Same sex marriage is inevitable

[Angela]

L.A. Times -- Gay Marriage inevitable

From the L.A. Times -- reflecting my belief that the tide of equal rights is sweeping over the last bastions of resistance.

"The more the rights of same-sex couples are recognized, the less credible are arguments about potential bad or harmful things that might happen if they are recognized," he said.

I think that twenty, or perhaps even ten years from now, people will be shaking their heads in astonishment that there was once a time when discrimination against gays was a-ok.

And not an asschap in sight!

[spirit4711]

The USA will get one day where we already are in NL

Now, about universal health care...

[Angela]

Originally Posted by spirit4711

The USA will get one day where we already are in NL

Now, about universal health care...

More and more, I want to visit the Netherlands. It sounds like the Land of Extremely Cool People.

[ssandra]

It used to be...

We are kind of big on equal opportunities and some drugs are legal (marihuana). Down side is that there is a large part of the population that is getting more and more right wing and against foreigners. Not so nice...

But, the more I live abroad (2 years Mexico, alsmost 3 years Belgium) the better the Netherlands seem.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by Angela

I think that twenty, or perhaps even ten years from now, people will be shaking their heads in astonishment that there was once a time when discrimination against gays was a-ok.

ITA, it is only a matter of time. I can't believe it's taking so long, though.

And not an asschap in sight!

Bummer! There's nothing so enjoyable as young fit gay men cavorting around half-naked. Especially if they're wearing cowboy-type gear.

Originally Posted by spirit4711

The USA will get one day where we already are in NL

Now, about universal health care...

Ha! Don't even get us started, lol.

Someday...someday...we'll get there.

[Angela]

There are some great things about living in the United States, but in the area of equal rights, drugs, healthcare, and superstition, it's easy to see why people in other parts of the world would see us as a dark backwater.

But stories like this one have me feeling like maybe the U.S. is on a roll!

[polyfulcrum]

Dare I say it? Next up is some sort of equivalent (domestic partnerships) for us weirdo polyamorous types that want to protect our families, no matter the number of people we consider "family".

[Angela]

That will be great, polyfulcrum! I think that may be next bee in the right wing's bonnet. Are you ready for the onslaught of comparisons to people who have sex with dogs, being told that you are sick, hearing people on the Promenade announce that you are going to hell, and being villified by Bill O'Reilly?

Who knows, though; maybe the courageous gay rights activists will have paved the way so that the path will be easier for polyamorists, and you won't be bothered by so much anti-polyamorist propaganda.

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by Angela

More and more, I want to visit the Netherlands. It sounds like the Land of Extremely Cool People.

Actually, it is in many ways. In other ways, a bit too careful - EVERYTHING is regulated, quite some bureaucracy too. After spending some months in Thailand I had a hard time getting used to all the too-protective rules and regulations (in Thailand they have those too, but most are ignored pretty much ).

But feel free to come over! We'll show you around.

I visited the Boston area twice, long time ago. I loved Boston!

[Angela]

Originally Posted by spirit4711

I visited the Boston area twice, long time ago. I loved Boston!

I live in a whole different universe -- Los Angeles!

[Brutha]

You can't predict the future.

The reason because Gay marriage isn't allowed isn't because the arguments against Gay marriage are credible either.

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by Angela

I live in a whole different universe -- Los Angeles!

Where else? Angela between the Angels .

Never got that far - yet.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Brutha

You can't predict the future.

Sure I can! I can watch and evaluate trends, I can track momentum, and I can use thin-slicing (intuition) to make pretty accurate predictions abut the future. I do it every day; don't you?

The reason because Gay marriage isn't allowed isn't because the arguments against Gay marriage are credible either.

I'm sure you're right; it isn't the only reason. But in the past, people have indeed paid credence to anti-gay and anti-gay-marriage propaganda, because like any propaganda, it's designed to bypass the conscious faculty and go straight into the unconscious mind where it can take root as a belief. Propagandists often build strong emotions, like hatred and fear, into the language of their arguments, and often in a way that sounds calm and reasonable. In that way, they can get people to believe things that would otherwise get bounced out by the conscious faculty.

Kind of like the Bush administration with the orange/red alerts, remember? Scaring people as a means of getting them to swallow something they might not otherwise, like the "Patriot Act."

In the same way, stories about how gays are the cause of AIDS, or they can somehow brainwash and recruit your straight kids, or that they are a threat to the survival of the human race.... they are presented calmly and matter-of-factly, but the underlying message is "be afraid." When people are afraid, they're putty in a manipulator's hands.

