....LMB: "Marriage Debate Crucible"....

July 20, 2004

Sex columnist Dan Savage had a recent article about gay marriage at Salon which has some interesting musings about sex, monogamy and love, but I was most intrigued by his ruthlessly short yet ruthlessly accurate description of the gay marriage controversy:

The problem for opponents of gay marriage isn't that gay people are trying to redefine marriage but that straight people have redefined marriage to a point that it no longer makes any sense to exclude gay couples. Gay people can love, gay people can commit. Some of us even have children. So why can't we get married?

I think that's the crux there. The institution of marriage has already changed from what conservatives like to think it is. And not because of some homosexual onslaught, but because straight married people have changed what it means. Conservatives hope that marriage can be changed back to what it used to be, but think that the acceptance of gay marriage represents a point of no return, where there would no longer be any hope of returning to "traditional values".

Which means they've already lost. They'll keep fighting, of course, but they've lost.

[via This Space for Rent]

Posted by Jake at 02:32 PM | TrackBack (0)
Comments

Ah, controversy. Well, I'm completely for gay marriage, but, the thing is, since "marriage" itself is defined in the bible as a union between a woman and a man, and since this country was first founded by white people on christianity (because everyone knows it doesn't matter what you do or if you were there first if you were say...oh i don't know.....NATIVE american)so, I think the christy's have a technacality there. It's almost like if a christian were trying to ask to get a batmitzvah. I completely agree with gay couples getting what is called "marriage", but just not CALLED marriage. Of course, then comes the "not quite equal" parade, and just more grounds to descriminate people with. Gah.

Posted by: Alyssa at July 25, 2004 09:48 AM

Ah, controversy. Well, I'm completely for gay marriage, but, the thing is, since "marriage" itself is defined in the bible as a union between a woman and a man, and since this country was first founded by white people on christianity (because everyone knows it doesn't matter what you do or if you were there first if you were say...oh i don't know.....NATIVE american)so, I think the christy's have a technacality there. It's almost like if a christian were trying to ask to get a batmitzvah. I completely agree with gay couples getting what is called "marriage", but just not CALLED marriage. Of course, then comes the "not quite equal" parade, and just more grounds to descriminate people with. Gah.

Posted by: Alyssa at July 25, 2004 09:49 AM

Ah, controversy. Well, I'm completely for gay marriage, but, the thing is,you know you've heard it! get ready for the gospel my friend!!! jesus will save you!!!..okay, since "marriage" itself is defined in the bible as a union between a woman and a man, and since this country was first founded by white people on christianity (because everyone knows it doesn't matter what you do or if you were there first if you were say...oh i don't know.....NATIVE american)so, I think the christy's have a technacality there. It's almost like if a christian were trying to ask to get a batmitzvah. I completely agree with gay couples getting what is called "marriage", but just not CALLED marriage. Of course, then comes the "not quite equal" parade, and just more grounds to descriminate people with. Gah. But like you said, they've already lost until someone decides to let up on their religious influence. And that isn't happening any time soon.

Posted by: Alyssa at July 25, 2004 09:53 AM

sorry, didn't mean to post that so many times, computer messed up.

Posted by: Alyssa at July 25, 2004 02:32 PM

marriage has been around since before the bible. it's not like the christians invented it and get rights to the name "marriage." THEY define marriage as the union of man and woman, but there's no reason why we can't use the word marriage to apply to gay unions. if they want to distinguish between a christian marriage and a secular marriage, fine. plenty of straight people get married outside the church anyway. the whole gay thing should be a non-issue.

Posted by: meep at July 26, 2004 07:21 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Lying Media Bastards is both a radio show and website. The show airs Mondays 2-4pm PST on KillRadio.org, and couples excellent music with angry news commentary. And the website, well, you're looking at it.

Both projects focus on our media-marinated world, political lies, corporate tyranny, and the folks fighting the good fight against these monsters.

