Straight Marriage Is Illegal Now

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Straight Marriage Is Illegal Now

SubponticatePoster: Aug 9, 2004; Every day takes figurin' out all over again how to fuckin' live.; Slippery Tilde

Spiffster posted:

Not sure about the LDS's currently. Pretty sure they are still being a pain in the rear end

Their language has certainly changed. After the December ruling they said "we still think marriage is 1 man 1 woman [rich coming from those guys] but this needs to work its way through the courts and you should still be respectful to people you disagree with." Which is pretty loving progressive from "the 3 enemies of the church are intellectuals, homosexuals, and feminists."

# ? Feb 19, 2014 23:41

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 3, 2024 08:57

Rhesus Pieces: Jun 27, 2005

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

Holy poo poo it was a bad day for bigots
http://www.buzzfeed.com/tonymerevick/lgbt-discrimination-bills-fail

This quote you cited pretty much says it all:

quote:

Sen. Mark Kirkeby, another Republican, rejected that argument, saying, �I don�t think this is about protection. Senate Bill 128 � it�s a mean, nasty, hateful, vindictive bill. It just is. I cannot sugarcoat that.�

They went way too far with this one and even hardcore Republicans know it. There isn't enough perfume in the world to make this pile of poo poo smell like roses. It's full-blown legalized bigotry without any clever loopholes or technicalities to make it look like anything except what it is. It's basically a mirror that reflects exactly what the anti-SSM side is all about, and much to their dismay it's really, really ugly.

I saw an essay over at Kos about the Kansas bill, and it had anecdotes about how even the reddest of Republicans there were aghast at just how blatantly terrible this bill was.

quote:

Does it mean that Kansas turns progressive? No. But for one day - for a few hours in a capital building today - I watched as angry citizens drove up with 'McCain/Palin' stickers on their trucks got out, made their way to representatives and told them off.

There is nothing as rewarding as the man on the sidewalk outside of the capital yelling 'STOP MAKING US LOOK LIKE ASSHOLES'

# ? Feb 19, 2014 23:47

FuzzySkinner: May 23, 2012

Westboro Baptist Church is coming to protest my Alma Mater

https://twitter.com/WBCFliers/status/435907985185857536/photo/1/large

Which is hilarious because everybody else is already in line to counter protest these people. Even our rival (Akron) has offered support.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 04:22

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

Spiffster posted:

Not sure about the LDS's currently. Pretty sure they are still being a pain in the rear end

They've quieted down some because they found that harping on it was turning away young LDS prospectives.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 04:27

The X-man cometh: Nov 1, 2009

I think Kansas shows how much the Republican leadership isn't in touch with the base. They thought "these dumb hicks will line up behind whatever hateful nonsense we come up with", and were surprised that those hicks were actual purple with a sense of justice.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 04:35

Grundulum: Feb 28, 2006

The X-man cometh posted:

I think Kansas shows how much the Republican leadership isn't in touch with the base. They thought "these dumb hicks will line up behind whatever hateful nonsense we come up with", and were surprised that those hicks were actual purple with a sense of justice.

I agree with the first sentence, but not the rest. I think it's more likely that a small but vocal segment of the population (with the ears of the state's politicians) finally pushed past the point where they had the support of the rest of the local Republican party.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 06:00

twerking on the railroad: Jun 23, 2007; Get on my level

Grundulum posted:

I agree with the first sentence, but not the rest. I think it's more likely that a small but vocal segment of the population (with the ears of the state's politicians) finally pushed past the point where they had the support of the rest of the local Republican party.

I'd amend that to national republican party. I think once the news came out that the Kansas house passed the bill, someone realized that they're inviting heightened scrutiny for laws against gays and so the Tea Party Money train comes to a stop once that passes courts. They're losing in courts right now, but they can still get paid off of gay issues for a few election cycles.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 09:19

paragon1: Nov 22, 2010; FULL COMMUNISM NOW

RZApublican posted:

"We are building a coalition of the willing" has got to be the funniest part of that story.

