I'll probably get some hate for this one, but in my opinion this piece hits the nail on the head in a clear concise way on marriage legislation. The comments following the article are interesting to say the least. I don't understand why rights are often up for grabs in the ballot box. Happy posting. Just try not to hurt me too bad. I do not feel that I am the root of all evil.
Read Harvey Fierstein's Historic for Some, Same Old Shit for the Rest of Us.
Below, the text copied in case the link changes:
Harvey Fierstein
Posted November 7, 2008
Huffington Post
While we dance in the streets and pat ourselves on the back for being a nation great enough to reach beyond racial divides to elect our first African-American president let us not forget that we remain a nation still proudly practicing prejudice.
I have heard this day described as one of transcendence where Americans came together to prove that we are, above all, a nation of fairness. World witnesses wrote that we rose above ideology, politics and bigotry to achieve a great moment for America. Meanwhile, on this same Election Day, we great Americans passed laws as heinous as any Jim Crow legislation. We great Americans reached out and willfully put our name to language that denies an entire minority group their equal rights.
Of course I am referring to the states of Florida, Arizona and California passing legislation to specifically deny gay people from entering into the contract of marriage. Actually, that's not true. We can still get married, just not to each other. Yes my friends, Florida and California have now made it legal for gay men and lesbians to marry as long as we don't marry our partners. How much sense does that make?
Now, before you rise up on your high horse to holler, "We're not against Civil Unions, just Gay Marriage", let me once again explain that THE SUPREME COURT HAS STATED THAT SEPARATE BUT EQUAL IS NOT EQUAL. And even if it were, civil unions are simply not equal to marriage.
Let me give you a simple example that anyone can follow. John and Jim are registered as domestic partners and so, just like a married couple; Jim is covered by John's employee health care. That's really nice. BUT… since the IRS does not recognize civil unions or domestic partnership Jim has to pay income tax on the value of this coverage. So, unlike a married couple, John and Jim are penalized hundreds of dollars for not being married. That's not fair. That's not in the spirit of the civil union legislation. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of the inequality being offered.
Listen, my fellow Americans, I am only asking that we get sensible about this controversy. Gays are not asking for religious blessings. We are not asking for everyone to come to our weddings. We are not asking the government to force churches and synagogues to perform marriage rituals or even to allow us into their tax-exempt edifices. We are simply and forcefully demanding equal protection under the laws of this nation as tax paying, voting, property owning citizens. I want no more or less protection than granted any heterosexual to control and distribute my holdings.
State sanctioned marriage is a civil contract period. A contract is not a judgment of moral value. It is a legal agreement between two parties that testifies to a meeting of minds between those consenting entities. It is not a religious act or rite and so has nothing to do with Adam and Eve or Steve or even Harvey. I often say that if you want to really want to understand the contract of marriage just ask anyone who has been divorced. The marriage contract is one of property rights. Or maybe you can look in the bible to see what Adam had to say about divorce since Eve was his second wife.
So, while we rightfully celebrate the election of our first African American president, let us take a moment to mourn the passage of three new laws legalizing prejudice. Of course there will be those who claim that voters were only protecting the institution of marriage to whom I would suggest it is just as likely that Obama's supporters were only voting against W. Breaking the lock on my door doesn't make your home any more secure.
Fuenteovejuna did it 
marriage and abortion should never have been in the mercy of any politiciantheir need to avoid giving the Social security and the health insurance benefits to a spouse of the same sex brings out the religion on them :down:it is nobody's business to whom one will be married to. ***********the same with abortion, if there are no exceptions to any law in my books it is simply "a control thing "by the politicians and not a moral one! So much for freedom :down:****************** the adoption plan that allows only non gay couples to adopt,it is an evil plan that robs thousand of kids the chance for a home and love,shame if I get grieve by other members for my believes,and this comments,well I have my opinion and nobody will change it the way I will not try to change yours,so live and let live :heart:
Thank you. :love:
Here there is some discussion ongoing about the "marriage", both about homo-marriage and de-facto marriage (when people, regardless the gender, live as a couple without a formal wedding).There are two main difficulties:- Italy is still a catholic country.- Italian law is based on the roman law.The catholic church says the marriage is a "sacrament" and then it is a blessing that comes directly from God through the Church. An "union" that is not "formalized" as sacrament is considered a sin and then they are discouraged. The Church understands that people can have a relation based on "love" and that is some sort of blessing but cannot accept those "unions" formalized as "marriage". BTW same goes for divorce, since the marriage comes from God's will, it cannot be nullified by man's will. Currently you can divorce in front of the italian law but you are still forbidden/not allowed by the Church.The roman law is based on the concept of "clan", in latin the "gens". A lot of social situations are regulated by the law starting from the idea that the basic unit of the society is the "clan", that means a male leader that rules over his relatives, related each other in different degrees with bonds of blood. Any kind of "union" that is not functional to the "clan" structure is simply ignored/not considered by the law. Males can be part only of their own clan, females can opt for their father's clan or their husband's clan (so the change in the name).Note that the Romans sometimes used the trick of adopting male adults as sons to incorporate them in a different clan. It was mostly used in homo-relationships and then criticized but it was also used seldom for recognizing officially "bastard" sons.The problem is when you introduce a change about these things it is like taking away the can at the base of the pile of cans, the whole construction of cans can crumble down.
Informative and interesting. Thanks Lorenzo.
In Belgium, where catholicism is the number one religion, homo-marriage is regulated and allowed. Adoption by homo-parents is allowed, too.I don't think it is the government's business to make a judgement, but that it is rather their responsibility to ensure that the amendments are fully introduced and adopted by al of its states. Sadly some of the states seem subject to strong non-relative influence.Church and state should by all means be separated.Secular and regular don't mix.And churches, catholic or others, should obey the country's laws if they want to establish themselves there and their operations and messages should never contradict that country's laws.I can of course only gues what lobby is behind this but Jesus Christ, it stinks like a whore from the depths of hell.Not that I know any.Courage, mes amis.Nice and daring post. :up:
Thanks daxon. I thought about marking the post "friends only", but what the heck. I might as well live a little. 🙂 Writing you from the depths of South Carolina where I am working this week. The capital, Columbia, ain't too bad.
A merit of modern technology. I think having this post with public access shows guts. And also, there's nothing wrong with living.Have a good stay in South Carolina.