All brought to you by Jake Sexton, The Most Beloved Man in America ģ.


contact: jake+at+lyingmediabastards.com

Media News

November 16, 2004

Tales of Media Woe

Senate May Ram Copyright Bill- one of the most depressing stories of the day that didn't involve death or bombs. It's the music and movie industries' wet dream. It criminalizes peer-to-peer software makers, allows the government to file civil lawsuits on behalf of these media industries, and eliminates fair use. Fair use is the idea that I can use a snippet of a copyrighted work for educational, political, or satirical purposes, without getting permission from the copyright-holder first.

And most tellingly, the bill legalizes technology that would automatically skip over "obejctionable content" (i.e. sex and violence) in a DVD, but bans devices that would automatically skip over commericals. This is a blatant, blatant, blatant gift to the movie industry. Fuck the movie industry, fuck the music industry, fuck the Senate.

Music industry aims to send in radio cops- the recording industry says that you're not allowed to record songs off the radio, be it real radio or internet radio. And now they're working on preventing you from recording songs off internet radio through a mixture of law and technological repression (although I imagine their techno-fixes will get hacked pretty quickly).

The shocking truth about the FCC: Censorship by the tyranny of the few- blogger Jeff Jarvis discovers that the recent $1.2 million FCC fine against a sex scene in Fox's "Married By America" TV show was not levied because hundreds of people wrote the FCC and complained. It was not because 159 people wrote in and complained (which is the FCC's current rationale). No, thanks to Jarvis' FOIA request, we find that only 23 people (of the show's several million viewers) wrote in and complained. On top of that, he finds that 21 of those letters were just copy-and-paste email jobs that some people attached their names to. Jarvis then spins this a bit by saying that "only 3" people actually wrote letters to the FCC, which is misleading but technically true. So somewhere between 3 and 23 angry people can determine what you can't see on television. Good to know.

Reuters Union Considers Striking Over Layoffs- will a strike by such a major newswire service impact the rest of the world's media?

Pentagon Starts Work On War Internet- the US military is talking about the creation of a global, wireless, satellite-aided computer network for use in battle. I think I saw a movie about this once...

Conservative host returns to the air after week suspension for using racial slur- Houston radio talk show host (and somtime Rush Limbaugh substitute) Mark Belling referred to Mexican-Americans as "wetbacks" on his show. He was suspended for a couple of weeks, and then submitted a written apology for the racial slur to a local newspaper. But he seems to be using the slur and its surrounding controversy to boost his conservative cred with his listeners.

Stay Tuned for Nudes- Cleveland TV news anchor Sharon Reed aired a story about artist Spencer Tunick, who uses large numbers of naked volunteers in his installations and photographs. The news report will be unique in that it will not blur or black-out the usual naughty bits. The story will air late at night, when it's allegedly okay with the FCC if you broadcast "indecent" material. The author of this article doesn't seem to notice that Reed first claims that this report is a publicity stunt, but then claims it's a protest against FCC repression. I'd like to think it's the latter, but I'm not that much of a sucker.

Posted by Jake at 04:02 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
More Media News

Jake Jake Jake

 

Fake "Ha-Ha" News

News

 

Quotes

"8:45? And here I am yapping away like it's 8:35!"
-Ned Flanders

More Quotes

Media News

 

Obligatory Blog Links

 

Snapshots

Mission: Mongolia

Jake's first attempt at homemade Mongolican barbecue:

Failure.

What went right: correctly guessing several key seasonings- lemon, ginger, soy, garlic, chili.

What went wrong: still missing some ingredients, and possibly had one wrong, rice vinegar. Way too much lemon and chili.

Result: not entirely edible.

Plan for future: try to get people at Great Khan's restaurant to tell me what's in the damn sauce.

More Snapshots

Columnists Of Note

 

References

Sonic Resistance

 

Dead Trees

 

Heavy Rotation

Archives

 

Squiggles of Insight

SubvertWare

Credits

Design and Layout by Mark McLaughlin and Quang Tang
LMB Logo by Quang Tang

Alt "One Hell of a Leader" logo largely stolen from Obey Giant.
All other material by Jake Sexton (unless otherwise cited)

hosted by nice dream