[ SECRET POST #673 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #673 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

101.


__________________________________________________



102.


__________________________________________________



103.


__________________________________________________



104.


__________________________________________________



105.


__________________________________________________



106.


__________________________________________________



107.


__________________________________________________



108.


__________________________________________________



109.


__________________________________________________



110.


__________________________________________________



111.


__________________________________________________



112.


__________________________________________________



113.


__________________________________________________



114.


__________________________________________________



115.


__________________________________________________



116.


__________________________________________________



117.


__________________________________________________



118.
[Twilight Hotel]


__________________________________________________



119.


__________________________________________________



120. [posted twice]


__________________________________________________



121.


__________________________________________________



122.


__________________________________________________



123.


__________________________________________________



124.


__________________________________________________



125.


__________________________________________________



126. [not secret]


__________________________________________________



127.


__________________________________________________



128.


__________________________________________________



129.


__________________________________________________



130.


__________________________________________________



131.


__________________________________________________



132.


__________________________________________________



133.


__________________________________________________



134.


__________________________________________________



135.


__________________________________________________



136.


__________________________________________________



137.


__________________________________________________



138.


__________________________________________________



139.


__________________________________________________



140.


__________________________________________________



141.


__________________________________________________



142.


__________________________________________________



143.


__________________________________________________



144.


__________________________________________________



145.


__________________________________________________



146.


__________________________________________________



147.


__________________________________________________



148.


__________________________________________________



149.


__________________________________________________



150.


__________________________________________________



151.



Notes:

CITY STUFF → http://lolbuttsex.myminicity.com/

Secrets Left to Post: 14 pages, 348 secrets from Secret Submission Post #096.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 1 2 3 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 2 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[jaclynhyde.livejournal.com]

Taking away the right of only one group to marry is still bigoted.

[(Anonymous)]

Marriage shouldn't be something sanctioned by the government. They have more important things to care about rather than taking care of the people like if the people were nothing but little children.

[pikabot]

You're such a unique, hardcore little snowflake.

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you very much! I'm proud of myself!

I do understand most people are too stupid and they need the government to take decisions for themselves. ;_;

[dwinghy.livejournal.com]

lol libertarian.

[jaclynhyde.livejournal.com]

That isn't the point. Would the right way to go about taking marriage away from the government be to say, "Okay, all interracial marriages--and only interracial marriages--are now null and void?"

Prop 8 has nothing to do about marriage in general, because there will never be a follow-up saying "Okay, now let's invalidate all the straight marriages." Prop 8 was about taking away the rights of gays, full stop.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure, I just find this "battle" stupid and based only on ideals rather than on something worth fighting for.

[jaclynhyde.livejournal.com]

Say that to the gay people who want to get married, and want their relationships to be seen as valid as straight ones. The ideals are pretty goddamn important.

And that's not to mention the practical repercussions--want to see your dying significant other in the hospital? Want to file taxes together? Not if you're gay!

[(Anonymous)]

"Wanting to see your dying significant other in the hospital" is the only worth-fighting for pro of marriage. I don't understand why don't people just fight for the benefits and be done with it.

[jaclynhyde.livejournal.com]

Because "separate but equal" didn't work so well the first time.

[kristenell.livejournal.com]

Um that is what they are fighting for the rights and benefits that are bestowed on marriage by the government.

[(Anonymous)]

No, they're fighting to be recognized by the government as a married couple. They're fighting for the idea and terminology rather than for the pragmatical.

[kristenell.livejournal.com]

They are fighting for both. And that is not worthless. To be seen as equal under the law of their government is what they are fighting for, I don't know why they should settle for anything less than equal.

[ronsard.livejournal.com]

And surely you see how it would be impractical to do it the other way around, don't you? Universal civil unions in this country would mean convincing over 200 million people of diverse social and religious backgrounds to give up their "conventional" idea of marriage and accept something new, even though our current system already distinguishes between civil and religious marriage. You think everyone would go for that? More likely, lots of people would go up in arms, saying, "Why should we throw out our marriage just because some gays want to get married?"

I myself believe universal civil unions would grant equal civil rights to all and fortify the separation of church and state - but even an idiot can see this is a thousand times more idealistic than same-sex couples fighting for their civil marriage status.

[(Anonymous)]

Why not just fight for civil unions to have the same benefits as marriage, then? Why so tied up to the word "marriage"?

[kristenell.livejournal.com]

Because lets tangle up the law with two separate words, that is a huge overhaul that can be done in a much simpler way. Also the concept of "separate but equal" can never work.

[ronsard.livejournal.com]

Because when you don't call it "marriage", people will take issue regardless of how similar the two concepts are. Even if civil unions receive the exact same governmental benefits that civil marriages do now, not everyone will see it as the same thing, and you will have a lot of problem convincing Middle America to give up their "marriages" in favor of the new system. Not to mention the people who do not have the option of having their marriages sanctioned by the church, and I'm not just talking about same-sex couples. Where do they go? How will you win their support?

In the end, you can argue all you want that marriage is a social construct and civil rights are all about legal benefits, but I maintain that this is not the pragmatic argument. Our system already upholds the difference between civil and religious marriage, and I believe that this is where the fight has always been and should continue to be - until the church can no longer interfere with the civil rights of people. Trying to change people's belief about an institution that's been in existence longer than history books, how is that a more feasible alternative?

[kristenell.livejournal.com]

Marriage is not just a bunch of ideals, there are real benefits and protections that are given to married couples. (Things about filing taxes, immigration concerns, paid leave for sick spouses, issues dealing with hospital visitation and inheritance, not being forced to testify against your spouse in a court of law, or custody issues with children). The battle for marriage is for heck of a lot more than just living up to ideals, even if those are important too.

And let's face the government is never not going to recognize marriage it is too longstanding and too important as a social institution. Married couples would never go for it.

[(Anonymous)]

Not only are those rather small benefits, you could also fight for the benefits, and only the benefits, without fighting for marriage. They still fight for marriage because it's a worthless fight and people like to waste their energy on them.

[kristenell.livejournal.com]

Um, but if those are what make up civil marriage which is what the government does then that is what we are fighting for. If it quacks like a duck it is a duck. If it looks like marriage, it should be called marriage. Marriage is transfer of kinship, and recognized legal standing by the government. They are fighting with both, because the pragmatical is the same. As it was pointed out to you, civil unions are not the same and as such do not carry all of the benefits and standing.

[(Anonymous)]

Marriage is a ceremony. Marriage is a social standard. Why not just fight for civil unions to have the same benefits as marriage?

[ronsard.livejournal.com]

It's so easy to talk. Have you spoken to a married person lately? A million of them? Why abandon the fight we've kept up all these years and made all this progress on in favor of something even more idealistic and less likely to work?

[kristenell.livejournal.com]

Well then it would have to be applied to everyone, and I think getting the straight people to give that up is much more losing battle then trying to gain an equal status under civil marriage. And this is a battle we will win. Right now we are on a generational shift, because younger people overwhelmingly support it. Also it is much easier to bring new people under one umbrella than just try to differentiate to much. We already have civil marriage. That is what gay people want in on. It has never been about the religious connotations of it.

[(Anonymous)]

But then you're indeed fighting for the word. If Civil Unions gave the same benefits as Marriage, then all pragmatism would be lost and it would end up as nothing but an ideological battle.

Why not just make an Civil Union co-exist with Marriage, both with the same benefits?

[jesidres.livejournal.com]

The idea of marriage is a lot older than Christianity- in fact, marriage was exactly that, a contract to legalize the union of two people. There is ample evidence there were marriages of all kinds before your "religion" came along.

Crack open a history book- the bible doesn't count.