You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #28: Used to agree, but have changed my mind lately. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
Plaid Adder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-07-03 09:03 PM
Response to Original message
28. Used to agree, but have changed my mind lately.
I put up a real long post about this whole thing a couple days ago whcih you can still see on the livejournal:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/plaidder

I never thought that the word "wife" would be anything but a joke for us, but after we did the ring exchange it really took on a totally different meaning for us. We don't refer to each other that way in public, but we do use it in private, and it does mean something different to us than "partner." This may have to do with our being women; I don't know. Your mileage may vary.

For almost 15 years we've done without same-sex marriage and we've been all right. But it is a serious problem that our relationship has no legal weight, and that will only get worse. Where I differ with you about this is that I don't think Bush can push through an amendment or federal law "codifying marriage" without also legally confirming our second-class status. It just seems very unlikely to me that we would end up with two different institutions, one for heterosexual couples and one for homosexual couples, that are legally equivalent but denoted by different terms. We will end up either with only heterosexual unions recognized, or a two-tier system with us on the bottom. Separate but equal has already been tried, and failed.

Marriage is a complex institution and American attitudes about it are wildly incoherent. The rash of "reality" shows in which contestants get legally hitched for the good of the ratings is proof of that much. Our country is based on the idea of separation of church and state (at least it used to be) but in reality marriage has, for most people, always combined the two. The churches insist that marriage is a spiritual institution over whcih they should have jurisdiction; but all the same, no established church would be happy with a proposal that tried to solve this issue by separating religious marriage from legal marriage.

Because that really would be the fair and easy way to do it: give marriage to the churches, and let them decide who can get married, while embodying the legal rights that are normally invested in marriage in civil union, which would be available to any couple willing and able to meet the legal requirements. Under that system, married couples would be spiritually united but have no more *legal* rights than unmarried ones, while anyone in a civil union would be on the same legal footing whether they had been married or not.

