|
evilweasel posted:Movements is too hard to really pin down, but for actual legalization it's the Netherlands (2001), Belgium (2003) some provinces in Canada (2003), then Massachusetts getting fourth place with 2004.  ) This is one case where the US's model of government works to our advantage, since it lets same-sex marriage get passed piece by piece, rather than all at once, with the Supreme Court likely taking care of the "nationwide" part.
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
fade5 posted:I still find it odd that the US isn't going to be the last country dragging our rear end across the finish line on this issue. (Excluding the Middle Eastern/African/former Soviet Bloc countries; they're going backwards on gay rights Why is it odd?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Who is it odd? You'd think Europe would be ahead of us, but as I said, Germany's in the "Civil unions that get everything but marriage" boat thanks to the CDU. AYC fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
AYC posted:You'd think Europe would be ahead of us, but as I said, Germany's in the "Civil unions that get everything but marriage" boat thanks to the CDU. So I'm guessing no one told you much of Europe is just as bigoted as the worst of the US
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
AYC posted:You'd think Europe would be ahead of us, but as I said, Germany's in the "Civil unions that get everything but marriage" boat thanks to the CDU. I also think there is something to be said for the 20+ years of american citizens having fellow openly gay icons as a central part of their cultural and international heritage. Germany doesn't have the same Hollywood or Broadway-like institution to create a sea change in the youth of their country w/r/t considering homosexuals worthy of full citizenship.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Why is it odd? The United States is literally the worst place on Earth and if you don't agree you're a fascist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
AYC posted:You'd think Europe would be ahead of us... You really wouldn't think this if you actually knew what Europe or indeed most of the world is like. The US has long been in the top 10 or so most progressive nations on LGBT rights.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Why is it odd? gently caress, we didn't even ratify the United Nations’ Disability Treaty because Republicans are such intransigent assholes. quote:America is the only member of the U.N., apart from Somalia and South Sudan, to not ratify the CRC. (It should be noted that both Somalia, a broken nation, and South Sudan, a new nation, are in the process of ratification.) America is also the only U.N. member, apart from Haiti, to not ratify the Basel Convention, which regulates the flow of hazardous waste from industrialized nations to developing ones. And that is an essential reason why the American government refuses to ratify the CRPD. Any international accord that can be perceived as diminishing American sovereignty is dismissed out of hand. Install Windows posted:You really wouldn't think this if you actually knew what Europe or indeed most of the world is like. The US has long been in the top 10 or so most progressive nations on LGBT rights. I'm happy we're doing so well on this issue, but it still surprises me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Basically, the US is really really bad about not getting things the rest of the (first) world takes for granted. A livable minimum wage, nationalized healthcare (hell, we don't even have a loving public option), a national ID, pretty much anything with even a hint of "socialism" is treated as horrifying in America. Gay marriage doesn't have any hints of socialism and is a generally "libertarian-friendly" right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
AYC posted:You'd think Europe would be ahead of us, but as I said, Germany's in the "Civil unions that get everything but marriage" boat thanks to the CDU. I wouldn't. The liberal states of Western Europe are generally more liberal than the United States, but not really more than 'liberal' US states. It's that when you take the US as a nation and compare it to liberal Western European nations, but that's just an artifact of Europe being many nations and the United States being one. Europe's liberal enclaves are nations, not states. Likewise, their backwards conservative areas are other nations, not states. We are one nation with both stuffed in so the nation as a whole is more average than European nations. But when states are able to make changes on their own then it's much easier to get a liberal majority. It's also not terribly surprising that the United States leads the way here because of our somewhat unique approach with constitutional rights. The EU has something vaguely similar but it's not nearly as powerful and as often used as the Bill of Rights/14th Amendment to strike down laws that society is realizing need to go. In the United States, because we can bypass the legislative process it's possible to have leaps ahead that happen before you could get that change through a legislature. In some cases this actually leads to a large divergence in the law as written and as practiced - much of Europe has stricter restrictions on abortion than the US does (due to abortion being constitutionalized), they're just widely ignored.