I think NOM desperately wishes that things were going as well for them as the Iraq war did for Bush.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 09:40

The Macaroni: Dec 20, 2002; ...it does nothing.

computer parts posted:

They've quieted down some because they found that harping on it was turning away young LDS prospectives.

Forget prospective members, it's turning away the LDS youth who were born in the church. They're already having problems with retention, but kicking this dead horse is not winning a lot of hearts and minds among the younger generation.

Hell, if Facebook were around and in heavy use back when DOMA passed, I would've expected to get some flack from Mormons for having pro-equality stuff in my feed. These days, 50% of my Mormon friends like those posts too, 40% are courteous enuogh to ignore them, and the other 10% unfriended me and are not missed. It's getting less terrible every day, folks!

# ? Feb 20, 2014 16:55

cruft: Oct 25, 2007

You can no longer get married in Carlsbad NM without the involvement of clergy.

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/ne...18944c65c5.html

The Santa Fe New Mexican posted:

CARLSBAD � Judges in two southeastern New Mexico counties recently announced they will no longer officiate weddings after the state's high court ruled that same-sex marriage is legal.

The announcement means judges in Eddy and Chaves counties won't officiate any civil marriage ceremonies, from straight or same-sex couples, the Carlsbad Current-Argus reports (http://goo.gl/iHFeHW).

Apparently there is one church in town who will do it: the First Christian Church. This town doesn't have a Unitarian Universalist congregation or United Church of Christ, which was surprising to me. But Carlsbad is on the westernmost border of the Bible Belt, so.

Good thing nobody actually lives in towns as small as Carlsbad, though. The few people who do live there are used to driving 3 hours to the nearest closest city (El Paso, TX) for everything anyway.

E: for those playing along at home, Eddy and Chaves (CHA-vezz) counties make up about 10,200 square miles. That's bigger than the entire state of Vermont.

cruft fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Feb 20, 2014

# ? Feb 20, 2014 20:05

ZeeToo: Feb 20, 2008; I'm a kitty!

Hey, guess what state is angling for a "worst" title again? It's Arizona! Kansas might have realized they don't want to stick their hand in this particular fire, but drat if we aren't going to give it a whirl.

quote:

The Arizona Senate on Wednesday passed a bill backed by Republicans that would expand the rights of people to assert their religious beliefs in refusing service to gays and others, a measure Democrats say would open the doors for discrimination and hurt the state economy.

Democrats and civil-rights groups opposed the bill pushed by social conservatives, saying it would allow discriminatory actions by businesses.

But the sponsor, Sen. Steve Yarbrough of Chandler, said his push for Senate Bill 1062 was prompted by a New Mexico case in which the state Supreme Court allowed a gay couple to sue a photographer who refused to take pictures of their wedding. He said he is protecting religious rights.

�This bill is not about allowing discrimination,� Yarbrough said during a debate that stretched for nearly two hours. �This bill is about preventing discrimination against people who are clearly living out their faith.�

The bill�s passage on a 17-13 party-line vote came just days after a similar House-approved bill in Kansas was squelched by Republicans and Democrats in that state�s Senate chamber following public outcry and opposition from groups including the Kansas Chamber of Commerce.

Arizona Democrats sponsored eight hostile amendments in an effort to sidetrack the legislation here, but they were rejected by Republicans, who control the Senate.

Democrats repeatedly said they believed Yarbrough�s legislation was designed to allow discrimination.

�The heart of this bill would allow for discrimination versus gays and lesbians,� said Sen. Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix. �You can�t argue the fact that bill will invite discrimination. That�s the point of this bill. It is.�

Sen. Steve Farley, D-Tucson, warned of economic consequences if the Legislature passes the bill and it is signed by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer. He said companies will begin to avoid Arizona, as they did after the state passed its signature immigration-crackdown law, SB 1070, in 2010.

