QuakerInfo.com Forum Forum Index QuakerInfo.com Forum
A place to discuss Quakers and Quakerism
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Q  Return to QuakerInfo. com home page

Gay marriage referendum
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    QuakerInfo.com Forum Forum Index -> Quaker Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Top Ramen



Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 94
Location: Virginia

PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 2:54 pm    Post subject: Gay marriage referendum Reply with quote

There has been considerable talk in regards to the gay marriage referendum in our meeting - scheduled for the November ballot in Virginia. It is designed to get the conservative voters to the polls. Members of our meeting indicate that straight members of the meeting should be concerned with the legislation because it will pertain to all partnerships and contractual agreements. I am against it because it is wrong to make a segment of the population 2nd class citizens. If it has other negative consequences that is secondary. It surprises me when members of our meeting assume that straight members don't support their liberties. I know that I do.
_________________
"Freedom is actually a bigger game than power. Power is about what you can control. Freedom is about what you can unleash." - Harriet Rubin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shay



Joined: 01 Jun 2005
Posts: 885

PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For those out of the US:
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0706/341378.html

Ugh- why is it so much easier to get folks to vote against things than for things, anyway? Sometimes the US citizen's negativity in these matters depresses me to all get-out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Top Ramen



Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 94
Location: Virginia

PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It perplexes me that people feel so passionate that gay people shouldn't marry. I really can only understand it in the most cynical. I really don't get it. I can understand that they don't like gay people and that they think they are sinful. I understand why they feel and think that way, although I disagree. I just can't see why allowing them to marry is the line in the sand.
_________________
"Freedom is actually a bigger game than power. Power is about what you can control. Freedom is about what you can unleash." - Harriet Rubin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Patrocles



Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 111

PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I suppose that there are three motives which have not directly to do with gays themselves.

1. People regard the classical heterosexual family as a kind of ideal and feel that that ideal would be dequalified if it was equalized with other forms of living-together.

2. "Marriage" is common ground between state and churches, and people feel that the state interferes in matters of their religion.

3. People resent the way courts and judges (as upper class institutions) can change the society without the consent of the people - only by redefining the words of the law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anthony



Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 1542

PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is 'marriage' not a misnomer for a civil ceremony that permits the same rights in law that married couples are entitled to; and a blessing of their relationship, by an ordained minister? I feel sure there is a difference between this and a marriage between opposite sexes.

In Friendship
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shay



Joined: 01 Jun 2005
Posts: 885

PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Patrocles wrote:
1. People regard the classical heterosexual family as a kind of ideal and feel that that ideal would be disqualified if it was equalized with other forms of living-together.

2. "Marriage" is common ground between state and churches, and people feel that the state interferes in matters of their religion.

3. People resent the way courts and judges (as upper class institutions) can change the society without the consent of the people - only by redefining the words of the law.


We don't require heterosexual families to prove their worth as parents before allowing them to have children- if anything, gay families are a step ahead in that regard.
We let people of every religion and none get married, so it's obviously not dependent on religion- nor is it common ground.
Men will not be required to marry other men, (or women other women) just to recognise a union that has nothing to do with them just as I am required to recognise a marriage between two people I think have a horrible marriage. But still a legal one.

Those three reasons apply equally to the civil rights movement and segregation, as well as women's suffrage and arranged marriages by force. You say they have nothing to do with gay people, but they have everything to do with a fear of change and the Other.

Stu, I'm afraid I don't understand your question. Are you saying that marriage by any other name would be as equal?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anthony



Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 1542

PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shay wrote:
Stu, I'm afraid I don't understand your question. Are you saying that marriage by any other name would be as equal?


Hi Shay, Smile

I don't think that gay couples actually get 'married' in the traditional sense of the word, rather they participate in a civil partnership ceremony. Perhaps it is marriage by another name, I don't know, except that it is not generally accepted as 'marriage' in the traditional sense. Please read:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3584285.stm

In Friendship
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
missliz



Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find it funny that people are trying to put limits on Love.

The world needs more love as it is....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anthony



Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 1542

PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I found the following statement whilst exploring the web page about civil gay partnerships. The web page is entitled: The Christian Institute: Christian Influence in a Secular World.

I consider it to be a blatant piece of misinformation. I note that the source is not referenced. It find it offensive and personally untrue and intended to give credence to a bigoted agenda.

'It is often said that homosexuals need civil rights because they are 'born gay and can't change'. But this claim simply cannot be backed up by evidence - homosexuality is not a fixed trait like race or sex. For example, a 2003 study by a leading psychiatrist who supports gay rights found that homosexuality could become 'predominantly heterosexual through psychotherapy. 84% of the homosexual and lesbians in the study became heterosexual by the end of the study. No amount of psychotherapy can ever change a person's race.'

http://www.christian.org.uk/soregs/sornewsletter_apr06.pdf

In Friendship
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shay



Joined: 01 Jun 2005
Posts: 885

PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anthony wrote:
I don't think that gay couples actually get 'married' in the traditional sense of the word, rather they participate in a civil partnership ceremony. Perhaps it is marriage by another name, I don't know, except that it is not generally accepted as 'marriage' in the traditional sense. Please read:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3584285.stm

In Friendship


Ah- yes, there are civil unions here as well, but is that option open to all? I find it difficult to reconcile the idea of a civil union as being equal with marraige- we in the States have had big problems with "Seperate But Equal" before.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Laurence17



Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 385
Location: U.K.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the UK the Civil Partnerships Act uses the same words as the Matrimony Acts, throughout. The only difference is the title Civil Partnership, which was adopted rather than the word Marriage, to try to placate the 'Christian' Institute and rightwing fundamentalist christians, here. But everyone else call it marriage.And sayings "getting married,"

My partner Michael are tying the knot later this year, and and having meeting for worship under the care of Meeting. It is also our 33 rd anniversary this year ! We made vows to each other 33 years ago !
_________________
Abwoon : divine progenitor, breathing mindfulness through poor in spirit and the resonating realm of ruach
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Top Ramen



Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 94
Location: Virginia

PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laurence17

congrats on 33 years! ......and they said it would never last. lol
_________________
"Freedom is actually a bigger game than power. Power is about what you can control. Freedom is about what you can unleash." - Harriet Rubin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jean from phoenix



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One thing to watch about these referendums is that they do not always just affect gay marriage. For instance the one in my state, Arizona, would have a negative effect on domestic violence law in the case of an unmarried couple (such as a boyfriend and girlfriend) regardless of gender.

jean
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Patrocles



Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 111

PostPosted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@ Anthony,

the source you missed is: Spitzer, R L, ‘Can Some Gay Men and
Lesbians Change Their Sexual Orientation?
200 Participants Reporting a Change from
Homosexual to Heterosexual Orientation’,
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32(5), 2003, page
411

Basically, Spitzer's study collects people whose sexual orientation shifted (more or less) but he didn't maintain that psychotherapy was apt to produce such an effect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Laurence17



Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 385
Location: U.K.

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

why try to interfere with anyone's affections ?

It offends me that anyone would consider it in 2006. I was subjected to electric shock 'therapy' in my teens and so I know from my own experience how wrong that is.

The majority culiture have a lot of work to do on yourselves and the world y o u have created.

You receive from lgbt folk lavishly--ever considered saying Thanks ?

You have much to laern from the lgbt communities.

(Ever wonder why we have never used terrorism to get our rights--even in the penal days ?_)
_________________
Abwoon : divine progenitor, breathing mindfulness through poor in spirit and the resonating realm of ruach
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    QuakerInfo.com Forum Forum Index -> Quaker Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group