I say all this because of the big deal made over the difference between civil unions and “marriage.” Gay activists are rejecting civil unions that are literally identical to state-enforced marriage contracts except in name, on principle. This is because they want to mimic the religious heterosexuals that hate them. It’s also to send the message that gays can be just as boring and domestic as religious weirdos; a desperate desire to be seen as a “traditional family.” Sorry, honey, as long as your junk don’t interlock, you’re not. This has transcended mere legal equality and the convenience of standard-form contracts and crossed into ceremonial jealously.
Knock it off. You’re a queer. Get used to it. And go suck a few dicks.
28 comments
I don't want to mimic religious heterosexuals. I want to share in the same deeply symbolic institution as my atheist parents.
Also, 'go suck a few dicks' makes no sense, as given the slightly higher proportion of women to men, one can assume that the marginal majority of targets of your comment are going to be lesbians.
"Gay activists are rejecting civil unions that are literally identical to state-enforced marriage contracts except in name, on principle."
- No, they are rejecting it because it is a trap. Marriages and civil unions might start out the same, but how will you keep them that way? What is to stop laws from being passed which apply to one institution and not the other?
@Sammettik
So what if a bunch of jurisdictions decide Christians can't get married, but they can share a relationship we'll call rutabaga. So what, right? It's just a name. Why should you care what others call your relationship.
Except it does matter and you wouldn't accept it.
"Sorry, honey, as long as your junk don’t interlock, you’re not."
Because marriage is solely about sexual intercourse, yes?
The only difference between civil unions and marriage is the building in which they are performed, really. Gays and straights ought to be able to choose the venue, on their own.
State-enforced? I'm a non-religious heterosexual who got married in a church (or rather a chapel). I don't hate people on principle, I hate people on actions; if you harm or hurt other people, or infringe in their human rights, I will, perhaps, hate you.
Hey, false dichotomy! We non-religious straight weirdos are also pretty boring! Me and hubby and our two cats might not be a "traditional family" but no-one is criticizing us; why should they criticize a gay couple with cats?
All "junk" can interlock, one way or the other. Mouths interlock very well with both penises and clitorises. I've sucked a few dicks, and I'm a straight female, not a queer. Your box seems very, VERY small. I pity you, dearie.
Why would gays be against gay marriage? It's. Not. That. Big. A. Deal. Stupid!
Maybe because "separate but equal" didn't work so well the last time a minority had to try it, for one?
I can roughly understand where these sorts of people are coming from, but uh... How's this one missing the many states/countries where civil unions are definitely not the same as marriage-leaving off at least adoption, but often other aspects as well? And for a nice slide down the slippery slope, what's to stop future legislation restricting civil unions even more, to make them less "marriage in all but name" and more "pseudo-marriage to be restricted as much as possible?"
Actually, the last time I looked, they weren't identical which is the major problem.
If you think they ARE identical, then why do they need different names?
@Sammettik
Um dude, civil unions are not available everywhere. I know in the state I live, the state issues marriage licenses. But here, that's ok, since same-sex marriage is legal anyhow.
Junk don't interlock? They just rub their genitals on each other's kneecaps or something? Honestly I would hope that a gay person would realize that if they do not want to get married they can just not do it. And the whole point of fighting for equal marriage rights was because civil unions did not universally offer same sex couples everything that heterosexual's marriages did. And civil unions are definitely not offered to same sex couples in every state.
Also, "gays are just jelly!" isn't a valid argument against marriage equality.
No, from what I've seen it's all about being accepted as a normal part of society just like straight people. Calling a marriage something other than marriage is not equal.
And from reading this post I'm highly doubtful that the person who wrote this is really gay.
Gay activists are rejecting civil unions that are literally identical to state-enforced marriage contracts except in name, on principle.
Except they aren't... civil unions often do not allow you to be at the bedside of a dying loved one, often don't allow you to make medical decisions for them and/or any kids, until very recently didn't allow you to be on the same policies, or get the same retirement/disability/sickness benefits that a marriage gives you AUTOMATICALLY!
So, reject them on principle? Nope.. reject them because they do no do what people claim they do.
"You’re a queer. Get used to it."
Is he admitting that it's not a choice?
Edit: Nevermind. I skimmed the post and missed the point at first.
This is because they want to mimic the religious heterosexuals that hate them
No, it's because of 1100 legal rights that you only get through being married and the urge to take part in a deep bond with the loved one.
You know, I'm reminded of the family friend who tried to tell us that several "dear friends" of hers were gay, yet thought that homosexuality was horribly wrong and opposed both gay rights and gay marriage.
It turns out that it wasn't "several people," it was only two. One of them was a guest speaker at the church she attended who claimed to be an "ex-gay" who was brought in to regale them with horror stories of teh ghey (he also claimed to be an ex-Satanist and an ex-Army sniper, among other things; fundies do like their bullshit piled as thick and heavy as possible).
The other one *was* actually a gay man who worked at the same hospital she worked at, who barely knew her. He was very surprised to find out that he was apparently bestest buds with this lady, who barely said ten words to him in the course of an average year and actually went out of her way to avoid being in the building with him. He was even more surprised to find out that he was actually a completely-celibate gay Christian conservative who had the same rabid views on homosexuality that she did, and that his partner of 7 years was actually a figment of his imagination.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