�I think this bill makes a statement � that we don�t welcome people here,� Farley said. �This bill gets in the way. This bill sends the wrong message around the country and around the world.�

A similar bill is making its way through the Arizona House and is set for floor debate this afternoon. It is expected to win approval from majority Republicans in that chamber, as well.

The proposals are backed by the powerful Center for Arizona Policy, a social-conservative group that backs anti-abortion and conservative Christian legislation in the state.

The bill is similar to a proposal last year brought by Yarbrough but vetoed by Brewer.

That legislation would have allowed people or religious groups to sue if they believed they might be subject to a government regulation that infringed on their religious rights. Yarbrough stripped a provision from the new bill in hopes Brewer will embrace it.

Civil-liberties and secular groups countered that Yarbrough and the Center for Arizona Policy had sought to minimize concerns that last year�s bill had far-reaching and hidden implications. During the Senate debate Wednesday, Democrats said the bill could allow people to break nearly any law and cite religious freedom as a defense.

Yarbrough called those worries �unrealistic and unsupported hypotheticals� and said criminal laws will continue to be prosecuted by the courts.

Senate President Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, said the Democrats� rhetoric was misplaced.

�There are times � that sometimes, people�s rhetoric tends to inflame instead of explain,� Biggs said. �And I would suggest if there is going to be a backlash because of 1062, it won�t be because someone has read the content of this bill and recognizes that it is indeed tailored after Supreme Court cases dealing with First Amendment religious rights, it will because of the temperate and inaccurate rhetoric. That is my personal opinion.�

# ? Feb 20, 2014 20:26

joat mon: Oct 15, 2009; I am the master of my lamp;
I am the captain of my tub.

cruft posted:

You can no longer get married in Carlsbad NM without the involvement of clergy.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 20:37

hangedman1984: Jul 25, 2012

cruft posted:

You can no longer get married in Carlsbad NM without the involvement of clergy.

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/ne...18944c65c5.html

Lucky its like insanely easy to get ordained, me and a couple of my friends got ordained here in Georgia for the hell (no pun intended) of it

# ? Feb 20, 2014 20:43

Morter: Jul 1, 2006; Gift for the grind, criminal mind shifty

Swift with the 9 through a 59FIFTY

For people not very involved in politics, republicans and conservatives tend to have a reputation of "comic book villain".

It's because of repeated attempts to pass bills and laws like this all over the country.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 20:44

WhiskeyJuvenile: Feb 15, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo

cruft posted:

You can no longer get married in Carlsbad NM without the involvement of clergy.

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/ne...18944c65c5.html

Apparently there is one church in town who will do it: the First Christian Church. This town doesn't have a Unitarian Universalist congregation or United Church of Christ, which was surprising to me. But Carlsbad is on the westernmost border of the Bible Belt, so.

Good thing nobody actually lives in towns as small as Carlsbad, though. The few people who do live there are used to driving 3 hours to the nearest closest city (El Paso, TX) for everything anyway.

E: for those playing along at home, Eddy and Chaves (CHA-vezz) counties make up about 10,200 square miles. That's bigger than the entire state of Vermont.

B. A person who is an ordained member of the clergy or who is an authorized representative of a federally recognized Indian nation, tribe or pueblo may solemnize the contract of marriage without regard to sect or rites and customs the person may practice.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 21:02

cruft: Oct 25, 2007

ZeeToo posted:

quote:
But the sponsor, Sen. Steve Yarbrough of Chandler, said his push for Senate Bill 1062 was prompted by a New Mexico case in which the state Supreme Court allowed a gay couple to sue a photographer who refused to take pictures of their wedding.

Yeah, the New Mexico Supreme Court must be terrifying to Arizona: that's where the entire state got marriage equality.

quote:

�I think this bill makes a statement � that we don�t welcome people here,� Farley said. �This bill gets in the way. This bill sends the wrong message around the country and around the world.�

I don't know, I think that's exactly the right message for Arizona to send the country and world. :allears:

WhiskeyJuvenile posted:

B. A person who is an ordained member of the clergy or who is an authorized representative of a federally recognized Indian nation, tribe or pueblo may solemnize the contract of marriage without regard to sect or rites and customs the person may practice.

