Gay marriage legalized in California

I just did a search and was a bit shocked to see that nobody has posted this yet. Today was a huge day for gay couples California-wide as gay marriage was officially made legal at 5pm local time. Congrats to all the happy couples!

Read the news

And for your viewing pleasure, here's San Francisco's very first married gay couple:

There was a fifteen page discussion about this on TT last month: Gay and lesbian couples win freedom to marry in CA. That topic was closed after it got very heated and members started accusing each other of being gay. It ended with threats of legal action for slander. Most amusing.

what???!!! Conqy and BadBob threatened to sue because they were jokingly taúnted for being gay? What on earth is wrong with being called gay if you are secure in your own sexuality?

What a sweet photo!

I just thought I'd add - on a related topic - that Swedish researchers will be publishing a paper tomorrow in the journal of the National Academy of Sciences that shows that the activity in the brain of gay people is similar to that of hetero people of the opposite gender.


Read the story here

Congratulations to those that want to go for it for a number of reasons.
But I'm not a huge fan of the institution.

In a hurry I read that as, "Gay men and straight women have half-size brains".

no, straight men have slightly larger right cerebral hemispheres than women. However in gay people it is lesbians who have slightly larger right cerebral hemsipheres than men. This does not tell you very much at all about function but hemispheric size and the relatively larger right hemisphere in baby boys is generally established in the womb. The Swedish researchers think this is evidence that sexuality is established before a baby is born. At least in the womb or possibly it is hard wired/caused by genes.

Im glad they are researching such important thing, seeing as we've cured cancer and everything.

I am guessing that they were actually looking at something else as well. Simon LeVay's research looking at autopsied brains finding that gay men had a precise diffence in the physiology of the hypothalamus was actually AIDS research.

Oh yeah - first time someone threatened to sue me on TT. What was he going to say to his lawyer?

"I want to sue someone on a discussion board who I don't know because he said he suspected I might be gay"

I seriously laughed when that happened...

if 80% of homophobes are gay, I wonder what proportion of litigious homophobes are gay? A cursory look at the history of litigation ofver the gay question shows that almost all of them were indeed gay (with the exception of Jason Donovan allegedly)

gayer than eight guys fucking nine guys

The implication that gay people are more homophobic than straight people could have important implications for gay rights marches - expect outrageously coloured flags in future marches with titles such "Down with anti-gay gays" , "We're targetting the gays cos they hate gays" ... and "I'm so gay I hate gays" etc.

hehehehehe

although gay homophobes would never be seen dead near a gay march unless they were throwing rocks at them. And as for how gay they are - while they might take it up the arse in public toilets they otherwise proclaim their straightness even to people who don't want to know.

Is that a typo?

outrageously coloured fags, eh?

you mean, like these:

That study has actually done a great service to the gay community. If someone makes homophobic comments, it's very easy to pull out and it should shut the homophobe up very quickly.

...or they threaten to sue, of course.

find it interesting that on the same day that California triumphs for liberalism and fairness to gay people . . . . The Anglican church is tearing itself apart over the same issue

Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ and the Persecution of Civil Society

you can read the rest of BadBob's ridiculous article here

Catholic.net is extreme even by the terms of the Catholic church but to present legislation that protects gay people from physical, economic or other kinds of discrimination as instead intolerant attacks on religious people is frankly bizarre.

Do the majority of same sex couples who want to be married really want their union to be recognised by a religious institution?

My thinking is no. that they want to be state recognised...

Bad Bobs article indicates that laws protecting gay people from being fired because of their sexuality and from having anti-gay propaganda directed at them "discriminates" against religious people who supposedly have a God-given essential right to fire gay people and vocally abuse them. Further it claims that laws preventing businesses from discriminating against gay people have forced the closure of Christian businessses (these businesses and charities closed to avoid prosecution because they refused to obey the laws concerned). Finally, the article claims that gay marriage and civil partnerships are entirely state created and require laws to keep them going - but omits to note that there are literally hundreds of laws in most juristiction conferring rights and definitions on heterosexual marriage alone.

Mr Sulu is going to get married. I guess he has finally reached the Final Frontier on Earth.

Same thing happened during the Civil Rights era. All those right wing racist christian numbnut wackjob businesses closed to avoid having black customers being equal with white customers.

actually, I was going to make the point about civil rights as there are a lot of parallels. Thanks eurovol.

Hey Badbob, I'm actually curious, do you think when the courts overturned a ban on interracial marriages that it was "a reduction in tolerance for everyone else, and an expansion of the power of the state"

If not, why? I'm actually curious.

I also laughed and couldn't believe what I was seeing. He doesn't even use his real name here, so in the end, you were "slandering" an alias. Certainly a pretty pathetic threat from the person in question.