So unconscious beliefs that gays are dangerous can indeed be a factor in non-gays wanting to tamper rights for gays. I don't think too many people actually believe that gay people getting married will interfere with straight people's rights -- after all, what actually gets taken away from straights if gay people have the same rights, except a sense of superiority and domination? Instead, I think it's more of an unconscious plugging into propaganda, for most people who oppose gay marriage. It pays off for the people who want to spread that propaganda, because it helps them keep their interests, including financial ones, in place.

But I sense that people are waking up to propaganda in general, and they're starting to engage their conscious faculty more and more -- look at this whole Swine Flu thing and how pervasive it is on the Internet lately for people to be saying: "Are you kiddin' me? Swine Flu my hoof!" And that's part of my thin-slicing, that contributes to my prediction that same sex marriage will soon just be a normal practice, protected by law, and that people who oppose it will soon be generally viewed as antique in their thinking, like the little old people who still complain about the shenanigans of Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, and the rest of those radicals. "Whatever happened to the good ol' days, when those people knew their place?"

That's my opinion.

[Brutha]

There are still enough people in the US who think that the theory of evolution is a treat to their morals.
I think that fear of homosexuals happens on a similar level.

And on some sense they are even right. Their belief's look more silly as society changes around them.
That makes them afraid.

Sure I can! I can watch and evaluate trends, I can track momentum, and I can use thin-slicing (intuition) to make pretty accurate predictions abut the future. I do it every day; don't you?

Momentum often isn't the thing that determines what happens ten years down the road in politics.

Facebook hadn't had any momentum ten years ago. Twitter hadn't had any momentum either then years ago.
Nobody knew Barak Obama ten years ago etc.

As far as momentum goes we have a financial crisis at the moment. In those times religions increase their strength usually and religion is the prime reason why people are against gay marriage.

I also don't think that propanda is dying in the US.
In the presidential election McCain used more attack spots than Bush in the previous election and Obama used more attack spots than John Kerry.

It not so much that people got more conscious but that the amount of propaganda increased and therefore more people notice it.

[polyfulcrum]

Originally Posted by Angela

That will be great, polyfulcrum! I think that may be next bee in the right wing's bonnet. Are you ready for the onslaught of comparisons to people who have sex with dogs, being told that you are sick, hearing people on the Promenade announce that you are going to hell, and being villified by Bill O'Reilly?

Who knows, though; maybe the courageous gay rights activists will have paved the way so that the path will be easier for polyamorists, and you won't be bothered by so much anti-polyamorist propaganda.

Shoot Angela, my dad's a fundamentalist minister. Going to hell has been part of the scenery for quite some time, well before becoming poly. Our dogs feel very safe, so that's all to the good.

I can only hope that the opportunities that gay rights activists have, and will continue to achieve, will translate out to the polyamorous community in the form of civil unions.

One thing that will need to happen before that manifests will be a more unified front and agreed upon standards for what "polyamory" means. At this point, there are several different main "flavors" of poly, and if we can agree on some fundamental basics, there would be a platform to launch from.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Brutha

There are still enough people in the US who think that the theory of evolution is a treat to their morals.
I think that fear of homosexuals happens on a similar level.

And on some sense they are even right. Their belief's look more silly as society changes around them.
That makes them afraid.

Yes, I agree.

Momentum often isn't the thing that determines what happens ten years down the road in politics.

Yeah, when you're predicting the future sometimes you have to be sensitive to changes that snowball with velocity, like the ones you mentioned, like Facebook or Twitter. Please note that I mentioned momentum only as one of the aspects of how I predict the future, not the sole determining factor. And although you may be right that faced with lightning-fast changes, religious people do often feel threatened and rely more on faith. At the same time, talented groups of people ride the wave of velocity with skill and precision -- and I think gay rights activists are really, really good at surfing social momentum. That's another aspect of why I believe change is a-comin', and why those old gay-bashers are becoming dinosaurs fast.

I also don't think that propanda is dying in the US.
... It not so much that people got more conscious but that the amount of propaganda increased and therefore more people notice it.

Yes, exactly so. I think propaganda is a natural part of communication; I don't think it's intrinsically good or bad or should be abolished or anything. Propaganda can be used for purposes that I condone (win/win intentions) as well as ones I don't (win/lose). It does look to me like people, especially with the Internet, are becoming more and more skilled and fast to notice when someone is feeding them win/lose propaganda.

And generally, too, there seems to be an Internet-based spread of impatience with willingness to just eat up win/lose propaganda -- that whole tendency for the web to just jump on it and shine a light on it, in the blink of an eye.

I like that about the Internet.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by polyfulcrum

One thing that will need to happen before that manifests will be a more unified front and agreed upon standards for what "polyamory" means. At this point, there are several different main "flavors" of poly, and if we can agree on some fundamental basics, there would be a platform to launch from.

Don't hold your breath! You know what they say about organizing atheists -- it's like herding cats. I think it may be even more squiggly to try and get all the different "flavors" of poly to organize together.

