". Then you have the wedding ring, yet another outward display of status. "yes, i'm married everyone, look my ring proves it." it's like those "baby on board" signs in cars. well done! you had a baby! people should be driving carefully whatever you have on board, and if they are driving like a twat, you having a baby on board won't stop them.
sorry, i went off on one a bit there.
love is, and should be absolute. it shouldn't need justifying with a big fancy ceremony, and a contract. a marriage ends up turning love into a transaction, and is all about show.
anyway, that's how i see it.
can you tell i'm single and childless???
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.63 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 12:03:01