Yay! And booo. (RL post)

[thistlechaser]

I usually avoid political-ish posts because 1) I don't like to upset people who don't agree, 2) I really, really don't like it when people fight/argue through comments, but this is a good day! And people might not know it yet!

The yay:

Go go go New Jersey!

"Gay couples have the same marriage rights as heterosexual couples under the New Jersey state constitution, the state Supreme Court rules."

See cnn.com and other such news outlets for details.

Yay for progress!

--

And the boo: I know being sad about crap Rush Limbaugh says is like beating a dead horse, but I just can't believe this. After Michael J. Fox appeared in an ad for something Limbaugh doesn't support, Limbaugh claimed that Fox (who has Parkinson's Disease) is faking it "for dramatic effect".

Fox appeared in a recent Clair McHaskill (D-MO) Senate campaign ad, touting the need for stem cell research. Limbaugh even goes so far as to accuse Fox of faking his symptoms all together.

You can Google for many, many links, but here's one from the Washington Post.

Quote from a doctor:
Anyone who knows the disease well would regard his movement as classic severe Parkinson's disease," said Elaine Richman, a neuroscientist in Baltimore who co-wrote "Parkinson's Disease and the Family." "Any other interpretation is misinformed."

So yeah. Spread more hatred, will you Mr. Limbaugh? At least people in NJ got some love going on. Maybe even enough to counter you.

---

Back when I worked at a certain search engine, we moved into a nifty new building with unfortunately thin walls between "offices" (fancy cubes, but more office than cube). The barest little sound easily passed from office to office, let alone something like a radio. The guy in the office next to mine asked me if I minded if he listened to Limbaugh. I actually laughed, thinking he couldn't be serious, that he would actually willingly listen to something like that. Oops, he was serious. Heh. My bad, but at least he used headphones during the show.

Comments

[kelen.livejournal.com]

..Yay for gay marriage! <3 I'm so glad someone finally got that passed. I dread how long it will last, but damn am I glad.

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

Yeah. But at least it's a start! Baby steps are fine, so long as we keep moving forward. :)

[kelen.livejournal.com]

Totally! <3

[quasilemur.livejournal.com]

Jersey's actually the second state to do so, after Massachusetts. But please, don't let my pedantry spoil your exuberance. :)

[firebyrd.livejournal.com]

I suspect her exuberance is because it means somewhere else is moving in that direction, not because NJ is the first. :)

[kelen.livejournal.com]

Yay for both!

(I'd totally forgotten about Mass to be honest.)

But yes, it's so nice to see further progress. Just wish more people could keep church and state separate.

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I knew NJ wasn't first. :)

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I knew that. Was happy that another state was doing it. :)

[veri-of-remora.livejournal.com]

haha i've always said homosexual couples should have the same opportunity to be unhappy in marriage just like the heterosexual couples. XD

[loneguardian.livejournal.com]

Since you mentioned not arguing I'll be good. ;3

Gay marriage: A good day if you have that viewpoint. I still think a civil union should be good enough, all the legal rights of a married couple without getting the whole country in a bloody uproar over social terms. Sometimes coming to an agreement where both sides give up something is better, but that's all I'm saying on it (given I don't feel like getting ripped apart for being a 'homophobe' by people who don't know me, which has happened, amusingly enough! XD).

Rush: He has a habit of overstepping his boundaries, but he only gets called on it because the media hates him... Who -really- cares what the man's personal opinion is? It's no worse than the morons running around lobbing false accusations all the time anyway.

[southern-hell.livejournal.com]

I actually hadn't seen that yet, quite an evening brightener :]

[theprogenitor.livejournal.com]

I live in Missouri and have seen the AD. I am for the admendment (still would like to see it broder though.)

Fox does sway a lot more in the commercial than he did in a fund raising event he attended a few days later. In all honesty, it does look circumspec.

Fox just could have been having a bad day, the day they taped it and a good day when he was at the fund raiser - or he could have been acting it up. It is hard to say.

-p

[barahir-ffxi.livejournal.com]

I would just like to point out that "Seperation of Church and State" is a convenient misinterpretation of "Freedom of Religion" whose sole purpose was to guarantee all religions the freedom to exist without government influence or suppression. I refuse to believe that the intent of thsoe who wrote the Constitution was to exclude people's religious beliefs from their decision making. How could you ever do that? Dedication to one's religion makes a person who they are and they make their decisions based off of that. Likewise lack of dedication/belief makes other people who they are, and influence their decision making process. It's not fair to say that only those without religous influence should be making the decisions for the country.