That will never happen, however; and it will never happen because it would significantly weaken the power of organized religion in this country. That's what this issue is really about. The religious right will never be satisfied with a monopoly on the moral high ground if it means the legal ground is being cut from under their feet. What they're fighting is not just homosexuality; it's the attempt to weaken their control over this very potent legal institution.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -The Word "Marriage" Should Remain Heterosexual David Zephyr  Aug-07-03 07:42 PM   #0 
  - What about for the Children they adopt?  LeviathanCrumbling   Aug-07-03 07:45 PM   #1 
  - Easy One.  David Zephyr   Aug-07-03 07:46 PM   # 
  - But they can't say "my parents are married."  LeviathanCrumbling   Aug-07-03 07:51 PM   #5 
     - I guess  geomon666   Aug-07-03 11:38 PM   #45 
     - Oh great- now we have to replace "Over the Rainbow"  comsymp   Aug-07-03 11:42 PM   #46 
     - "my parents are unionized"  sexybomber   Aug-08-03 09:01 AM   #62 
     - Well, if you want to get technical, they both aren't the child's parents.  Alexander   Aug-08-03 02:15 AM   #57 
  - Don't you think  SPICYHOT   Aug-07-03 09:32 PM   #29 
     - So do you think that  lastliberalintexas   Aug-08-03 09:19 AM   #65 
  - Celts had 10 different  Maple   Aug-07-03 07:46 PM   #2 
  - thanks for the history maple  JohnKleeb   Aug-07-03 09:41 PM   #32 
     - Marriage for the Celts was to protect the rights of the child  Maeve   Aug-08-03 09:18 AM   #64 
  - What about calling it a civil wedding?  Stephanie   Aug-07-03 07:49 PM   #3 
  - Time for a change then!  Misinformed01   Aug-07-03 07:50 PM   #4 
  - Who is the "Wife" and Who is the "Husband"?  David Zephyr   Aug-07-03 07:52 PM   #6 
     - Thank you! I can see us thirty years down the road;  Misinformed01   Aug-07-03 07:58 PM   # 
     - ?????  Maple   Aug-07-03 07:59 PM   #13 
     - 28 years together, Partner and I decided  mitchtv   Aug-07-03 09:58 PM   #35 
        - Congratulations on Your 28 Years and Thanks for Your Post  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 05:32 PM   #79 
     - We're both husbands.  donco6   Aug-07-03 09:56 PM   #34 
  - Why give them this inch? Civil unions/marriage = separate but equal (nt)  jpgray   Aug-07-03 07:53 PM   #7 
  - A Really Bad Analogy.  David Zephyr   Aug-07-03 07:57 PM   #9 
     - Civil unions are not marriages. They will be separate but equal, no? (nt)  jpgray   Aug-07-03 08:01 PM   #15 
     - Also, separate but equal was NOT blacks wanting to be called "whites"  jpgray   Aug-07-03 08:12 PM   #21 
        - Hmmmm  waggawagga   Aug-08-03 01:55 AM   #55 
  - I agree with this...this is a very common sense postion. (MCC, too)  TheBigGuy   Aug-07-03 07:56 PM   #8 
  - And the MCC Has It Right.  David Zephyr   Aug-07-03 07:59 PM   #11 
  - I agree  Cornus   Aug-07-03 07:58 PM   #10 
  - Congratulations!  David Zephyr   Aug-07-03 07:59 PM   #14 
  - Now that I think about DaveZephyr's post  Darth_Ole   Aug-08-03 12:12 AM   #50 
     - Thanks for Your Thoughtful Input.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 05:33 PM   #80 
  - "Let me not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments."  aquart   Aug-07-03 07:59 PM   #12 
  - I wouldn't count on it! The meaning of words is often transitory......  ParanoidPat   Aug-07-03 08:02 PM   #16 
  - David, gracious as always  Cheswick   Aug-07-03 08:05 PM   #17 
  - Seperate but equal, huh?  Cronus   Aug-07-03 08:06 PM   #18 
  - IndianaGreen Makes A Similar Point  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 05:36 PM   #82 
  - Until very recently I agreed with you.  BlueState   Aug-07-03 08:08 PM   #19 
  - Congratulations on 15 Years.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 02:15 PM   #68 
  - It should be a matter of indifference as to what it's called.  bandera   Aug-07-03 08:10 PM   #20 
  - Nicely Put and Thank You for Sharing About Your Sister-In-Law  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 05:39 PM   #83 
  - Why do you use that as your measure?  CWebster   Aug-07-03 08:26 PM   #22 
  - Good point!  BlueState   Aug-07-03 08:34 PM   #24 
  - I would have agreed until  jono   Aug-07-03 08:30 PM   #23 
  - If all secular marriage was called a "civil union", that would be helpful  jpgray   Aug-07-03 08:35 PM   #25 
     - Bingo!  BlueState   Aug-07-03 08:43 PM   #27 
  - "Have some sense of grace. let it go."  roughsatori   Aug-07-03 08:40 PM   #26 
  - I Am a Socialist Queer...Hardly Conservative  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 02:38 PM   #69 
     - I agree with you, Zephyr.  donco6   Aug-08-03 05:25 PM   #76 
        - Thanks, Donco6  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 05:27 PM   #78 
  - Used to agree, but have changed my mind lately.  Plaid Adder   Aug-07-03 09:03 PM   #28 
  - Congratulations, The Plaid Adder for Your 15 Years.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 05:52 PM   #84 
