Skip to main content

View Diary: I Want To See My Son Marry Before I Die. (273 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's a necessary implication (8+ / 0-)

    If same-sex couples were viewed as the equals of heterosexuals, then they would necessarily be entitled to the same rights.  The president does not believe that we are so entitled, however, and this necessarily means that he believes that there is something special or superior about heterosexuals that entitles them to a more privileged status under the law.  

    I am sorry to see you trivialize questions about marriage equality for gays and lesbians as "foolish."  One might have hoped that people who call themselves progressives would view the civil rights of America's LGBT citizens as a serious issue.  Your comment only shows how far we have to go.

    Finally, if, as you say, "there is no implication of inherent superiority or inferiority" between heterosexual and homosexual relationships, then one seriously has to wonder why anyone would support different legal regimes for the two groups.  Marriage is not fundamentally a religious institution.  It is a civil contract to which numerous legal rights and obligations are attached.  If neither group is superior to the other, then why does the president advocate differential treatment under the law?

    Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

    by FogCityJohn on Fri Sep 17, 2010 at 02:04:41 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Okay (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tnichlsn

      The president does not believe that we are so entitled, however, and this necessarily means that he believes that there is something special or superior about heterosexuals that entitles them to a more privileged status under the law.

      I have no evidence of this, which is why I raised the objections in my comments. But if that is true, then he is practicing discimination.

      I am sorry to see you trivialize questions about marriage equality for gays and lesbians as "foolish."  

      I said that questions about personal beliefs about gay marriage are misdirected and foolish. In my schema, the issue of gay marriage and the issue of partnership equality across different sexual orientations are two very different things with very different meanings. I'm not trivializing equality for gays and lesbians.

      Which brings me to your final point:

      then one seriously has to wonder why anyone would support different legal regimes for the two groups.

      That's the same question I want to have answered. Because the core issue here is equality of partnership. Regardless of the name it's given, what are the benefits, legal, social and otherwise, and how do they match up to heterosexual partnerships.

      •  We're looking for the answer too. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tnichlsn, Predictor

        But so far the president has not explained what would justify different sets of legal relationships for the two groups.

        Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

        by FogCityJohn on Fri Sep 17, 2010 at 04:34:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site