[QUOTE=QUIKAG,Nov 24 2008, 07:06 PM] Last I checked Prop 8 passed with the majority of the vote.

 

Yes good point! Some places in the south, that I have visited, would seem that segregation still exists.

 

hardly. I don't see colored water fountains.

you missed my point, tho.

edit:
what you're refering to is probably racial tension, which is quiet different. you can go anywhere to see it. even your beloved california has plenty (see: la riots)

 

Yes, but what I mean is it exists to the degree to what it can legally exist as. IE: an interracial couple will pull many vocal negative comments in the southern states where as in CA, its unlikely to recieve any attention at all.

 

Oh, come on. There is a difference between elevating a discussion and being ridiculous. While your point is valid in how tolerance relates to WWII, that example does not relate even remotely to the tolerance homosexual couples are asking for.

Europe showed tolerance to Germany's penchant for killing people and invading countries. That is a far cry from society showing tolerance for a lifestyle. While many people disapprove of homosexuality, homosexuals as a group are not going around rounding up straight people, for example, and putting them in concentration camps.

The level to which tolerance is harmful or unacceptable is dependant on what one is tolerant of.

 

Not exactly. If states allow civil unions, even if religions are free to not allow gay marriage as they see fit, there will still be plenty of ordained ministers that will marry gay couples; count on it. And that very idea threatens many peoples' idea of marriage.

 

lol, when's the last time you've been to the south? 1968?

 

The Court talked about this when it determined that the ban on gay marriage in CA was unconstitutional...part of the reason why a separate system of civil unions for gays (with equal substantive rights, at least under the state law) was deemed unequal was the myth and prestige and X-factor that "marriage" as a label and institution has built up and enjoys today. I tend to agree that the provision of a "separate but equal" system is fundamentally unequal because the label, which is the crux of the matter, is so important and weighty.

A lot of you guys seem to like the idea of the State getting out of the Marriage business entirely and joining ALL couples via civil unions, leaving marriage to religious organizations. As Ace articulated, Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, Baptists, Orthodox Jews, etc. would have the right to limit "marriage" within their tradition to male-female couples. Other churches would marry same-sex couples within their tradition with no moral or spiritual difficulties.

Personally I see this as a reasonable compromise, but the difficulty will be getting the several states to get out of the marriage industry...which is hard because the same people who want to limit gay marriage at all also want the state to be involved in sanctioning the relationship, at least at this time in our history. And like Will just said, they don't want the state to get out of it because they are worried that allowing gay couples access to the marriage label, even outside of the state context, would dilute the quality of their marriage and dilute the moral fiber of "society."

Really glad that my prediction on page one that this thread would be closed has not happened.

 

QUOTE (Kyushin @ Nov 25 2008, 02:08 PM)
Yes, but what I mean is it exists to the degree to what it can legally exist as. IE: an interracial couple will pull many vocal negative comments in the southern states where as in CA, its unlikely to recieve any attention at all.

I'm from California and live in the Bay Area right now, and I can assure you that there are places in California where you'll hear "nigger," "spic," etc. said in anger, and with no hesitation, on a regular basis. The assumption that the South is the only repository of racism in the US is completely false.

 

I agree. I'm proud of the s2k community for having a level headed conversation over such a heated subject.