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Basically, the US is really really bad about not getting things the rest of the (first) world takes for granted. A livable minimum wage, nationalized healthcare (hell, we don't even have a loving public option), a national ID, pretty much anything with even a hint of "socialism" is treated as horrifying in America. Most countries don't have livable minimum wages either, it's kind of a major problem that again, you would know about if you ever looked into it. PS actual "socialist" countries didn't tend to really play nice with gay people either. Among most of them, the best you'd get was lack of legal action against you just for being gay, but you wouldn't get protection.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Gay marriage doesn't have any hints of socialism and is a generally "libertarian-friendly" right. Along with marijuana. I wouldn't be surprised if we had consciousness-uploading before we have single-payer health care, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Gay marriage doesn't have any hints of socialism and is a generally "libertarian-friendly" right. But yeah, gay marriage is extremely accepted among young people and real libertarians. (I actually use support of same-sex marriage to determine if someone's a real libertarian or a conservative pretending to be a libertarian.) Install Windows posted:Most countries don't have livable minimum wages either, it's kind of a major problem that again, you would know about if you ever looked into it. PS actual "socialist" countries didn't tend to really play nice with gay people either. Among most of them, the best you'd get was lack of legal action against you just for being gay, but you wouldn't get protection.  fear-mongering) rights was nothing short of amazing. But, we did get the ordinance passed 8-3, so  . Okay I guess that sort of proves your point. Fine, just let me be amazed the US is doing something right the first time and in a timely manner, it doesn't happen very often.  E: poo poo I didn't mean to cause a derail, I just wanted to explain why I found the US being a leader in LGBT rights amazing. fade5 fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
National ID cards are not "socialist"; and many European nations (including the three scandivanian nations and the UK) either don't have national ID cards, or have non-mandatory ID cards. I consider myself a socialist; but I'm opposed to mandatory national ID cards. That's admittedly in the context of the legislation that the last UK government were doing (mandatory not only to own but also to carry with you at all times along with some other dodgy stuff. I just feel that you shouldn't be forced to carry around an identity document everywhere you go with you; a system like the German one wouldn't be so bad; but I'd rather not have one in the first place, to be honest! What I'm saying is that its rash to assume that America is automatically well behind the rest of the world because some European nations (for LGBT issues, the Netherlands and the UK, especially for trans issues although things are far from perfect, come to mind) lead the world. America has been behind on lots of things (the healthcare thing is a big one); but it has led in some areas, especially prior to the rise of the Christian right. fade5 posted:former Soviet Bloc countries; they're going backwards on gay rights I am going to question the universality of this, though. While its obvious that things are nowhere near perfect in Central and Eastern Europe for gay people, I don't see things as going backwards. Russia (and I think Belarus) certainly is; I don't know enough about Central Asia (or the Balkans) to comment and Ukraine is impossible to say right now because of more immediate concerns. However, my impression is that although broadly LGBT people still face great problems and changes in the region; my personal feeling (it is anecdotal, but the general trend seems to be supported by polling data) is that most young people brought up after the collapse of the Soviet Union and Communism are much more supportive of LGBT rights issues. Marriage is still a complicated issue (especially in Poland, being the most catholic nation in Europe and all); but there are civil unions now in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovenia (and soon in Croatia, I believe) along with some pretty good anti-discrimination legislation and seemingly also allowing legal gender change without the need for surgery. Societally they are still a long way away from meeting the standards that we are used to in the east (Lithuania passed some awful "protection of minors" legislation a few years back but its nowhere near as bad as Russia's but its still an awful thing); but anecdotal evidence from people from the region that I know (admittedly, they are studying at my university in Scotland, so they're not representative of the general population) and polling evidence that I've seen all hint towards things in the region moving in the right direction. We've all seen how much things have changed in the west over the last 5-10 years: and while I'm not saying that homosexuality will be accepted in former Soviet parts of Europe in the short and medium term, I think that its wrong to say that things are clearly moving backwards outside of Russia and its pals. e: this took a long time to post and everyone beat me to bits of this
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