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

In one of the news articles a doctor is quoted as saying that the drug that most people with this disease are on causes those sorts of motions as well -- in addition to all the motions that Parkinson's itself causes. I think there are so many reasons, serious reasons, for such movement, him "faking it" should be the very last one on most folks' lists. Just my opinion. :)

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

Yep! :)

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

I still think a civil union should be good enough, all the legal rights of a married couple without getting the whole country in a bloody uproar over social terms

One issue about that that comes up though: How well has 'seperate but equal' worked in the past? I used to think that would be a workable solution, but I'm not really sure now...

It's no worse than the morons running around lobbing false accusations all the time anyway.

Two wrongs don't make a right. :) How about we stop both issues instead of saying it's okay for one person to be awful because another person is?

(Ha ha ha, I deleted so much out of my reply that there's little left~! :P )

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

*snerks* Yeah!

[kelen.livejournal.com]

Yes, but the problem is that America is suppose to be freedom of religion. Suppose to be. Yet every day I find Christians and Catholics forcing their religion on me and mine. This is what I mean by wishing people could keep state and religion separate. Realize the fact that not everyone wants to believe in their god, and some of us are even disgusted by said religions. If they want to keep gay marriage out of their churches then power to them, but there should be more space between how government is run and how the church is run.
Being a Christian doesn't give anyone the right to tell another how they should live (Everything within reason here of course.), but they certainly do try, don't they.

[kamalloy.livejournal.com]

Wait a sec, Catholics aren't Christians? News to me. ^_~

I understand the main point of what you're getting at here, honestly. It's just that one particular statement that I have quibbles with. So as to not clutter Thistle's journal with religious discussion, if you wish to talk about this in more detail, just send me an e-mail or poke me online later tonight.

[loneguardian.livejournal.com]

One issue about that that comes up though: How well has 'seperate but equal' worked in the past? I used to think that would be a workable solution, but I'm not really sure now...

How is a civil union separate? It's the same thing. Straight people get civil unions when they don't wanna deal with the price of a wedding all the time. o.O The only 'difference' is the lack of a religious ceremony to call it a wedding. :3

Two wrongs don't make a right. :)

True enough, but it's annoying that only certain people get picked on about it all the time. :3 I think everyone should stop making unbased accusations and just be friggin' -nice- to each other. But humanity sucks, so...

(Ha ha ha, I deleted so much out of my reply that there's little left~! :P )

X3 Sounds like me. Get thoughts down, realize there's no point trying, 'cause we're never gonna agree, delete it all! :D

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

How is a civil union separate? It's the same thing. Straight people get civil unions when they don't wanna deal with the price of a wedding all the time.

...So those are real things now? Then that works for me! (See how out of wedding-type loops I am?)

Get thoughts down, realize there's no point trying, 'cause we're never gonna agree, delete it all! :D

Exactly. We're not gonna agree, so there's no use arguing about it. :P

[barahir-ffxi.livejournal.com]

Are you really "disgusted" by certain religions? I will go out on a limb here and guess that we are particularly talking about Christians? Maybe specifically the Catholic Church? With all if their disgusting flaws... The Crusades, The Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, "holy" War int he Middle East, the recent incidents of pedophilia and child molestation... there is still no other organization of people that has single handedly brought about so much good to the world. Aid to the needy, comfort for the distressed, guidance for the lost. Worldwide, these things happen every day and have happened for thousands of years. Sure there are dark times. But those dark times can not possibly erase all the amazing things that are done/have happened in the name of God. Or at least, they shouldn't. Many times people forget that without religion and dedication to it, the world would not know Bach, Handel, Haydn... the works of Michaelangelo, Leonardo DaVinci, and Botticelli have no meaning... some of the greatest architectural wonders known to man lose all purpose. The same feeling that inspired all these artists then is small when compared to the passion some christians feel today. I do not blame them in the slighteset for wanting to pass that on. And you're right, they certainly do try.

[barahir-ffxi.livejournal.com]

Now see... I argue with people I don't like. I have "insightful conversations from differing viewpoints" with friends.

And you know you love it too... no need to put a disclaimer on your politicy posts.^^

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

there is still no other organization of people that has single handedly brought about so much good to the world.

Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids (http://www.guardian.co.uk/aids/story/0,7369,1059068,00.html). Quote: "The Catholic Church is telling people in countries stricken by Aids not to use condoms because they have tiny holes in them through which HIV can pass - potentially exposing thousands of people to risk."

From what I see, the "good" stuff religious folks do tends to come with strings attached: We'll feed the poor IF they attend a prayer night first. We'll give aid to Africa countries if they promise not to use condoms... and hey, wouldn't you like to switch to the "right" religion, while we're at it?

If you don't believe in something, don't do it. Don't support gay marriage? Then don't marry someone of the same sex. Don't believe in abortions? Then don't have one! The gall some people have to try to force their values onto others amazes me.

