fear mongering anyone?

[Sasha]

the debts that american religigous fundamentalists are willing too decent too never fail too shock me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp76ly2_NoI

i'm no fan of liberal demockracy but after that i realy needed this video to restore some of my hope in humanity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2s2R5qKhbo
(Iowa state Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal blocks an attempt to amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage...)

[h0m0revolutionary]

Hmm..

But gay marriage isn't the be-all and end-all of LGBTQ liberation, infact it hardly touches upon it. If anything it's a distraction, it alludes to the misguided notion that the state and/or religious institutions can offer some form of liberation to LGBTQ peoples, and they cannot.

Gay marriage is something i'd not vote for or against, it's mostly irrelivent. I don't want mere 'equality' with those who don't define as Lesbian, Gay etc, and I certainly don't need a piece of paper, given to be my the state which gives me ownership over my partner.

The fight we should be having within a bougouis framework is a fight for domestic partner benefits for LGBTQ couples. Gay marriage, in whatever form can only offer greater state regulation of LGBTQ peoples and is essentially a copy-cat aim; wanting to take part in an archaic and misogynistic (and heteronormative) ceremony that has prooved so woefully disasterous for heterosexuals with some 70% of marriages ending in divorce.

[Pirate Utopian]

Wp76ly2_NoI
Boohoo we can no longer be asshead bigots.

What the hell are they on about?

[Sasha]

@ h0m0revolutionary: sure i agree 100% with you, i only support gay marriage in the sense that everybody should have the same right too be an idiot.
but it still can be quite shocking too see sommething that is already quite accepted in my country be the subject of such fearmongering and hysteria in america....
and then its nice too see an bourgois politician taking at least one decent stand in his live.

[hugsandmarxism]

Wp76ly2_NoI

"...my freedom, will be taken away..."

For these, unfortunate oppressed christian fundis, I am now playing the worlds saddest song...

...on the world's smallest violin.

The sad thing is, there are people who buy into this shit. I shouldn't be surprised by now... but I am, and wish someone would spam the comments on this video with links to gay porn.

[h0m0revolutionary]

and wish someone would spam the comments on this video with links to gay porn.

haha wheyyyyyy ahead of you :P

but they get removed pretty quickly =p

[Sasha]

Boohoo we can no longer be asshead bigots.

What the hell are they on about?

found this:

“The Real Truth Behind the Fake Ad”
The general argument of the ad is that the push for marriage equality isn’t just about rights for same-sex couples, it’s about imposing contrary values on people of faith. The examples they cite in the ad are:
(1) A California doctor who must choose between her faith and her job
(2) A member of New Jersey church group which is punished by the state because they can’t support same-sex marriage
(3) A Massachusetts parent who stands by helpless while the state teaches her son that gay marriage is okay
The facts indicate that (1) refers to the Benitez decision in California, determining that a doctor cannot violate California anti-discrimination law by refusing to treat a lesbian based on religious belief, (2) refers to the Ocean Grove, New Jersey Methodist pavilion that was open to the general public for events but refused access for civil union ceremonies (and was fined by the state for doing so) and (3) refers to the Parker decision in Massachusetts, where parents unsuccessfully sought to end public school discussions of family diversity, including of same-sex couples.
All three examples involve religious people who enter the public sphere, but don’t want to abide by the general non-discriminatory rules everyone else does. Both (1) and (2) are really about state laws against sexual orientation discrimination, rather than specifically about marriage. And (3) is about two pairs of religious parents trying to impose their beliefs on all children in public schools.
The real facts of each case are:



The California doctor entered a profession that promises to “first, do no harm” and the law requires her to treat a patient in need – gay or straight, Christian or Muslim – regardless of her religious beliefs. The law does not, and cannot, dictate her faith – it can only insist that she follow her oath as a medical professional.



The New Jersey church group runs, and profits from, a beachside pavilion that it rents out to the general public for all manner of occasions –concerts, debates and even Civil War reenactments— but balks at permitting couples to hold civil union ceremonies there. The law does not challenge the church organization’s beliefs about homosexuality – it merely requires that a pavilion that had been open to all for years comply with laws protecting everyone from discrimination, including gays and lesbians.
The Massachusetts parent disagrees with an aspect of her son’s public education, a discussion of the many different kinds of families he will likely encounter in life, including gay and lesbian couples. The law does not stop her from disagreeing, from teaching him consistently with her differing beliefs at home, or even educating her child in a setting that is more in line with her faith traditions. But it does not allow any one parent to dictate the curriculum for all students based on her family’s religious traditions.



source: human rights campaign

[Sasha]

:laugh:

someone found the audition tapes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRjVDZxho54

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwqNFBt33o4

[Rjevan]

Wp76ly2_NoI
Oh my, do these people really have no other problems than suffering from the terrible fear of gay marriage?

"My freedom will be taken away..." Why? What the hell is she talking about? Her freedom to discriminate others?

"I'm a californian doctor who must choose between my faith and my job..." Er, what?

"I'm a.. parent helplessly watching public schools teaching my son that gay marriage is ok" (not the expression of deep suffering on her face!) Yes, I know what you feel like, I'd too prefer them teaching that homosexuals are menatlly ill and need to be gassed for God's pleasure.

"They want to change the way I live!" "I have no choice!" Er... did somebody speak of forcing them to do gay marriage?

