[Bobboau]

for those of you outside the states, this was the expected reaction, the mayor himself knew this was going to happen, its almost a mechanical action. this is all part of the political dance that is involved in makeing these sorts of changes, now it's time for the SSM folks to make the next chanlenge eventualy pushing it into the US supreem court.

[Ace]

The US supreme court has already said that SSM is a state based thing.

Effectively, it's a similar as a legal situation to slavery in the US.

History repeats itself.

Coming up in the next episode of America: Abraham Lincoln II and the Second American Civil War!

[Rictor]

I guess that makes Bush the second Stonewall, as in: "dumb as a".

[karajorma]

Originally posted by ionia23
The law is in place now.  Period.  That's it.  Go change the law.  The rest will take care of itself.  Put it on a ballot, I'll glady vote to strike it down and extend the privilidges, responsibilites, consequences and benefits to same-sex couples.  Never should have been restricted in the first place.

The problem is that you can't simply say "Change the law" and it will be done. That's not how things like this work. This issue has to become a bigger and bigger issue until it either becomes an election issue (unlikely) or the supreme courts are forced to make a final ruling on it.

Things like this are the only way to make this a big enough issue.  

Originally posted by Flipside
Well, I tend towards the thought that people aren't born straight either, but there you go

[Setekh]

Hmmm, the idea of same-sex marriages has come up in Australian parliament recently too. Interesting...

[Tiara]

Seriously, you guys are all behind the times. Bickering over issues long resolved over here

Once again, I'm proud to be Dutch. Especially when I look at the other countries in the world, including the 'allmighty' America. :D:drevil:

Mark my words, one day we will become the Second Atlantis and curbstomp you all for being so backwards!

(Hell, we're already halfway there cuz technically we're already 'under the sea' )

[Flipside]

Yep, if you hadn't accepted your dykes you'd be screwed

[Rictor]

And in the future, when some advanced civilization finds records from the time of the Dutch Empire, they'll all choke to death trying to pronounce the words, and that will be mankind's final act of vengance

[aldo_14]

What was that old story about a Dutch lad sticking his finger in a dyke?

:eep:

[ionia23]

It was the only way to stop it from leaking everywhere.

Okay, that's simply gross.

Recent incident at a bar.  Me, drunk to stupidity.  Stereotypical classic "bull-dyke" (pardon, please) at the bar giving a dissertation on The Evil That Is The Male Species.

I look over: "You know, if you hate men so much, how come you're trying so hard to be one?"

BAD idea .  But buckets of fun.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by ionia23
It was the only way to stop it from leaking everywhere.

Okay, that's simply gross.

Recent incident at a bar.  Me, drunk to stupidity.  Stereotypical classic "bull-dyke" (pardon, please) at the bar giving a dissertation on The Evil That Is The Male Species.

I look over: "You know, if you hate men so much, how come you're trying so hard to be one?"

BAD idea .  But buckets of fun.

What were you at the GAY BAR! GAY BAR! for in the first place?

[ionia23]

Originally posted by aldo_14


What were you at the GAY BAR! GAY BAR! for in the first place?

heee, t'werent a gay bar, my friend.  neighborhood bar.  It was one of those moments when I said something in my head just in time to realize it came out of my mouth.

Truth stings like a *****, don't it

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Flipside
Yep, if you hadn't accepted your dykes you'd be screwed

Well, just for your information, we're building dykes across the world as we speak. Dutch experts are currently overseeing the construction of dykes in America, China and a ****load of other countries.

WE WILL RULE THROUGH DYKES!



Ok, that's just wrong in so many ways...

But seriously, slightly on topic... Why is it that Holland is so much more socially liberal then almost the entire world? Everytime something comes up about euthanasia, gay marriages, soft drugs, etc etc in other countries I just get the urge to point and laugh because of their... ass-forwardness instead of trying to be at least a little bit progressive.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Tiara

But seriously, slightly on topic... Why is it that Holland is so much more socially liberal then almost the entire world? Everytime something comes up about euthanasia, gay marriages, soft drugs, etc etc in other countries I just get the urge to point and laugh because of their... ass-forwardness instead of trying to be at least a little bit progressive.

Well, did you legalize soft drugs before everything else?

[Tiara]

Originally posted by aldo_14

Well, did you legalize soft drugs before everything else?

Eh? What?

[vyper]

[q]
Well, did you legalize soft drugs before everything else?[/q]



On a serious note:

In legal terms this ruling was correct. However, it _is_ unfair on the parties involved on the ground.

Forget marriage for a second, perhaps a union with equal legal standing could be created specifically for any couple (of any sexual persuasion so long as they were an unrelated couple) to be joined in?

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by vyper
[q]
Well, did you legalize soft drugs before everything else?[/q]



On a serious note:

In legal terms this ruling was correct. However, it _is_ unfair on the parties involved on the ground.

Forget marriage for a second, perhaps a union with equal legal standing could be created specifically for any couple (of any sexual persuasion so long as they were an unrelated couple) to be joined in?

Well isn;t marriage by definition a religious thing?  

If so, why the hell is it on the statutes of a supposedly secular (nation) state?

[vyper]

Historically it's not necessarily religious - only the christian, muslim, etc ceremonies to make it happen are. The Ancients (no FS references lads ) had marriage between a man and a woman in much the same vain only with different or no religious context.

[Ace]

Originally posted by vyper
Historically it's not necessarily religious - only the christian, muslim, etc ceremonies to make it happen are. The Ancients (no FS references lads ) had marriage between a man and a woman in much the same vain only with different or no religious context.

...as well as marriage between men and men as well as women and women. (the Greeks and Romans are good examples of this)

Really this whole idea of claiming that historically that marriage has been between a man and a woman is just trying to justify bigotry in the same way that "white man's burden" was used.

[aldo_14]

Well, I can understand why marriage would be between man and woman for the purposes of reinforcing the parental group (i.e. because human children need one to survive, unlike most animals)...but that reasoning is going back thousands of years, to the beginning of human evolution - we've moved on a bit since then methinks.