Oh, yeah. There was this time I was pinned down by this guy that played left tackle for varsity... Well, at least he used to before he was a vampire... Anyway, he had this really, really thick neck, and all I had was a little, little Exact-O knife ... You're not loving this story.

Buffy ,'Beneath You'


Natter 62: The 62nd Natter  

Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.


Jesse - Dec 22, 2008 2:22:48 pm PST #7545 of 10002
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.

Dear god elementary strings. My ears, my ears.

Ha ha! My younger cousin took violin for a while, and it was a nightmare. This is why I took flute -- even at 9 or 10, I knew that played badly, flute sounded better than violin or clarinet played badly.


msbelle - Dec 22, 2008 2:25:09 pm PST #7546 of 10002
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb

Oh dear god, it is awful. And the parents in the audience talking is worse. Wtf is wrong with people.


Steph L. - Dec 22, 2008 2:46:40 pm PST #7547 of 10002
I look more rad than Lutheranism

My cousin Buffy, who married her wife over Labor Day, sent me this link to Melissa Etheridge's wife's blog. They've got an interesting take on the Warren deal.

Her perspective is interesting -- as long as the government-approved union with all the same rights as marriage is legal for gay people, then it doesn't have to be called "marriage" -- but my impression (based solely on the media) is that, in general, gay people don't want separate-but-equal status, with a differently-named union. If "marriage" is good enough for the hetero American citizens, then why should gay American citizens be forced to accept anything else?

Still, it was interesting to read.

Although I couldn't get past her horrible butchering of "yarmulke."


meara - Dec 22, 2008 2:55:27 pm PST #7548 of 10002

Meh, I'd *rather* have marriage, but if someone were going to hand me something that was *actually* the same as marriage, I wouldn't kick it out of bed for eating crackers. Especially if it were more than just a state at a time. Widespread. IJS.

I'm pragmatic. I'd rather have the shit than fight for the word. I figure if we have civil unions or whatever the hell they want to call them, in ten or twenty years, when we've had those and the world has not collapsed, at some point, people go "oh. yeah. duh"

I can see the argument that we shouldn't settle, and I have definitely seen people settle for things that were NOT worth settling for--things that were LESS than equal. Things that were selling out friends of theirs, for example (ie, "oh, well, we'll get equal rights for the gays, and sucks for the trannies! Maybe someday!") And that shit ain't right. But...


javachik - Dec 22, 2008 2:58:12 pm PST #7549 of 10002
Our wings are not tired.

Although I couldn't get past her horrible butchering of "yarmulke."

ha!

My personal opinion is that government should be completely out of the "marriage" business altogether. Gov't should issue civil unions, i.e. binding legal contracts between adults, to any persons who wish to be united by law. I could give a rat's ass if it's 2 people or 5.

And "marriage" would be left up to religious organizations to do with what they see fit. Lots of churches are open to gay marriage. And lots of 'em aren't. As with any church, you're welcome to be a member of any you think fits your needs.

The end.


Jesse - Dec 22, 2008 3:12:23 pm PST #7550 of 10002
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.

I am pretty much with you, javachik. I know straight couples who don't believe in legal marriage, churches that celebrate gay marriage, etc. Some (gay) close family friends now have two anniversaries -- their church wedding 15 years ago (that I'm pretty sure my father co-celebrated), and their legal marriages when MA passed marriage equality.


P.M. Marc - Dec 22, 2008 3:29:30 pm PST #7551 of 10002
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

Her perspective is interesting -- as long as the government-approved union with all the same rights as marriage is legal for gay people, then it doesn't have to be called "marriage" -- but my impression (based solely on the media) is that, in general, gay people don't want separate-but-equal status, with a differently-named union. If "marriage" is good enough for the hetero American citizens, then why should gay American citizens be forced to accept anything else?

I think the same-sex legal contract in Great Britain is civil marriage rebranded without the word marriage. (Civil partnership vs. civil marriage.)

My personal opinion is that government should be completely out of the "marriage" business altogether.

Amen.


Steph L. - Dec 22, 2008 3:38:17 pm PST #7552 of 10002
I look more rad than Lutheranism

My personal opinion is that government should be completely out of the "marriage" business altogether. Gov't should issue civil unions, i.e. binding legal contracts between adults, to any persons who wish to be united by law. I could give a rat's ass if it's 2 people or 5.

And "marriage" would be left up to religious organizations to do with what they see fit.

This is my opinion as well; my earlier post was just my attempt at articulating *my perception* of the general arguments in favor of gay marriage. (I just wanted to be clear.)


tommyrot - Dec 22, 2008 3:50:12 pm PST #7553 of 10002
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

Oh, uh, today is Strega's birthday!

Birthday Happies for Strega!!


Glamcookie - Dec 22, 2008 4:06:35 pm PST #7554 of 10002
I know my own heart and understand my fellow man. But I am made unlike anyone I have ever met. I dare to say I am like no one in the whole world. - Anne Lister

I am javachik. "We're very pretty."