Haha, well that certainly makes things easier, you just have to hunt down an official from a pueblo to officiate your gay wedding! Here's where the Navajo Nation is on this issue. They're the largest Indian nation in the US.

cruft fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Feb 20, 2014

# ? Feb 20, 2014 21:11

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

RZApublican posted:

"We are building a coalition of the willing" has got to be the funniest part of that story.

I was about to post this. Truly anti-marriage-equality is this decade's Iraq War of conservatism: a Good Analogy

# ? Feb 20, 2014 21:15

thefncrow: Mar 14, 2001

cruft posted:

Haha, well that certainly makes things easier, you just have to hunt down an official from a pueblo to officiate your gay wedding! Here's where the Navajo Nation is on this issue. They're the largest Indian nation in the US.

Or you find a friend you trust and let him run a $30 charge on your credit card. 10 minutes later, he's an ordained minister who can officiate.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 21:19

twodot: Aug 7, 2005; You are objectively correct that this person is dumb and has said dumb things

thefncrow posted:

Or you find a friend you trust and let him run a $30 charge on your credit card. 10 minutes later, he's an ordained minister who can officiate.

Is this even a requirement? I can't find a definition of clergy anywhere in the New Mexico codes, and I don't see anything stopping you from declaring yourself the head of your own religion. (Note: clergy members are mandated reporters in New Mexico)

# ? Feb 20, 2014 21:21

cruft: Oct 25, 2007

thefncrow posted:

Or you find a friend you trust and let him run a $30 charge on your credit card. 10 minutes later, he's an ordained minister who can officiate.

Okay, I'm not trying to claim this is zomg the biggest setback to marriage equality ever. It's just related news from the state that most recently got marriage equality. Surely there are lots of workarounds. But I think this belies the political atmosphere in the southeast part of the state.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 21:22

hangedman1984: Jul 25, 2012

completely free ordination: http://www.themonastery.org/ordination?gclid=CLWj5bjE27wCFRQV7AodpTgAhg

# ? Feb 20, 2014 21:24

Captain_Maclaine: Sep 30, 2001; Every moment I'm alive, I pray for death!

VitalSigns posted:

I was about to post this. Truly anti-marriage-equality is this decade's Iraq War of conservatism: a Good Analogy

You know as well as I there's probably very little light between the "anti-marriage-equality" and "Iraq War was a good idea" demographics.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 22:21

point of return: Aug 13, 2011; by exmarx

twodot posted:

Is this even a requirement? I can't find a definition of clergy anywhere in the New Mexico codes, and I don't see anything stopping you from declaring yourself the head of your own religion. (Note: clergy members are mandated reporters in New Mexico)

It's probably easier to sign up with the Universal Life Church anyways since they have guides on how to make sure the marriage goes through legally.

# ? Feb 20, 2014 23:11

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Captain_Maclaine posted:

You know as well as I there's probably very little light between the "anti-marriage-equality" and "Iraq War was a good idea" demographics.

I'm just loving the analogy: a pointless fight begun for political purposes with little relation to the justifications given, one that will lead to defeat on the ground and demoralization of the rank-and-file while a few rich politically connected people make bank. And then 5 years after it's over, it will never be brought up or acknowledged again by those who once supported it.

It's perfect :iamafag:

# ? Feb 20, 2014 23:33

Ponsonby Britt: Mar 13, 2006; I think you mean, why is there silverware in the pancake drawer? Wassup?

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2014/02/20/3316031/arizona-house-discrimination/

So the Arizona House passed the "it's totally okay to discriminate against gays if your religion says so, we didn't already have this fight over racial discrimination in the 1970s" bill, and now it's up to Jan Brewer to decide whether she'll sign it or not. Personally, I have a good feeling about her!