[pomr.livejournal.com]

Actually there's a tremendous difference between a civil union and a marriage. :)

There are considerable tax benefits, for example, for a married couple that a couple in a civil union may not qualify for. Many work places do not offer benefits to civil unions, but do to married couples. There's a slew of legalities that are different for marriage than a civil union. Also, marriages aren't merely done in churches, I got married, and it was a Judge who did it.

Ironically my company offered benefits to Domestic Partners--ie: unwed but living together and such, and here's the kicker -- FOR SAME SEX PAIRINGS ONLY. That's right, kelen despite having been my Domestic Partner for years couldn't qualify for medical until we got married, but if I was living with a man, HE would have.

I think a lot of the confusion on the issue is about semantics, and further, don't forget that marriage as an institution was originally about securing lines of succession and inheritance. :) But that's another issue entirely.

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

And you know you love it too... no need to put a disclaimer on your politicy posts.^^

Bah, like my comment-replies to Aurian, I end up deleting so many paragraphs that nothing is left. :P We're not going to convince each other to change, so let me instead reply with a simple: No. I don't love it, because it makes me feel sad for you (and Aurian, the only other person who tends to comment on that side). I know you'll think that I shouldn't feel bad for you, and you probably won't understand why I do, but I do. Usually I just try not to think about your (and her) leanings, but when I make posts like this it pushes them out into the forefront, and then I feel sad for you guys again.

Grr, and I keep typing more and more trying to explain things. I suck at this whole 'keeping it short' thing. :P

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

Man, this whole thing is so confusing. Maybe they should just scrap the whole thing and come up with some new word for everyone, every couple, and have it apply to all laws and such.

I mean really, what's in a word? Call it a joining or a coupling or pairing whatever the heck you like.

[pomr.livejournal.com]

Freedom of religion is a tremendous thing -- and very important, freedom FROM religion is too. Beliefs are grand and give a lot of comfort, and that's great, if it brings you joy, comfort, security...great and wonderful. It is when people try to share their beliefs that things start getting hairy, not everyone is reasonable about it, or polite, or even kind. For some, unfortunately the ones you tend to remember, it is downright offensive.

I agree that religion and religious organizations of numerous denominations and faiths have done a lot of good, but they've also been the excuse for a lot of stuff that's excreble and vile.

What it all should boil down it is individual choice. If I seek guidance, then that's one thing, but the choice has to be mine. :)

[barahir-ffxi.livejournal.com]

First let me say, You and kelen compliment each other very well... even in your LJ replies.^^

Second... I absolutely agree. Choice is key! My biggest problem stems from the people who scream "Don't force your religion on me... " Immediately followed by "... because my non-religous way is right and it's YOU who needs to change." Where has choice gone at that point?

For some reason it is "wrong" to be against gay marriage and force that belief on everyone, but it's "right" to be for gay marriage and force THAT belief on everyone?

In most cases, it's not that one way is right and the other wrong... they are simply different. Luckily we live in a country where we can make these decisions and if the popular belief shifts, we have ways to make changes.

[pomr.livejournal.com]

We're nearly telepathic, bud. Let me tell you. It is scary how many conversations we have that consist of sentence fragments because we just know. :)

The biggest problem I see is that no matter what, SOMEONE is bound to be upset or unhappy. There's no pleasing everyone. :) I wouldn't want to force my set of values on anyone! They should just KNOW I'm right, and share them! ^_____-

Seriously though, I hear what you're saying. I don't think that there's a median that people can meet at on this issue, and I can't say anyone is wrong for believing what they do, all I can say is that I think that it it shouldn't matter what genders are involved; if they live together, take care of each other, and love each other then it is a beautiful thing, and should be treated with respect, and reverence regardless of who is involved.

The problem is that people's opinions on this are very very very strong, and so they get worked up, and then start making emotional based decisions that end up hurting others. If you're against same sex marriage, that's definitely and emphatically your right, and I would never even consider telling you otherwise.

All I ask is the same in return. :)

Which I think we both agree on, so why am I waxing long winded? Oh...right...I'm a Chatty Cathy, someone should clip my string!

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

Small question on this part:

For some reason it is "wrong" to be against gay marriage and force that belief on everyone, but it's "right" to be for gay marriage and force THAT belief on everyone?

How can you force same-sex marriage onto someone? Unless you hold a gun to some guy's head and say "Marry that man! Or else!"? :P Is it that you don't want to see same-sex couples in your world? If it's that, then how is that more... more... 'acceptable' than saying "I hate black people, so I don't want to see black people"? Or fat people or interracial couples or retarded people marrying or anything else?

You have a right to your own opinion, but when you say "I hate X so no one can X!", that's where my issues come in.

People who are pro same-sex marriages are not trying to force anyone to be married to anyone. (Believe me, I'm pro it and I don't want to marry anything! Not man, woman, or space alien!) People who are against it are trying to force others into acting how they believe is right.