But since you mention it, maybe it's your job! Does that inspire you?

[themaster]

While gay discrimination is clearly reprehensible.. I tend to think honestly bigger ideas likes stupidity of the war on drugs or prostitution or terrorism scares.. or you name what we need to "repress" right here are bigger deals..

You should be happy.. reality has changed so much.. (it's only going to get better)

2004's big election issues that seemed for some reason to work (well, not really but.. we'll just say the common world thinks they did)
- Don't switch commander in chief when in a war..
- Keep them damn mexicans out! Immigration..
- And Gay Marriage.. omg! call all your IRA buddy's we going to burn a cross tonight..

2008's election issues..
- Economy
- Stupidity
- Iraq
(maybe racism)

Sorry don't even remember anything else.. guess what I'm pleased with the change!

[aelle]

Originally Posted by polyfulcrum

Dare I say it? Next up is some sort of equivalent (domestic partnerships) for us weirdo polyamorous types that want to protect our families, no matter the number of people we consider "family".

As much as I hope the legal frame will quickly catch up with the (now commonly accepted) ethics of "whatever happens between consenting adults is fair game", I think it will take some time for a poly legal recognition to be set up, simply because our actual societal experience hasn't caught up with the ethics we aspire to. Cultures where polygamy is imposed on women still exist ; the time when a woman had no existence outside marriage and as such had to accept her husband's mistress(es) is not so far either. As long as these trends aren't FAR behind us (just like the ideas that homosexuality is a perversion or predator behaviour) giving a legal frame to polyamory will seem scary to most, in my opinion.

I believe we will have to become a truly feminist society (in the original sense, ie equalitarian between genders, both legally and in habits) before such a change is possible.

[Brutha]

I believe we will have to become a truly feminist society (in the original sense, ie equalitarian between genders, both legally and in habits) before such a change is possible.

We also have to do something about immigration laws.
The scenario that some Indian would just enter a poly civil union with everyone in his home town and therefore give all of them the right to move to the US is something which laws are supposed to prevent.

Yeah, when you're predicting the future sometimes you have to be sensitive to changes that snowball with velocity, like the ones you mentioned, like Facebook or Twitter.

You can't be sensitive to them because you don't see them beforehand.
Maybe the economy is in a real crisis and will still be in four years.
The right will think they have prove that Obama messed it all up even when the caurses for the crisis were created before he took office.

Especially when Obama doesn't hold other promises like getting out of Iraq, Palin might become president in 2012.
Maybe even somebody comes along that's like Palin but that's actually understands how the world works.

And generally, too, there seems to be an Internet-based spread of impatience with willingness to just eat up win/lose propaganda -- that whole tendency for the web to just jump on it and shine a light on it, in the blink of an eye.

I like that about the Internet.

The internet allows you to disattach from the "public consensus".
But it allows that in both directions. There a reason why things like the 9/11 conspiracy theory spread on the net.
It becomes more and more possible that stories like that get momentum on the internet without much substance when the story serves some prejeduce and provides a sense of community for those people who gather around the story.

If you increase speed it hurts much more to drive against the wall.

[Addict]

Hmm... I do think equal rights are inevitable, but damn people are stubborn. They will always resist change. That's inevitable too!

[Eric Roosevelt]

Originally Posted by Addict

Hmm... I do think equal rights are inevitable, but damn people are stubborn. They will always resist change. That's inevitable too!

Agreed.

Then again, I think all societal change has unintended consequences that aren't always considered in the "fog of war" when people are trying to lobby for something. Instead of seriously considering potential side effects of change, and thinking about how they'll make up for them, progressives often deny there are any side effects, because if they didn't do that, they'd be giving "free points" to the reactionaries.

But in the case of same-sex marriage, the reactionary arguments are unusually weak (almost exclusively based on religious dogmas). Especially in secular societies I think it'll be difficult for religious groups to resist change in the long run.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Brutha

If you increase speed it hurts much more to drive against the wall.

Yup! That is, if you believe there is in fact a "wall."

[wachusettgirl]

Originally Posted by Angela

Yup! That is, if you believe there is in fact a "wall."

Right, and "the wall" is in the constricts of our minds. Thank you Angela for your opening post, and the positive energy that it generates. I completely believe that this is true, and that unfortunately patience is necessary. We are definately going in the right direction, let's be grateful for that...

[liamona]

I was surprised it went through in Maine, although it will be challenged. I like what the Governor said about it:

"I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to a civil marriage," Baldacci said at a State House news conference this afternoon. "Also, and importantly, this legislation does not force any religion to recognize a marriage that falls outside of its beliefs. It does not require the church to perform any ceremony with which it disagrees. Instead, it reaffirms the strong separation of church and state."

Maine News

[Angela]

Right on, right on, right on!