  - Having two different terms is a semantic argument...right NOW  greekspeak   Aug-07-03 09:39 PM   #30 
  - What is the reason  SPICYHOT   Aug-07-03 09:40 PM   #31 
  - can't argue with this  jagguy   Aug-07-03 09:42 PM   #33 
  - Interesting and I largely agree  dsc   Aug-07-03 10:06 PM   #36 
  - Barney Frank also said  I Lean Left   Aug-07-03 10:23 PM   #38 
  - Thanks.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 05:26 PM   #77 
  - Thanks for Your Input  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 02:42 PM   #70 
  - I keep breaking into a rousing chorus of "Tradition"  ulysses   Aug-07-03 10:12 PM   #37 
  - Fiddling On My Roof!  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:06 PM   #88 
     - *channels Topol*  ulysses   Aug-08-03 06:30 PM   #96 
        - Topol  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:42 PM   #100 
           - LOL  ulysses   Aug-08-03 07:00 PM   #105 
  - Same sex rites are well documented  TrogL   Aug-07-03 10:51 PM   #39 
  - No Ire from this fellow 'mo  comsymp   Aug-07-03 10:52 PM   #40 
  - comsymp!  ulysses   Aug-07-03 11:05 PM   #41 
     - Hey Uly!  comsymp   Aug-07-03 11:14 PM   #43 
  - I agree with you DavidZephyr  Crewleader   Aug-07-03 11:05 PM   #42 
  - Thanks, Crew!  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 05:53 PM   #85 
  - Something that you conveniently ignore:  tedoll78   Aug-07-03 11:23 PM   #44 
  - What if a particular religion chooses to marry same sex couples  IndianaGreen   Aug-07-03 11:54 PM   #47 
  - Followup to my post: Episcopalians recognize gay unions  IndianaGreen   Aug-08-03 12:09 AM   #49 
  - <Sigh> There she goes...  comsymp   Aug-08-03 12:23 AM   #51 
  - But, historically gays and lesbians have been  Against ME   Aug-08-03 12:01 AM   #48 
  - In many countries, there have always been two marriage ceremonies  IndianaGreen   Aug-08-03 12:35 AM   #52 
     - Wisdom.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:19 PM   #91 
  - I only have 15 years with my guy so I bow to some of you...  Rowdyboy   Aug-08-03 12:52 AM   #53 
  - Congratulation on Your 15 Years Together.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 04:37 PM   #75 
  - Another Solution  waggawagga   Aug-08-03 01:07 AM   #54 
  - Do you know the precedent on separate-but-equal?  tedoll78   Aug-08-03 02:10 AM   #56 
  - Question for David Zephyr  election_2004   Aug-08-03 02:24 AM   #58 
  - And I think that the scenario you describe...  BlueState   Aug-08-03 02:49 PM   #71 
  - Election_2004  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:03 PM   #87 
     - That would be great.....  election_2004   Aug-09-03 04:33 AM   #107 
  - So only heterosexuals can "really" be married  soothsayer   Aug-08-03 08:41 AM   #59 
  - Hi, Soothsayer.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:17 PM   #90 
  - David, while I don't fully support what you are saying...  foreigncorrespondent   Aug-08-03 08:45 AM   #60 
  - Thanks for Your Thoughts.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:20 PM   #92 
  - the word, imho, David  buddhamama   Aug-08-03 09:00 AM   #61 
  - You Always Have "Say"  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:28 PM   #95 
  - "Traditions" some times need to be updated  goddess40   Aug-08-03 09:16 AM   #63 
  - I Hear You.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:31 PM   #97 
  - If you plan to reserve the word "marriage"  ftbc   Aug-08-03 09:21 AM   #66 
  - Hi, FTBC.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:35 PM   #98 
  - Well, even though I am just a a straight female,  lastliberalintexas   Aug-08-03 09:29 AM   #67 
  - To the Lastliberalintexas  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:50 PM   #101 
  - I agree with you, and I support laws to give you and your companion  DemBones DemBones   Aug-08-03 03:51 PM   #72 
  - Other than the obvious  TrogL   Aug-08-03 04:06 PM   #73 
  - Anatomy Perhaps  DemocratSinceBirth   Aug-08-03 04:22 PM   #74 
  - I assumed that was obvious  TrogL   Aug-08-03 06:02 PM   #86 
  - Women are Superior.  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:58 PM   #104 
  - Thank You DemBones DemBones  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:54 PM   #102 
  - I've Never Been Crazy About The Word "Marriage" Either... BUT  arwalden   Aug-08-03 05:34 PM   #81 
  - We Agree, Arwalden  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 06:57 PM   #103 
  - I think that should be left up to the word to decide  Jonte_1979   Aug-08-03 06:12 PM   #89 
  - LMAO!  jono   Aug-08-03 06:24 PM   #93 
  - Hmmmmm....  David Zephyr   Aug-08-03 07:02 PM   #106 
  - well, the solution is to not have the state endorse "marriage"  David__77   Aug-08-03 06:28 PM   #94 
  - Reasonable solution  Maeve   Aug-08-03 06:38 PM   #99 
  - "It has never had any other meaning"? Not so!  Mairead   Aug-09-03 05:49 AM   #108 
  - agree as a christian and liberal  Kamika   Aug-09-03 06:21 AM   #109 
  - I disagree. The "meaning" of words change over time in all  DemLikr   Aug-09-03 08:23 AM   #110 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC