case: ([ Snake; Moeface. ])
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2008-11-08 04:59 pm

[ SECRET POST #673 ]


⌈ 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.

(Anonymous) 2008-11-08 11:47 pm (UTC)(link)
Why not just fight for civil unions to have the same benefits as marriage, then? Why so tied up to the word "marriage"?

[identity profile] kristenell.livejournal.com 2008-11-08 11:49 pm (UTC)(link)
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.

(Anonymous) 2008-11-08 11:51 pm (UTC)(link)
That's not a huge overhaul, that would just be much easier for the "LOLCONSERVATIVESOCIETY" to accept.

[identity profile] kristenell.livejournal.com 2008-11-08 11:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Well honestly, I don't see why I owe it to society to accomodate and placate its bigotry, but that is just me. You differentiate it and you just protect the status quo.

(Anonymous) 2008-11-08 11:57 pm (UTC)(link)
It's a process of change. You slowly eliminate government-endorsed marriage by making Civil Unions more and more like it. In 60 years, perhaps society would be ready to abandon government-endorsed marriage.

[identity profile] kristenell.livejournal.com 2008-11-09 12:01 am (UTC)(link)
I am telling you there is no end to government marriage. There is no movement from anyone for that. What would be more likely happen is civil unions become so much like marriage that we start calling them marriage. But the legal standing right now is under marriage and that is what the fight is for.

(Anonymous) 2008-11-09 12:04 am (UTC)(link)
Fine. I can accept that. I didn't vote on Proposition 8 because I couldn't care less for it, but if you want to waste your energy there when we have more important problems in this country... go for it!

And I say the exact same thing to people that are against gay marriage, mind you.

[identity profile] kristenell.livejournal.com 2008-11-09 12:08 am (UTC)(link)
You act as if this is the only thing we are fighting for. Since when are we so one dimensional. I hate this argument that just because there are other problems mean we need to ignore this one. That is how things never get done by the way.

Also I don't believe that fighting for equal standing or rights of anyone in this country is ever a waste of energy.

(Anonymous) 2008-11-09 08:26 am (UTC)(link)
I didn't vote on Proposition 8 because I couldn't care less for it

Then shut the fuck up and stop wanking about it here. gb2/bakersfield, failfag.

(Anonymous) 2008-11-11 12:15 am (UTC)(link)
You're putting far more effort into your "don't care" argument on a forum about fandom than I did in my effort of filling in a tiny circle that said no on Prop. 8.

lol your efficiency

[identity profile] dots.livejournal.com 2008-11-09 08:02 am (UTC)(link)
It's not government marriage that is the root of the problem, it's religious marriage -- because people have been misled to think that Prop 8 would require churches to marry couples (which it wouldn't).

And if you think people are ever, ever, ever going to give up religious marriage, I have a bridge to sell you.

[identity profile] ronsard.livejournal.com 2008-11-08 11:55 pm (UTC)(link)
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?

(Anonymous) 2008-11-09 12:02 am (UTC)(link)
To make society grow out of marriage slowly. You slowly eliminate government-endorsed marriage by making Civil Unions more and more like it. In 80 years, perhaps, society will be ready to abandon government-endorsed marriage.

[identity profile] ronsard.livejournal.com 2008-11-09 12:12 am (UTC)(link)
To be frank, the backlash that would come from instigating such a movement would likely hurt the fight for same-sex couples to receive equal rights long before universal civil unions can be realized and accepted. Well-conceived in theory, but it won't work.