# ? Feb 21, 2014 07:56

Three Olives: Apr 10, 2005

I hope she does sign it because Arizona will be sued so hard and so fast with an injunction and it perfectly tees up a case for gays to be given protected class status, there is an army of lawyers just salivating at taking this case to court. The papers are probably already drawn up waiting to be filed for an emergency injunction the second this law is signed if Brewer doesn't realize what a disaster this will be for Arizona and anti-gay forces if she signs it.

# ? Feb 21, 2014 16:53

cruft: Oct 25, 2007

Ponsonby Britt posted:

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2014/02/20/3316031/arizona-house-discrimination/

So the Arizona House passed the "it's totally okay to discriminate against gays if your religion says so, we didn't already have this fight over racial discrimination in the 1970s" bill, and now it's up to Jan Brewer to decide whether she'll sign it or not. Personally, I have a good feeling about her!

Man, I just can't :allears:

Arizona politicians hard enough.

# ? Feb 21, 2014 16:54

got any sevens: Feb 9, 2013; by Cyrano4747

What if my religion demands that I castrate christians? Arizona can't discriminate against my religion!

# ? Feb 21, 2014 17:57

Spiffster: Oct 7, 2009; I'm good... I Haven't slept for a solid 83 hours, but yeah... I'm good...; Lipstick Apathy

Meanwhile, Back in Indiana! Involving the speaker, Brian Bosma and backroom deals that were offered to kill the bill.

CBS/WISH TV Channel 8/ Indianapolis posted:

Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent behind the scenes in the battle over the marriage amendment, known as HJR 3. Now that�s it�s over, we�re learning that the stakes were even higher.

House Speaker Brian Bosma played a key role in the marriage debate removing the marriage amendment from one committee and then sending it to another to guarantee a floor vote. He kept it alive.

Several weeks ago Speaker Bosma said that he was offered unlimited campaign contributions if he was would kill the bill and, at an availability in his office today, he said other offers were made, too.

�And I�ve just discovered that there was an offer to another person that lives in my district of a half million dollars in campaign funding,� he said, �if that person was willing to run against me in the primary based on HJR 3. So, this has been most unusual and completely out of line on this issue.�

A half million dollars is a lot of money, and it�s pretty much unheard of in a primary for the General Assembly.

The Speaker wouldn�t identify the person who was asked to oppose him. He did says he was looking into the question of where the half million dollar offer came from.

The filing deadline has passed and he doesn�t have a primary opponent.

Rick Sutton of Freedom Indiana, the organization that opposed the marriage amendment, said that his organization made no promises of campaign contributions.

He said it wouldn�t be appropriate.

Link to the article

This is going to cue cries of foul play, claiming that the supporters of marriage equality in Indiana on the grounds of...

:argh:

Those gays are trying to bribe their way out.

I wonder if this will go anywhere or if this is just bluster on behalf of the speaker to save face for reelections.

# ? Feb 21, 2014 20:16

Chris James 2: Aug 9, 2012

Illinois gay marriages begin now, not June 1st, judge ruled.

# ? Feb 21, 2014 20:21

staticman: Sep 12, 2008; Be gay
Death to America
Suck my dick Israel
Mess with Texas
and remember to lmao

Porno Pete LaBarbera and Scott "complete monster" Lively are joining together to form a new breed of hate-group! Because we totally don't have enough of those. The announcement was made in a DC Press Conference:

quote:

The purpose of this press conference is to announce the formation of a new organization, the Coalition for Family Values, whose purpose is to unify and coordinate pro-family groups around the United States and the world to more effectively oppose the now global LGBT agenda. The coalition is being organized by Dr. Scott Lively of Defend the Family International, based in Springfield, Massachusetts, and Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, based in Naperville, Illinois, with the assistance of other existing pro-family groups in the U.S. and abroad. The first action of the coalition will be to issue a statement of support for the Russian pro-family laws of 2013 and 2014 and to urge other nations of the world to follow the Russian example.

"Coalition of Family Values"? :allears:

Yet ANOTHER example of the anti-gay movement being this decade's Iraq War.
Original name, do not steal!

