Wednesday, November 19, 2008

When Opinions Suck: "I can haz douchebaggery?" edition

In response to an opinion piece done in the local newspaper today, in addition to a common meme I see online a lot, I say "Welcome to post-19th century America!" Marriage is no longer a state-sanctioned bond used to assure that people successfully breed annoying demonspawn children. If it was, we would still be annulling marriages for people who do not have children within a set amount of time, and would prevent the elderly or impotent from marrying. Hell, we probably wouldn't even let people marry unless they specifically stated that they wanted to have children (which some married couples do not). This is a very nice way of trying to justify why marriage is arbitrarily defined as a bond between a man and woman. When marriage served as a sex contract, you probably would have had a point. But, present day, marriage is not a child quota. It is not a man buying property rights to a vagina. It is more or less a partnership contract. One that confers certain legal benefits that we should not be allowed to arbitrarily deny to people just because they do not have different sets of genitals. Your argument from tradition, completely ignoring the state of marriage today, and from the fact that using a tradition of exclusion to support continued exclusion, fails. And your attempts to pretend that people aren't homophobic by claiming that there is no hatred in adamantly clinging to such a tradition are mildly humorous, and would be outright hilarious if your willingness to turn a blind eye to the motivations behind these arguments wasn't so disgusting.

Just because you scoff at the idea that gay marriage is a civil rights issue does not mean that it isn't one. End rant.

23 comments:

mac said...

I think some of the oppisition comes from what people percieve as god's admonition of homosexuality.
At least, that's what they claim !

I find it amusing when they refer top Leviticus as an example of god not condoning gays....that's the same chapter that says don't eat pork, shellfish, catfish,...don't lay with a woman who is mmenstrating for she is unclean, a whole liteny of infractions they ignore, BUT still find the admonition of gays appropo ??

Asylum Seeker said...

"I think some of the oppisition comes from what people percieve as god's admonition of homosexuality."

It does. And, like you probably do as well,I find that they usually use that as a justification for their own natural, irrational contempt. Considering the undue level of opposition to this one "abomination" or "sin" or whatever the hell they call it compared to others, (e.g. the ones that you have pointed out) I think that it is clear that there is more going on here than "Bible says gay is bad".

Of course, the article I am ranting on about (and which I cannot quote because I don't want to give away too much about who I am, and where I am located) didn't bother to get into the retarded selective interpretation of the Bible that warrants such adamant opposition to homosexuality, and instead settled for "it has always been this way, and those militant gays are so pushy!" This whole gay marriage debate is ridiculous. It is tolerance through change vs. maintaining the status quo for any variety of trivial reasons (anywhere from "destroying marriage", to "marriage not being right/important", to just the implicit assumption that merely keeping things exactly the same as they have always been is a good in of itself). I almost prefer the inane religious reasons to the pseudo-logical garbage.

pboyfloyd said...

EXACTLY!

off topic, this is funny!

The cleaning lady(dont ask) is saying that she hasn't had the flu shot yet.

She says she does't like 'chemicals' being put in her body.

I told her that it was a 'disabled' flu that is being injected so that one's immune system can become resistant!

She says, "Ahh, yes, but they MAKE the flu out of chemicals!"

So, now you know.

(I'm picturing labs brim-filled with mad scientists 'making' different flues and OTHER labs filled with good(Godly?) scientists 'making' the flu shots! The mind boggles!)

Stacy said...

"She says, "Ahh, yes, but they MAKE the flu out of chemicals!"

OY!! (slapping head)

Asylum Seeker said...

"She says she does't like 'chemicals' being put in her body."

Meal time must be traumatizing for that woman. Especially if she considers a flu virus "chemicals".

Also: is she a conspiracy theorist? Who is the "they" that are making these flu viruses? You picture mad scientists making flu vaccines. I picture the Illuminati, and their Zionist/reptilian overlords, who force the unsupsecting scientists into furthering their nefarious goals.

Stacy said...

"I picture the Illuminati, and their Zionist/reptilian overlords, who force the unsupsecting scientists into furthering their nefarious goals."

Ouch! LOL! It hurts! :-)

Harvey said...

I, too, have been unable to comprehend what it is about same sex marriege that in any way demeans or diminishes existing or future marriages between a man and a woman, although it seems to be on this basis that most opponents of same sex mariage base their objections. For the fundamentalist Christian or the Catholic Church, permitting a civil contract between consenting adults that happens to be called "marriage", in some way seems to harm the religious sacrament of marriage. It is noteworthy that every state in the union requires that clergymen must be licensed to perform the legal, secular institution of marriage at the same time they may bless the "sacrament" of religious marriage. Non-clergymen (such as mayors, ship's captains, etc.) are able to perform the legal contract of marriage without having any recourse to the religious one, however. Clearly, same sex couples cannot hope that most religious organizations (with, apparently, some exceptions) will recognize or "sanctify" their unions, nor should religion be forced to, but it baffles me that religion can impose its will on the rest of the public, secular parts of society who do not agree with them.

Asylum Seeker said...

"Clearly, same sex couples cannot hope that most religious organizations (with, apparently, some exceptions) will recognize or "sanctify" their unions, nor should religion be forced to"

Agreed. Besides, I am not sure why a couple would want to have any part in organizations that wouldn't want to sanctify their marriage anyway.

"it baffles me that religion can impose its will on the rest of the public, secular parts of society who do not agree with them."

Yep. That's mob rule for ya. In fairness, they do have their fallacious secular arguments from "this is how it has always been", and not just religious reasons. But, the traditions are themselves rooted in religion which we have progressively moved away from. So...it is still pretty ridiculous.

mac said...

"I am not sure why a couple would want to have any part in organizations that wouldn't want to sanctify their marriage anyway."

Is this akin to " I wouldn't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member"?

I agree..why would ANYONE want to be a part of a group that hates them ?( I think this may be why I'm seperated from my wife ;-)

Asylum Seeker said...

"Is this akin to " I wouldn't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member"?"

More or less. You just don't have Jewish Nazis or black KKK members. It's also why gay/female/minority group Republicans frighten me. You have to really be messed up to openly side with people who not only despise you, but pursue laws to make life worse for you.

As for marriage: bad comparison. IF people involved in marriage don't hate one another, they are doin' it rong.

Richelle said...

this reminds me of a funny (yet terribly pathetic) story.

i used to live in wyoming and when the movie "brokeback mountain" came out in theaters 95% of the state freaked out. the theaters wouldn't even show it because everybody was pissed off because the story takes place in wyoming.

then there were the ranting idiots who wrote in to the local newspapers and proclaimed that "REAL cowboys are not gay and i would know because i'm a cowboy and my daddy was a cowboy and my granddaddy was a cowboy and cowboys are hard workin' people unlike you stupid liberals who like immoral movies like this derp, derp, derp!!"

it was one of many instances where the mentality of the majority of wyomingites made me extremely embarrassed to be a resident of that state.

i would not recommend going there unless you want to take a hunting/camping/fishing trip because almost everybody is a backwoods god fearing hick asshole retard who is incapable of intelligent thought.

GearHedEd said...

Richelle,

Do you have any unmarried sisters?

GearHedEd said...

LOL

Asylum Seeker said...

"the theaters wouldn't even show it because everybody was pissed off because the story takes place in wyoming."

These people must not understand how fiction works. It also makes me wonder how Georgians reacted to Deliverance...

"REAL cowboys"

The hilarity began there. It continued when the person insisted that his anecdotal evidence is authoritative enough to conclude that there are absolutely no gay cowboys in existence.

"because almost everybody is a backwoods god fearing hick asshole retard who is incapable of intelligent thought."

Sounds like Youtube...

pboyfloyd said...

It's a little known 'fact' that two cowboys were heading into the yet unnamed territory and they decided to name the territory the first thing that the other said.

Sinchronistically they came upon some native Indian's who happened to be, strangely Hari-Krishnas!

"Om... Om... Om" the Indians were chanting, in their trance.

The cowboys were flummoxed and one finally asked the other, "Wyoming?"

pboyfloyd said...

It's ten o'clock on Saturday morning.

I, not wanting to stink up the house with edible garbage, have taken to offering the crows any left-over food.

(I love birds)

Just, just now, the crows were knocking on the roof, basically saying, "Give us some breakfast!"

I have created 'a monster'!

LOL

(I can't believe how smart birds are!)

Josh said...

Agreed. I did a post comparing this to the civil rights opposition in the 60's the other day: The Poor, Persecuted Proponents of Proposition 8.

It is truly amazing how the persecutors can mind&*$*# themselves enough to think they are actually the ones being oppressed.

Josh Nankivel
non-theist.com

Asylum Seeker said...

"It is truly amazing how the persecutors can mind&*$*# themselves enough to think they are actually the ones being oppressed."

Yes. It's something that has entertained me (and disgusted me) for a while now. I really would like for more psychological research into the marvels of the persecution complex, and its underlying causes, because it would make these people a little less incomprehensibly absurd, and more straightforwardly absurd.

pboyfloyd said...

"...homosexual activists who have no qualms coming in and doing the most blasphemous and sacrilegious acts right in the middle of a Christian worship service, he(Dr. Gary Cass) says.."

Of course, 'just being there', is probably considered 'most blasphemous and sacrilegious'!

Way to try to wedge in sacrilege and blasphemy back into common law, Cass-baby!

Asylum Seeker said...

The thing about blasphemy and sacrilege is....almost everything qualifies! That's one of the many reasons why it is ridiculous to hold them with much regard, even within a relatively homogenously religious segment of society. And why accusing others of offending for such things just amounts to contentless bitching rather than actual critique.

And these people are making mountains out of molehills, pretending that the select few activists who snuck into a church to protest are indicative of the general nature of the protests going on now. Typical. They really cannot sleep comfortably unless they allowed to fitfully imagine someone attempting to strangle them. It would be kinky if they didn't simultaneously condemn such fixations while awake. In that situation, it's just sad.

Richelle said...

"Do you have any unmarried sisters?"

sorry ed, both my sisters are married with a ton of babies.

why do you ask?

Pliny-the-in-Between said...

I have to admit that the whole prop 8 thing was a tipping point for me. I am in the process of loading my first oral volley into the vile heart of the supporters of the measure and their enablers.

Asylum Seeker said...

It wasn't a tipping point for me, it is merely the dialogue being provoked by the decision that is beginning to have an increasing influence over myself. But, it's good to see that others feel as strongly (not that that is particularly difficult).