Does this make sense? :)

[loneguardian.livejournal.com]

So make up a legal union that isn't called marriage so people don't have to be at others' throats about it? That's all I'm saying. :P Stupid legal mumbojumbo. z.z That's all I've got to say on the matter. I was just offering what should be a simple solution. ;3

[barahir-ffxi.livejournal.com]

How can you force same-sex marriage onto someone?
I didn't say anyone was trying to force anyone to get married. All I'm saying is that just as being against gay marriage is forcing a religious belief on people, forcing ACCEPTANCE of gay marriage is forcing a secular belief on people. How is asking that people accept gay marriage any different than saying "I believe X and you have to too."?

"I hate X so no one can X!"

I have immense issues with this statement as well. But, my concern is that when it comes to religious things, this is exactly what is done. At Christmas time, when there's a Creche, a Menorah, or whatever placed on, heaven forbid, the land of a public building, people are up in arms. And what is there solution? REMOVE IT... aka "I hate X so no one can X."

Look, I really and honestly don't care about Gay Marriage. I don't really care if someone wants to marry a tomato, my issue is that it is far too convenient for those that support it to not see how excusive they are when it comes to other issues. If you want marriage to be open and available to everyone then, EVERYTHING needs to be open and available to everyone. Including religion. The Chistmas decorations are pretty, they fit the season... do they grab you, smack you in the face and say, "Straighten up and get thee to church?" Absolutely not... I would expect the person who doesn't believe to just walk on by and not give it a second thought, just as they are currently expecting me to do with gay marriage. If I'm supposed to just agree to let anyone marry anyone, and simply turn my head and be silent if I don't agree, I expect to be afforded the same courtesy on other issues where I happen to have strong passions.

[barahir-ffxi.livejournal.com]

Thistle... I just wanted to apologize. I really feel I was responsible for taking your LJ into that place where you don't like it to go. I'll stay away from politic posts in the future... Politics frustrate me more than anything.

[kelen.livejournal.com]

I'd quote Thistle's reply, but there's no point. ;)

Really, it should be said I am disgusted with most the world's religions, not just the Christian one. No matter how many good things you claim, there are a hundred bad ones that the church attempts to hide. Not only this, but they still are commiting wrongs out there in the world in the name of God.
Doesn't make the Islam extremists any better though.

But this doesn't mean all Christians and those who follow Islam are bad people. I /KNOW/ the distinctions here. What I'm saying is that I choose not to believe because I can't worship a god that allows his priests and followers to do such horrible things in his name. Who continues to do horrible things in his name. I don't care what you call the religion.. I chose not to follow it.

There for, if I live in a country that claims to have freedom of religion I demand the right not to have to follow one I don't agree with. Nor should gays, who are only asking for the right to be married. They aren't demanding to stand in your church and have your priest to speak the vows, they are asking for legal state marriage. They are different. I'm married, and I didn't do it in any church.

It doesn't have to be about religion. :)

[kelen.livejournal.com]

I tend to separate the two because I know some people who froth at the mere idea. 9.9; It's kind of like the religions of the middle east (I'd name names, but I'm not sure I'd get them right.). Don't they technically worship the same god as Christians? Yet they'd get really upset at that idea I imagine. Same idea.

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

No no, don't apologize! Aurian and I were talking about this on IM too, and cutting people off from commenting is the last thing I want to do. (If there was some issue I didn't want people to be able to comment on, I'd actually turn comments off. If the 'comment' link is there, you're free to use it!)

I see my LJ as being a place for people to talk. Talk to me, talk to each other. That's why I hope to never make it a friends-only journal.

If I make a political post, I can't very well be upset by getting politcial comments, can I? :P

*snugs* Maybe one day I'll feel like posting about FFXI again. Those are usually nice, safe, non-argument-causing posts.

[thistle-chaser.livejournal.com]

At Christmas time, when there's a Creche, a Menorah, or whatever placed on, heaven forbid, the land of a public building, people are up in arms. And what is there solution? REMOVE IT.

Hmm, that's a good point. I don't personally care about religious stuff up at Christmas time, but I know some people do. (Personally I'd rather see nothing; I don't like Christmas for personal reasons, so the decorations annoy me -- I ignore the religious stuff in the same way that I do the non-religious stuff.) I wonder if it's the same people though? Are the majority of pro-same sex marriage people against display of religious stuff?

The only exception to this (and I think we've disagreed on this in the past) is displaying religious stuff in official ways (like the Ten Commandments in a court building). That would be more like an official acceptance of it, where the display of stuff at Christmas time is more personal and non-official.

Absolutely not... I would expect the person who doesn't believe to just walk on by and not give it a second thought, just as they are currently expecting me to do with gay marriage.

Other than the above example, that seems totally reasonable to me. If you don't like something, then ignore it. We shouldn't be children who can't be shown stuff we don't like...