The hate-group opens with a bang, as two activist heckle Porno Pete and Lively during the press conference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yk5Vg-2Q8cc

In the video, Lively goes absolutely apeshit:

quote:

Every time we come forward to speak the truth from our perspective, we are interrupted by homofascists! THIS is what we call homofascism! I would like to know if there is security! We rented this room!

As usual, the activist were kicked out by security, but not before one added:

quote:

I am - I swear Scott - a homofascist! Stop the killing that is going on in your name in Uganda and Russia!

# ? Feb 21, 2014 20:39

quiggy: Aug 7, 2010; [in Russian] Oof.

How isn't Scott Lively rotting in prison yet?

# ? Feb 21, 2014 20:43

Nth Doctor: Sep 7, 2010; Darkrai used Dream Eater!
It's super effective!

It looks like the challenge to Michigan's gay marriage ban is coming up next week:

quote:

A federal judge is setting aside at least eight days for a trial on Michigan�s ban on gay marriage.

Judge Bernard Friedman held a conference call with attorneys Wednesday to discuss the trial, which starts Feb. 25 in Detroit federal court.

# ? Feb 21, 2014 22:07

Zero VGS: Aug 16, 2002; ASK ME ABOUT HOW HUMAN LIVES THAT MADE VIDEO GAME CONTROLLERS ARE WORTH MORE; Lipstick Apathy

Notorious QIG posted:

How isn't Scott Lively rotting in prison yet?

I feel ridiculous defending this guy but freedom of speech. It's like the difference between Hitler and a modern Klansman, one is ordering crimes against humanity where another is merely suggesting ideas. It should be the governments in Uganda and Russia answering to the world for their crimes, not one kook who drove around tossing out the idea.

Allowing that, if he were to find himself murdered that would just be karma and I'd be fine with it.

# ? Feb 21, 2014 22:53

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Notorious QIG posted:

How isn't Scott Lively rotting in prison yet?

Opinions, however revolting, aren't illegal.

# ? Feb 22, 2014 01:32

quiggy: Aug 7, 2010; [in Russian] Oof.

evilweasel posted:

Opinions, however revolting, aren't illegal.

No but inciting people to kill other people is.

# ? Feb 22, 2014 01:32

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Notorious QIG posted:

No but inciting people to kill other people is.

Incitement is extremely narrowly defined to avoid it being used as a pretext to suppress opinions and this is not incitement.

# ? Feb 22, 2014 01:36

quiggy: Aug 7, 2010; [in Russian] Oof.

evilweasel posted:

Incitement is extremely narrowly defined to avoid it being used as a pretext to suppress opinions and this is not incitement.

Fine fine. I'd still imprison him if I was Dictator Of The World :colbert:

# ? Feb 22, 2014 01:38

Shalebridge Cradle: Apr 23, 2008

Notorious QIG posted:

No but inciting people to kill other people is.

Not really the right way to put it.

His crime isn't telling people lovely things, he is specifically being sued for coordinating with Ugandan officials to persecute sexual minorities. Persecution is defined clearly under international law, both in the Nuremberg Principles and the Rome Statue. The case is sorta controversial because it uses the alien tort statue to allow Ugandans themselves to sue Lively in the US because it gives jurisdiction to the courts for torts committed outside the country that violate US treaties or international law.

Shalebridge Cradle fucked around with this message at 09:05 on Feb 22, 2014

# ? Feb 22, 2014 02:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 3, 2024 08:57

teacup: Dec 20, 2006; = M I L K E R S =

So at what point will the USA go over 50% of the population living in a state with marriage equality? I think wikipedia has it as 38% now with the couple of states that have 'holds' waiting on appeals going to 42% if it moves that way.

I know it may seem like a silly thing but I think it will be a powerful landmark to show the scale, saying over half the country has it and nothing bad has happened. Problems is all these little states doing it doesn't really add it... I guess we need a Texas or a Florida to move in but that's not going to happen anytime soon

# ? Feb 22, 2014 04:02

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Straight Marriage Is Illegal Now

«‹›609 »