Author Topic: The whole Ms. California thing.  (Read 21137 times)

Offline Raisa

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,248
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #40 on: Tuesday, May 26, 2009, 11:10:49 PM »
tapioca cooked in milk, cardamom, cloves, vanilla, sugar, and chilled to perfection beats any ice cream! well, almost.

Miss California--it's true--marriage should be between a man and woman. But i'm tired of beauty queens. They're odd.

But judges are even more odd, especially if they're fugly.
Taken.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #41 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 10:34:04 AM »
California agrees with you, again.

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,933
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #42 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 11:31:07 AM »
I love the rationalization people have been using to claim that isn't discrimination.

"Its not singling anyone out. No one, gay or strait, can marry someone of the same sex. See? Its fair."

Ignoring the fact that the only people that would ever want to do such a thing in the first place are the gay people. Its infuriating and it doesn't even affect me one bit. I can only imagine if it did.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #43 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 01:06:08 PM »
It is a contentious issue, though.  We've already gone through the whole litany of arguments, and we even know more or less who is on which side of them.  No one here wants to deny gay couples the right to the same protections as married people.  Some of us think their unions need to be called something other than marriage.  That's all.

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,933
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #44 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 01:54:16 PM »
Which makes it all the more stupid. We're passing laws because of a noun. So its exactly like a marriage, with the same legal protections and everything that goes along with it...but you cant call it a marriage? "Thats our word! You can't use it!"

Please stop the planet, I'd like to get off.

Offline sirean_syan

  • Global Moderator
  • Post-aholic
  • *
  • Posts: 2,544
  • ...
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #45 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 01:59:02 PM »
I'm with Idol's idea. If the term marriage is so laden with religious meaning, strike it from the laws and let the churches have it. Then they can all argue among themselves which church/religion actually owns it.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #46 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 02:00:48 PM »
Let me put it another way.  By calling it something else, they can bypass the huge crowd of voters who simply will not budge.  They can get exactly what they want by using a different noun, yet they keep heading into the same brick wall.  Now who's being stupid?

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,933
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #47 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 02:15:51 PM »
Well first they need "unions" or whatever they want to call it to actually be equal (legally) to marriages. Currently, they aren't.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #48 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 05:09:22 PM »
Or you could say that the entire world has stopped believing in the inherent meanings of just about everything, leading to a near constant battle of wills where one group eternally tries to welcome itself into the territory of another.  Marriage, the concept of a blessed union under God where a man and woman commit to loving and supporting one another regardless of the trials that may come, may mean nothing to you, but it meant a hell of a lot to millions of people throughout history.  And considering that we live in an age graced by the most colossal heap of failed marriages and divorces in the history of humankind, let alone infidelity, let alone promiscuity due to people abandoning marriage altogether, let alone broken families with a single parent, maybe the fact that marriage has come to mean so little is more of a problem than it's been given credit for.  So instead of wasting all of our time discussing whether or not two dudes should get a legal congratulation for committing to regularly fucking one another, maybe we could focus on the fact that most of the people who live in our society, gay or otherwise, are so consumed by themselves and so unconcerned with the consequences of their actions that they seem to spend most of their time destroying whatever relationship they lay their hands on.

Just saying.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,933
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #49 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 05:18:10 PM »
I don't want to be a dick, but I thought the contrast here was funny.

"man and woman commit to loving and supporting one another regardless of the trials that may come"
"two dudes should get a legal congratulation for committing to regularly fucking one another"

One is love and support, the other is fucking?

