Archive

Posts Tagged ‘gay marriage’

Gay Marriage=Volcanic Eruptions

June 13th, 2010 3 comments

By a unanimous vote — you read that correctly, a unanimous vote — the Icelandic Parliament just voted for marriage equality. The vote itself wasn’t a huge surprise — the country has the world’s first openly gay head of government, Johanna Sigurdardottir; her sexual orientation wasn’t a big deal when she was installed as Prime Minister last year.

Here’s a takeaway quote from the Reuters story:

“The attitude in Iceland is fairly pragmatic,” said Gunnar Helgi Kristinsson, a political scientist at the University of Iceland. “It (gay marriage) has not been a big issue in national politics — it’s not been controversial.”

Ho, hum….

When I read the story, I thought I might make some snarky comment about how volcano’s eruption and gay marriage were connected (not sexually — where’s your mind?), in the tried-and-silly “God’s wrath” meme. Never mind that the volcano came first, unless we want to attribute sloppiness to God. (This reminds me of a Christianist evangelist who blamed Katrina’s carnage on God’s wrath against the licentiousness of New Orleans, especially the rampaging of the gays. He didn’t seem to notice that those most affected by the disaster were the poor.)

But then I was reminded that there’s hardly ever a need for sarcasm. You can find these sorts of wacky pronouncements anywhere you look. Here was the first comment on the Reuters story, from someone styling himself Moses 10. :

Don’t think its a good time to disobey GOD’s commandments, especialy [sic] when They have Volcanoes erupting on that Island.

Now watch the other Big Volcanoe [sic] Erupt and cover the Whole island in ASH.

So the first eruption was a warning: Don’t pass gay marriage laws or Iceland will be no more.

What’s Moses 10’s take on the BP oil spill?

Mexico City Approves Gay Marriage

December 21st, 2009 No comments

Gay rights rally in Mexico City, 21 December

This just reported by the AP:

Mexico City lawmakers have become the first in Latin America to legalize gay marriage.

City legislators passed the bill 39-20 on Monday with five lawmakers absent….

Leftist Mexico City Mayor Marcelo Ebrard is widely expected to sign the decision into law.

The bill calls for changing the definition of marriage in the city’s civic code. Marriage is currently defined as the union of a man and a woman. The new definition will be “the free uniting of two people.”

Although the legislation doesn’t yet allow gay couples to adopt, this move is expected to be next.

Another bastion of Catholicism defies the dictates of natural law! If you wonder what I’m talking about, it’s because you haven’t read this article in yesterday’s Times Magazine about Robert P. George, who is urging a return to “reason” as a way of making clear the moral case against gay marriage.1 I’ll deal with his warmed over theology in a subsequent post.

  1. I almost missed the article myself, as I rely on something called a “newspaper” — rather than the ‘net — to get my Sunday Times fix. It didn’t arrive yesterday, apparently because of the two feet of snow that hit Philly. At least the storm provided us with an excuse to host a fun “snowed-in” party on Saturday night. The kids destroyed the upstairs while the adults drank, apparently in a show of agreement with the new “overparenting” critics.

Reaction: New York Senate Votes Against Marriage Equality, 24-38

December 2nd, 2009 2 comments

I had no idea whether the Senate would pass this measure, but I’ll bet everyone was surprised by the lop-sided margin by which it went down to defeat.  So all of these months of wrangling and wondering whether the bill would even come to a vote end with…a thud. Very disappointing, especially since eighteen of the twenty-four supporters spoke during the debate, as compared with only one opponent.

To me, the opponents’ silence says: “We know we don’t have arguments that are compelling, and we don’t want to stand against these many real-life stories of how the denial of equality affects our fellow New Yorkers. But we’re afraid of the political ramifications of a “yes” vote.”

It looks like NOM’s threat to campaign against any Republican who supported the measure had some effect, but it’s too simple to blame it all on that. There’s still the matter of the Democrats who voted against it, some of whom appeared to have been supporters. What happened? How much of this is attributable to the voters’ reaction to legislatively conferred marriage equality in Maine? And how will it affect the vote in neighboring New Jersey? (Prediction: Now, I’d be surprised if the matter even came to a vote. And if it does, expect another defeat.)

Is the glass filling, or emptying? 2009 has been an up-and-down year for marriage equality (and in that order, too — first “up” with results in Iowa, New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont; and then “down,” with the California decision upholding Prop 8, the voter repeal of marriage equality in Maine, and now this).  The year’s not over, of course, as D.C. looks poised to enact marriage equality before year’s end, so things may yet end on a positive note. But overall 2009 is ending on a down note.

More broadly, though, nothing will stop this movement. I know and believe this.

To end on a practical note: All the N.Y. Senate has done is to make getting married more of a challenge for New Yorkers: The state recognizes same-sex marriages from other states, and today’s action didn’t change that. Yet the legislature was unwilling to make life easier for gay couples: They still have to go to Massachusetts, Connecticut, or Canada (to name the three adjoining jurisdictions that recognize gay marriages) in order to marry.

Not Seeing the Silver Lining, or Even One Atom of Element 47

September 16th, 2009 No comments

Andrew Sullivan:

Maybe I’m being too optimistic, but one effect Obama has had on the right is to galvanize its small government, balanced budget wing and cool off the Christianist boilerplate. I haven’t noticed the tea-partiers going on and on about gays getting married for example, or cracking down on drugs.

I’ve been thinking about this since I read it a couple of days ago, and it just seemed to me…too optimistic. Here‘s a piece of evidence in support of my misgivings. “How to Take Back America” gets its upcoming conference off to a rousing start with these two items, first up in its first “workshop”:

  • How to stop abortions: a new approach (DVD: Maafa 21 & Discussion)
  • How to counter the homosexual extremist movement

OK, maybe the tea-party gang isn’t riled up about this stuff, but many on the right are. For example, those wanting to “Take Back America” aren’t some ultra-right fringe, but a group that boasts elected Congressional reps and Mike Huckabee. Read the whole schedule and be chilled by the centrifuge into which every crazy idea has been thrown.