It's also a case where the scale of things flips the meaning of "national" to "federal" in US terms. What people actually mean by "national ID card" is "federal ID card" and that doesn't exist in the EU either. You don't get a European Union Identity Card in the EU, you get an identity card from Poland or Germany or France, which is analogous to state-issued identity cards in the EU structure. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:It's also a case where the scale of things flips the meaning of "national" to "federal" in US terms. You may be right, technically, but lets compare apples to apples. The US is a federal state, and Germany is a federal state (16 states for 80 million people). Germany has national/federal ID. It's also rather uncontroversial. One advantage is that nobody cries about voter fraud here. If you are elderly or disabled you can also get a government worker to visit you if you lose your ID or it becomes obsolete, instead of going to a government office to get a new one. evilweasel posted:It's also not terribly surprising that the United States leads the way here because of our somewhat unique approach with constitutional rights. The EU has something vaguely similar but it's not nearly as powerful and as often used as the Bill of Rights/14th Amendment to strike down laws that society is realizing need to go. In the United States, because we can bypass the legislative process it's possible to have leaps ahead that happen before you could get that change through a legislature. In some cases this actually leads to a large divergence in the law as written and as practiced - much of Europe has stricter restrictions on abortion than the US does (due to abortion being constitutionalized), they're just widely ignored. I don't get that at all. When civil unions were passed here in Germany, they were worse than "real" marriages in several areas (no joint taxes,full inheritance taxes etc.), and the Federal Constitutional Court has declared every single one of these disadvantages that were litigated before it unconstitutional. I don't see where the United States is unique in that regard. And if you want to compare the USA with a pan-European institution, the European Court of Human Rights has declared the ban on gay soldiers in the United Kingdom illegal under the European Convention of Human Rights (which was passed by the Council of Europe [47 members] and not the EU [27 members], though all EU states are also part of the Council of Europe). And it did so in 1999, more than a decade before the US Supreme Court abolished DADT. fade5 posted:Basically, the US is really really bad about not getting things the rest of the (first) world takes for granted. A livable minimum wage, nationalized healthcare (hell, we don't even have a loving public option), a national ID, pretty much anything with even a hint of "socialism" is treated as horrifying in America. The first Universal Health Care system was established by Bismark in the 1880s to fight against the dirty socialists that were rather strong at that time, in an attempt to undermine their support. So hardly a sign of progressiveness. And unless you think every country not the USA is socialist, then it cannot really be seen as an exclusively left wing issue. Nations like the Vatican, Australia, India and Singapore have UHC as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
Europe didn't have many non-white people, and now that they do (coincidentally) all of their systems are breaking down due to racists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 12:08
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Europe didn't have many non-white people, and now that they do (coincidentally) all of their systems are breaking down due to racists. That's simply not true. Or do you mean those non-white people caused the Euro crisis and the global financial crisis? And outside of the crisis hit nations the social systems in Europe are not breaking down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 13:02
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:That's simply not true. Or do you mean those non-white people caused the Euro crisis and the global financial crisis? And outside of the crisis hit nations the social systems in Europe are not breaking down. There seems to be a large number of fascists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 13:02
|
|
|
The voter ID laws in the US don't exist to stop any type of fraud. Almost all voting fraud comes from absentee ballots. It's entire goal is disenfranchisement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 13:28
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:The voter ID laws in the US don't exist to stop any type of fraud. Almost all voting fraud comes from absentee ballots. It's entire goal is disenfranchisement. But if everybody has an ID you can no longer use it to disenfranchise people! And from the US politics thread I gather that it can be a huge hassle to get the appropriate identification. computer parts posted:There seems to be a large number of fascists. Could you be more precise? Do you watch Russian news about the fascists in the Ukraine? If you please go here to get a more complete picture: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3618446&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 13:33
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:Could you be more precise? Do you watch Russian news about the fascists in the Ukraine? If you please go here to get a more complete picture: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3618446&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1 Try this thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3564268