But I agree that the whole marriage situation is fucked up. Divorce rate is 50%. There was some stat I read recently where 1 in 2 kids have a single parent, and 1 in 3 are born to unwed parents. Its a sad state of affairs, which makes it even all the more absurd that people are trying to "protect" or "save" marriage by not letting gay people do it.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #50 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 05:24:58 PM »
My point is that the legal status of what it is really shouldn't matter.  If the government came by and told me my marriage was null and void tomorrow, why should I care?  What's important to me about what my wife and I share has nothing to do with law or tax breaks or anything else, it has to do with me loving her and giving her my life completely in the sight of God.  Any of you who know of the struggles we've gone through will know that this isn't bullshit lip service to a cause.  Life is difficult and relationships with imperfect people (all of us) are always going to be hard, but it's the dedication and sense of responsibility that make it work, not simply being compatible or having enough orgasms or finding the perfect balance of give and take.  Few people are that compatible 100% of the time, you can never have enough orgasms, and in a world full of imbalanced people you're never going to weigh the scales properly.  Living up to the vows you swear to your spouse is a responsibility that most of the idiots in this country seem to have abandoned en masse, right along with the realization that love isn't some magical fairytale concept (at least not entirely), it's in many ways a real, tangible, finite thing that requires care and effort just like anything else.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,933
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #51 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 05:34:06 PM »
I agree with you there, it shouldnt matter. But, you do get some tax breaks, you get to make medical decisions for each other if the other is unable, and various other legal rights that the government grants because of a marriage. The government needs to get off their ass and make that shit available to ALL committed relationships regardless of whos in it.

Either that, or stop giving the benefits. Marriage doesnt have to go away and it doesn't have to change. The government just needs to get the fuck out of it.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #52 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 05:59:48 PM »
For most people, the problem isn't governmental.  Whether I agree or disagree with gay relationships, what do I care about medical decisions and tax breaks?  People aren't arguing over a word.  They're trying to save the legacy, the context, the importance of all the things that come with it.  And as I said, I think we have bigger problems than these unions.  We have a nation of people that doesn't respect the importance of just about anything, which is exactly what put us in this position in the first place.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,918
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #53 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 06:15:14 PM »
I still say the gov't has no business in personal affairs i.e. marriage or its definition. The only official concern should be in legal rights, which are contractual and not necessarily based on emotional positions as marriage can be. Everyone already has the right to consentually enter a contractually binding agreement, like a partnership or a joint venture, they're just united by lawyers rather than a priests.

In cases of injury or death where the victim has no spouse (or no one mentioned in the will) the rights, legal obligations, or inheritence goes to the next of kin. Suppose the victim and the next of kin are the same gender it has no venue on its legitimacy and makes no difference at all.

So as I said in my earlier post, people are just agitated by the terminology and context. They don't seem to have any problems when similar contractual obligations exist between other entities or in "profesional" contexts.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #54 on: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 06:36:10 PM »
Moved to Serious Topics.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,918
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #55 on: Thursday, May 28, 2009, 02:53:30 AM »

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,180
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #56 on: Monday, June 22, 2009, 07:12:23 PM »

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #57 on: Monday, June 22, 2009, 07:15:35 PM »
What the fuck?  Somebody punch that guy in the face so he can't talk anymore.  He's invading my sense of decency.

Keyboard cat rules, though.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline angrykeebler

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,717
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #58 on: Monday, June 22, 2009, 07:40:19 PM »
What the fuck?  Somebody punch that guy in the face so he can't talk anymore.  He's invading my sense of decency.

Keyboard cat rules, though.

Someone DID punch him in the face..that's what he's ranting about. Didn't stop him from making that video.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98VS5RG1&show_article=1
Suck it, Pugnate.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #59 on: Monday, June 22, 2009, 09:17:46 PM »
Yes, but someone needs to punch him in the face again.  And harder.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline angrykeebler

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,717
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #60 on: Monday, June 22, 2009, 09:24:00 PM »
OR

or or or or


with a hatchet
Suck it, Pugnate.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #61 on: Monday, June 22, 2009, 09:30:55 PM »
Oh oh, a hatchet that's on fire!

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #62 on: Tuesday, June 23, 2009, 04:56:46 AM »
Serrated edge?  Spiked?

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,918
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #63 on: Tuesday, June 23, 2009, 07:27:31 AM »
Might I reommend this two-handed spiked mace?


Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The whole Ms. California thing.
« Reply #64 on: Tuesday, June 23, 2009, 05:22:38 PM »
Yes.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野