Yes, yes, "a storm is coming"... I think I know where they got this from:
http://img31.picoodle.com/img/img31/9/9/23/f_SFFlyerm_33459f2.jpg

[Jimmie Higgins]

Hmm..

But gay marriage isn't the be-all and end-all of LGBTQ liberation, infact it hardly touches upon it. If anything it's a distraction, it alludes to the misguided notion that the state and/or religious institutions can offer some form of liberation to LGBTQ peoples, and they cannot.

Gay marriage is something i'd not vote for or against, it's mostly irrelivent. I don't want mere 'equality' with those who don't define as Lesbian, Gay etc, and I certainly don't need a piece of paper, given to be my the state which gives me ownership over my partner.

The fight we should be having within a bougouis framework is a fight for domestic partner benefits for LGBTQ couples. Gay marriage, in whatever form can only offer greater state regulation of LGBTQ peoples and is essentially a copy-cat aim; wanting to take part in an archaic and misogynistic (and heteronormative) ceremony that has prooved so woefully disasterous for heterosexuals with some 70% of marriages ending in divorce.

As someone who lives in California, if people voted against gay marriage it would be only interpreted as a win for the christian right and a defeat for gays. I agree that ultimate liberation can only come from a different system, but the question is how do you get there and not fighting for reforms is not the way to do it.

Not supporting this reform is the same as not joining a union because unions will never bring about a revolution. It's true they won't but it is potentially a place to build working class confidence in their ability to take on capital and win.

[Bilan]

Haha the end of it is a riot of irony.
"A rainbow coalition (...) coming together with love". Love of what? Bigotry?
It's not so much love as it is hate. A love of fostering hate and ignorance.

"My Freedom will be taken away" - isn't that what they're advocating? Denying freedom to others?

Dipshits.

[Pirate Utopian]

found this:


source: human rights campaign
The doctor one is most fucked up.
"Sorry Mr. the gay person, you're gonna die, the bible tells me to do so."

[gorillafuck]

I'm confused by what the doctor means when she says she has to choose between her faith and her job:confused:

[redSHARP]

i always supported gay marriage, since it would allow non-radical gays to enjoy marriage. of course i am against marriage because it is a tool of oppression, but if marriage will make a lot of people happy, then i will support peoples right to marry.

one has to remember, not everyone is as radical as us!:cool:

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

I'm confused by what the doctor means when she says she has to choose between her faith and her job:confused:

Same here. If she was a Christian OB-GYN who was forced to give abortions I understand, but it really has no context in this ad. At all.

Anyway, fucking Viacom took the Colbert parody off of YouTube. It was great, needless to say.

[Rascolnikova]

"...my freedom, will be taken away..."

For these, unfortunate oppressed christian fundis, I am now playing the worlds saddest song...

...on the world's smallest violin.

The sad thing is, there are people who buy into this shit. I shouldn't be surprised by now... but I am, and wish someone would spam the comments on this video with links to gay porn.



I wish the left would take the perspective presented in this video more seriously--not because I agree with it, or think we should agree with it as a group, but because it represents what a very large section of the American proletariat sees as their interests.

The freedom to live in the kind of community you want to live in is an incredibly important issue. I, for example, want to live in a community where economic exploitation is abolished, and where sexual coercion, racism, domestic violence, and child welfare are taken very seriously. For child welfare to be dealt with, some very significant community cohesion is necessary--it does, in fact, take a village, and in order to use a village you have to have one. All of these issues play out significantly in the public sphere.


Here's an interesting case.

A couple of my older sisters, living in the deep south, were forced to watch films of abortions for their sex ed classes. This was clearly intended as a scare tactic. Who gets to decide if they have to watch it?

[Dr Mindbender]

:laugh:

someone found the audition tapes:
lRjVDZxho54

cwqNFBt33o4


''This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by the National organization for marriage''.

Fucking asshats.

[Dr Mindbender]

This is good. :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJGR8YDd_lU

[Nulono]

I don't get it. How does gay marriage affect a physician?

[Hiero]

Number 3 is by far the most ignorant. It's basically saying they have the right to be sheltered by some protective other to decide what ideas may be discussed in public to control what shapes people's reality.

The very presence of other ideas is supposedly a restriction of rights to this idiots, the right to be protected from new things.

[Rascolnikova]

Number 3 is by far the most ignorant. It's basically saying they have the right to be sheltered by some protective other to decide what ideas may be discussed in public to control what shapes people's reality.

The very presence of other ideas is supposedly a restriction of rights to this idiots, the right to be protected from new things.

Someone always decides that. I'm an anti-pluralist myself.

As Zizek put it:


"Would you like to live in a society where you have to debate and argue all the time that women shouldn't be raped? No. I would like to live in a dogmatic society where when someone starts to advocate the right of men to rape women, you simply disqualify yourself, I mean, people don't even attack you. You're such a jerk it's like, "huhu, I mean, what's wrong with this guy" or whatever. . and unfortunately, I would like to live in a society where the same goes for torture. . . "


Of course, in this he presumes that one doesn't have to argue against rape in our current culture, which is not at all the case. . .

[Eva]

This parody is relevant to this conversation:

youtube.com/watch?v=Bicsqqg5qaE

[hugsandmarxism]

This parody is relevant to this conversation:

youtube.com/watch?v=Bicsqqg5qaE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bicsqqg5qaE

I love the Onion :laugh:

[Pirate Utopian]

I also quite liked this one:
To1UlG6_Tv0