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 13:40
|
|
|
The problem is that implementing anti-"fraud" measures before getting a national ID system up and running is just so blatantly an attempt to disenfranchise poor, elderly, and nonwhite voters. I don't think anyone disagrees but it bears repeating. Edit: My goto answer for fascists in Europe would be Romania and anything to do with the Romani/gypsies Mecca-Benghazi fucked around with this message at 13:55 on Apr 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
I'm still not sure why "national id" is being presented as something we should consider positively correlated with anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:You may be right, technically, but lets compare apples to apples. The US is a federal state, and Germany is a federal state (16 states for 80 million people). Germany has national/federal ID. It's also rather uncontroversial. Right, it's uncontroversial because in the EU national IDs are issued "locally". State-issued IDs are uncontroversial in the US too. Given how much people cry about everything done in Brussels, EU identity cards would probably be just as divisive and controversial as US issued identity cards from Washington. The usual "state's rights" crowds always throw a fit about big government power grabs and the gigantic centralized databases that will totally spring into being (hint: they already exist) and begin oppressing everyone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
While other states are voting in favor of marrying gays Louisiana just voted more than 2-1 in favor of jailing gays! Thank god that the SCOTUS is good on at least one issue. http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/04/post_558.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Right, it's uncontroversial because in the EU national IDs are issued "locally". State-issued IDs are uncontroversial in the US too. Its even better when people don't even contend the current existence of the Permanent Record form of information-gathering, but they still quibble about a fact of life in developed countries as part of a 'slippery slope into fascism'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Gerund posted:Its even better when people don't even contend the current existence of the Permanent Record form of information-gathering, but they still quibble about a fact of life in developed countries as part of a 'slippery slope into fascism'. Seriously, I mean, the NSA can literally pinpoint your computer by fingerprinting the browser or OS, and having to store "License #01234567, Alabama" instead of "License #0123456789" is really going to throw them off the track somehow? But really, the underlying feelings are the exact same, the terminology is just a little different. I know for a fact there are various anti-EU national-rights type parties and I guarantee you those types will throw a fit about MY SOVEREIGNTY if you tried to implement an EU-wide ID system. The fact that Germany has cantons or whatever doesn't mean dick, our states have their own individual "federal" governments of counties/parrishes/etc too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Seriously, I mean, the NSA can literally pinpoint your computer by fingerprinting the browser or OS, and having to store "License #01234567, Alabama" instead of "License #0123456789" is really going to throw them off the track somehow? Agreed! And to bodily wrench this topic back, imagine how much faster the appeals process would be if there was a centralized form and identification system for marriage. No quibbling about different state forms being necessary and then waiting for the eventual harm to occur to form the basis of an appeal, just black-and-white "this person is married or else you're a bigot" = instant court case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Gerund posted:Agreed! And to bodily wrench this topic back, imagine how much faster the appeals process would be if there was a centralized form and identification system for marriage. No quibbling about different state forms being necessary and then waiting for the eventual harm to occur to form the basis of an appeal, just black-and-white "this person is married or else you're a bigot" = instant court case. The whole 50-different-systems thing helps minority movements gain momentum. If you make it so there's only one system, you destroy the possibility of progress on the state level. I honestly can't think of a civil rights issue that was resolved in the proper, history-approved fashion by a nationwide majority right from the start (if everyone agrees, it's not an issue). I guess maybe abortion, but that one backslid after Roe v Wade. Most of the time you start with a broad, popular disapproval, you convince a few liberal states, who pass laws and show the rest of the country that the sky doesn't fall, and then you gradually convince the majority and then the courts finally drag Alabama and Mississippi kicking and screaming into the 20th century. Much like the idea of making all of everyone's votes public, it sounds great until you realize that you're not starting from a majority. If you ask the national public what they think of interracial marriage circa 1950 or gay marriage circa 1970 then you're going to get a resounding "hell no", and then how are you going to show people that gay marriages work too? The US only has had national majority support for gay marriage since 2011. The tools (suspect classifications, etc) exist but it's really tough to get people to interpret the law in such a way to use them given the dynamics of a political system. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Apr 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Seriously, I mean, the NSA can literally pinpoint your computer by fingerprinting the browser or OS, and having to store "License #01234567, Alabama" instead of "License #0123456789" is really going to throw them off the track somehow? Arstechnica should be ashamed of themselves for acting like browser fingerprinting wasn't invented and in use since the late 90s. It's an intentional design decision in browsers since like NCSA Mosaic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:I'm still not sure why "national id" is being presented as something we should consider positively correlated with anything. Yeah toss me into the "what's wrong with states issuing identification" column.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 07:32
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Yeah toss me into the "what's wrong with states issuing identification" column. The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate Disco > Civil Rights in the South.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 07:37
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate Disco > Civil Rights in the South. So you're saying that with a national ID voter disenfranchisement would never happen? Because I don't see a way for a national ID to shake out without either relying on the states to issue said ID card or through the creation of a massive nationwide bureaucratic system to issue identification which isn't likely to happen as long as small government types are A Thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
You asked what was wrong with state issued ID and I answered. Racists. I don't see why we'd need to build massive infrastructure just to hand out some colored plastic pieces. There's already one or more US post offices in most every US city. Let them issue no-cost national photo ID at every post office. Such a plan wouldn't get through the GOP-controlled house today obviously, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good idea...plenty of good ideas can't get through that House.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 08:06
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:So you're saying that with a national ID voter disenfranchisement would never happen? Because I don't see a way for a national ID to shake out without either relying on the states to issue said ID card or through the creation of a massive nationwide bureaucratic system to issue identification which isn't likely to happen as long as small government types are A Thing. We already have a national ID that has nothing to do with the states: your social security card. It works pretty well, and we could easily have an actual nation ID as a parallel to that. The big issue is forcing the states to go to a standardized election format and acceptance of said ID. I do't see that happening right now or at all until the minarchists are beaten back into whatever dark corner they crawled out of this time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:The big issue is forcing the states to go to a standardized election format and acceptance of said ID. I do't see that happening right now or at all until the minarchists are beaten back into whatever dark corner they crawled out of this time. It isn't really an issue of libertarianism, though. State and local politicians might dress up their voter restriction policies in that kind of rhetoric, but it's really just a cover for the complete opposite goal of disenfranchising certain groups (people who would vote for the wrong kind of candidates) via authoritarian structures (state bureaucracy and law enforcement). To tie it back to the topic, it's actually the exact same rhetorical lie used when people say they are "protecting freedom" by restricting gay rights, when really they have a completely different reason for doing so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:I'm still not sure why "national id" is being presented as something we should consider positively correlated with anything. Isn't that basically what a SSN is?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:It isn't really an issue of libertarianism, though. State and local politicians might dress up their voter restriction policies in that kind of rhetoric, but it's really just a cover for the complete opposite goal of disenfranchising certain groups (people who would vote for the wrong kind of candidates) via authoritarian structures (state bureaucracy and law enforcement). To tie it back to the topic, it's actually the exact same rhetorical lie used when people say they are "protecting freedom" by restricting gay rights, when really they have a completely different reason for doing so. You act as if that isn't the standard libertarian playbook anyway. The whole thing's a philosophical sham to give give cover for making GBS threads on minorities and the poor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:Isn't that basically what a SSN is? I would say that's much more what a passport is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 15:29
|
|