Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile bunnywarez! Previous Previous Next Next
love in the time of H8 - adventures of a red-headed stepchild in the house of love
mermaid on the mic
love in the time of H8
been enjoying the weekend so far. Fryday there was a party in the building and Jovino and I went over and DJ'd. I love a good party that I can stumble home from on foot. aside from some drunk girl who would NOT leave me alone, I had a great time.

last night was Jeremy's birthday so we headed over the bridge to join in the celebration. it was a great house party, just the right number of people for the space. I had some lovely conversations and really enjoyed myself. afterwards we went to Sparky's and got a midnight snack (well ok, a 2am snack). the economy must really be in the shitter because when we rolled up right before 2 we were seated immediately without having to wait, and when we left there were several empty tables... on SATURDAY NIGHT at bar closing time!

on the way over to Jeremy and Phil's place, we drove through the 18th/Castro intersection and there were folks out there holding a vigil for marriage equality. when I think about this issue, I get angry, but when I see people out protesting it makes me feel deeply sad. it is SO WRONG that it has to happen this way! how do people think it is ok to discriminate like this?! I got all worked up and sad and had to compose myself before we could go to the party.

at the party, there was some talk about the issue, and the consensus seemed to be that folks are fairly confident that it will be overturned in the courts, and that even if not, the time is coming. I've read a fair amount about this issue, and I've seen a theory that the way to solve the problem is through separating "marriage" from "legal unions" so that "marriage" means the religious side of it and "legal unions" are what you get when you file all the forms with the guv.

personally, I can't see solving this issue through what basically amounts to linguistic sleight of hand. the word "marriage" is in common use for both kinds of ceremonies, and I just can't see either side agreeing to let go of that. it's a civil rights issue, and therefor everyone needs to be treated equally, and making up a new term (as we've seen with "civil unions" - which are NOT on par with marriage on several levels) is just not going to be acceptable. and, why should it? separate but equal has always been at best imperfect, at worst a euphemism for institutionalized discrimination. fuck that! didn't we learn anything from the '60s?

what *I* want is marriage rights for EVERYONE. (and soon, please! how long must this go on?)
3 smooches or Gimme Some Love!
starchy From: starchy Date: November 17th, 2008 11:44 am (UTC) (Link)
The problem with this approach is that if you change the language and create a new legal class, all the laws which currently refer to marriage won't automatically apply to the new phrase/class. It's like what would happen if you decided to recreate Microsoft Windows from scratch: you could program something that generally looked and acted like Windows relatively easily, but getting every piece of software that runs on the original to work on your version equally well would be an infinitely harder task. This is also why civil unions for same-sex couples can never promise to provide a "separate but equal" solution (never mind that its being separate precludes its being equal anyway).
chasbrown From: chasbrown Date: November 17th, 2008 03:24 pm (UTC) (Link)
The civil unions + marriage is what Canada has-- everyone has civil marriages and the church isn't part of it. My friend Vicki said she had to go do the govt part, and then the wedding part, which is pretty much what we have to do here, but it isn't called as such.

I would happily give up my "marriage" for a "civil union" if that means everyone got the same thing.
broncochick From: broncochick Date: November 18th, 2008 02:02 am (UTC) (Link)
I prefer civil union over marriage. It's what Laura and I have along with millions of other Canadians who've decided to partner up before the law. Secularizing ALL legal partnerships is the only way to get out of the sticky semantic and religious quagmire that the American citizenry finds itself in. I don't see civil unions as "separate but equal." Far from it. Civil unions equalizes partnerships for all people before the law.

3 smooches or Gimme Some Love!