Conqy had earlier threatened to sue Ulysses in another discussion. It has been some time since then.

i think it's not good that the government at any level would have any say in the matter, defining what marriage is. let every individual decide for themselves what it means, and tax people on an individual basis as well. but anyway, i'm very happy about this. discrimination is disgusting. it's disgusting to think that in our modern 21st century society there's still so much discrimination.

until the Marriage Act of 1781 in the UK, marriage existed largely independent of statute for most British people. A hand on the barn door or 12 months cohabitation was sufficient for marriage. The reason this changed was largely because of property rights in the event of death of one spouse or divorce. Before the martriage act, women often lost everything on losing their husbands. The Act therefore was arguably to protect the rights of female spouses.

This facet of marriage is usually missed by individuals like BadBob who imagine that the marriages we have today with their attendant rights to property etc are solely natural affairs derived from biblical injunction. Marriage as framed in most developed countries including the USA is an entirely state created institution of the modern era designed to protect property.

And now in the 21st century states around the world are recognising that gay spouses are being similarly discriminated against in tax, inheritance, property ownership and pensions. Extending marriage or civil partnerships to gay people are a way of allowing gay people to have similar protection to heterosexuals. The move is being taken for precisely the same reasons the 1781 Marriage Act was passed for heterosexuals.

Possibly the greatest comment ever made.

Perhaps eurovol should see this pair:

Lesbians in search of a male perv

Judge raises constitutional issue in R.I. gay divorce case

So now I guess we will see gays out marching for the right to get divorced!

Anyway, it is a good reason to get conservatives in CA (there must be some) out to the polls in November to vote on the proposition to overturn these lib judges (and vote for McCain).

You're just not fast enough on the draw BTC...While you are quick to praise the Marriage Act of 1781...what about the Act of Settlement 1701 that discriminates against Catholic marriages? When are you going to repeal that? Probably right after the state-sponsored Church of England collapses and that won't be long now.

These are the usual sort of infantile and idiotic comments one would expect on such a topic:



BTC, AFAIK, BB has never said he was going to sue anyone here on TT.

I also never made any homophobic comments.

Hazza, you know as well as anyone that your comments would get moderated if and when you are served with a suit (in order to protect you).

EB, the thread was not a matter of two sides calling each other gay- that accusation came from one side only.

you mistake me for someone who gives a fuck about monarchy. Why bother repealing the act of settlement when it would be much more sensible to abolish the whole bloody institution? And the Church of England - as a Scottish Quaker why would I care about them?

But what on earth does that have to do with gay mariage? I raised the marriage act of 1781 because it was a template or precursor to legislation enacted in a lot of countries round the world including the USA. Marriage as practiced in most countries these days is a legal institution pure and simple. When a priest or minister officiates at a wedding he or she is fulfilling the role of registrar in the same way as in a civil wedding. In that sense it is no different at all from gay marriage or civil partnerships.

in the Uk and Germany we already do have the right to divorce. Don't blame us for the failure of the USA to enact coherent legislation on this issue

You tell me.

Feck em all.

Fecked up perverted people. living fecked-up perverted little, non-interesting lives till they die of three little gay-ridden letters.

Why should they get to declare their love before god? God hates gays, they sure as feck don't make the world go round.

If their parents had married same sex partners the world might be a happier place.

I'm sorry, but if your kid turns out to be a shirt-lifter or rug-muncher, you kind of messed up with parenthood.

Cancer of society. The only right these fudge-packers deserve is the right to die a long, painful AIDS-ridden death.

I thought it was about declaring their relationship before the government, but hey, if the US government is God to you then feel free to carry on with your rantings. Tis certainly entertaining and useful for a few page views.

I am a rug muncher and a rug muncher's son and I will munch rugs till the rug munching is done.

Next will be nice little diddy about shag carpets.

Jesus DJ, I thought you were just a regular nutter.
Didn't realise you were such a full-on packet of Spangles.

Why does God always have to be dragged into the whole marriage debate? Atheists and agnostics get married all the time with no religious ceremony necessary or required. Hubby and I only had a civil ceremony so I guess we're still living in sin. Perhaps that's why the sex continues to be so good

If an adult couple wishes to proclaim their commitment to one another, then that's great! And if they are willing to take on legal and financial responsibilities for each other, then why not let them? I really don't get the whole issue, to be honest.

The only drawback that I can see is that Toronto will start losing gay wedding parties to California

Coming from a "man" who has no problem shafting another "blokey bloke" (Listed under your interests!) I'll happily be a feckin bunch of starbursts if it keeps people like you fern from my ringpiece.

I like a man with self-confidence I can break as I tie him up DJ, so fair dos for trying.

But don't flatter yourself, innit.

I bet dj is quite the sinner in real life.

I don't defend the CofE. I think they are risible and deserve to go down the pan if they become beholden to the bigot tendency. If pushed, I would prefer them to split but I can barely even arouse enough interest to care, frankly.

and if statistics are to be believed there is an 80% likelihood he is gay too. How does it feel to be abig fat poofy poof DJ?