dreamer_easy: (BRIC A BRAC quotations)
Frustratingly, migrating to the new puter has somehow resurrected a bunch of deleted bookmarks. It's a real jumble. So apologies for any duplicates which get posted as I try to sort them out.

Doctors' fears mean woman is sent to Darwin for abortion: "Queensland Health is paying for a woman to be sent to Darwin for an abortion because doctors fear they will be jailed if they perform the operation here... A source told The Cairns Post the fetus to be aborted was so 'significantly abnormal that it would not survive' if it were born."

Activist seeks divorce ban in California: "The effort is meant to be a satirical statement after California voters outlawed gay marriage in 2008, largely on the argument that a ban is needed to protect the sanctity of traditional marriage. If that's the case, then Marcotte reasons voters should have no problem banning divorce."

‘Sexting’ bullying cited in teen's suicide

The Characteristics of Bullying Victims in Schools

Cyberbullying is as common as name-calling, study shows

Britain's criminalising of children breaches their rights, says report

Patrick Stewart: the legacy of domestic violence

via [livejournal.com profile] qthewetsprocket, Schrödinger's Rapist: a guy's guide to approaching strange women without being maced. Gentlemen, give this a read - despite the serious subject matter, it's very funny.
dreamer_easy: (homeoboxual)
When it comes to Rick Warren, my personal interest is in challenging his incorrect statements, but of course all this Googling has turned up some thought-provoking political commentary from various perspectives:

Rick Warren’s biggest critics: other evangelicals

Barack Obama and Rick Warren: Gay Rights Activists Are Offended

Praying With Rev. Warren

The Flipside of Warren-gate

Also of interest:

Homosexual Civil Unions: A Medieval Tradition? (The journal article is Same-Sex Couples Creating Households in Old Regime France: The Uses of the Affrèrement.)
dreamer_easy: (love)
Continuing to examine Rick Warren's claim that "For 5,000 years every single culture and every single religion has defined marriage as a man and a woman", I spent a few minutes Googling, and came up with multiple cultures for which this is not true.

There are cultures in Africa, including the largest ethnic group in Kenya, the Kikuyu, in which women marry other women. The word for male-female marriage and female-female marriage is the same, as is the marriage ceremony.

There are a large number of cultures in which polygyny, a husband with more than one wife, is quite usual, and that's been true throughout history. There are also some polyandrous cultures where women take more than one husband, such as the Nyinba of Tibet. (It's also possible that there were polyandrous marriages in early Sumer.)

And then there are also matrilineal, matrilocal cultures in which there's really nothing that looks like the Western idea of marriage, such as the Nayar of East India, and the Mosuo of China.

Even from this small pool of examples, it's obvious that Rev Warren's statement is incorrect: over thousands of years of history and thousands of human cultures, what counts as "marriage" has actually varied quite a bit. That said, Warren's argument is fallacious in any case; just because something is popular or traditional doesn't make it right.
dreamer_easy: (GODDESS)
Further to the Rev. Warren's remarks, I'd like to investigate this claim: "For 5,000 years every single culture and every single religion has defined marriage as a man and a woman, not just Christianity [but also] Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism."

By specifying that period of time, Warren has in a sense staked a claim on my territory. 5,000 years ago, there was no Christianity, no Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, or Buddhism. From the perspective of Sumer and predynastic Egypt, those faiths are mere Johnny-come-latelies. But in the Ancient Near East, there was no religious definition of marriage. It was a civil matter of laws and contracts, mostly regarding the production of children and the disposal of property. Laws regulated virginity, inheritance, child support, support for divorced women, and so on. Funny to think that 5,000 years later, it's these civil rights which gay and lesbian couples are seeking: for the state to recognise and regulate their marriages, and modern versions of the same issues.
dreamer_easy: (facepalm)
Dammit, this guy is going to give Obama's inauguration speech?

I remember scoffing when, in the very first episode of The West Wing, a fundie can't remember which is the First Commandment. I am no longer sceptical. Warren says: "God said in Genesis 1, a man and woman should cling to each other for life." Um, no, that's Genesis 2:24. That may seem like a nitpick, but it's a surprising error for a professional Christian - one who displays a sophisticated understanding of the different "laws" in the Bible, and yet not only seems to confuse monogamy with promiscuity, but a civil matter (the state's definition of marriage) with a religious matter (his church's definition of marriage).

That said, a surprising number of people have taken the pizza thing seriously. It's a satirical joke, you gulls, as a moment's Googling would've made clear.
dreamer_easy: (homeoboxual)
Same-sex discrimination end closer: "The Senate agreed to amend superannuation laws to allow same-sex couples to leave entitlements to their partner or child upon death. It also debated a bill to extend the meaning of de facto partner, child and parent to include same-sex relationships to 68 commonwealth laws. The legislation will bring long-awaited equality to same sex-couples in areas including tax, social security, health, aged care and employment." Specifically: "The Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws Superannuation) Bill 2008 passed the Senate with government and opposition amendments and will now return to the lower house. Debate on the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws General Law Reform) Bill 2008 was adjourned. A series of Greens amendments on both bills were defeated, including one to allow same-sex marriage."

In other news, I may yet buy that coffee at SFO, as the Bay Area staunchly opposed Prop 8. However, we're flying back thru Los Angeles, which can BITE ME.
dreamer_easy: (facepalm)
Huge disappointment and anger over the passing of Prop 8 is understandable, but the blamestorming in some quarters is disgraceful. It was the Mormons! It was the Blacks! As though there are no gay Mormons, as though there are no gay Blacks; as though Mormons didn't fight Prop 8, as though Blacks didn't fight Prop 8 - alongside people of all races, religions, and politics.

Here's what the No On Prop 8 campaign has to say:
"We achieve nothing if we isolate the people who did not stand with us in this fight. We only further divide our state if we attempt to blame people of faith, African American voters, rural communities and others for this loss. We know people of all faiths, races and backgrounds stand with us in our fight to end discrimination, and will continue to do so. Now more than ever it is critical that we work together and respect our differences that make us a diverse and unique society. Only with that understanding will we achieve justice and equality for all."
(To be fair, "Mormons Stole Our Rights" has two good points: it at least acknowledges that gay Mormons exist; and the rather clever idea of challenging the church's tax exempt status on the grounds that its primary activity is lobbying.)
dreamer_easy: (australia)
Just recently (14 October) the Senate's Inquiry into the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws—General Law Reform) Bill 2008 has recommended passage of the Bill.

And on 16 October, the Senate passed the Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other
Measures) Bill 2008
(although technical stuff means it'll have to go round once more before becoming law).

Basically, in Australia, gay marriage per se is not on the agenda, but IIUC correctly the laws which cover de facto straight couples are being changed to cover same sex couples as well. This addresses what is IMHO the crux of the issue: citizens who are expected to pay the same tax as everyone else, but are not entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.
dreamer_easy: (VOTE OR SHUT UP)
U-turn as Californians vote to ban gay marriage

(Bonus copyediting fuckup: "US: Californians vote to ban gay marriage US Gay Second Lead" lol)

More details from the SF Chronicle: Same-sex marriage ban wins; opponents sue to block measure.

More resources: Lambda Legal; National Center For Lesbian Rights; ACLU.

ETA: But wait! No On Prop 8 points out there are millions of absentee ballots still to be counted. (Thanks [livejournal.com profile] puppetmaker40!)
dreamer_easy: (Default)
Prop. 8 Ban On Same-Sex Marriage Maintains Lead

Gods damn it, California, if you do pass Prop 8, I swear I'll boycott your bigoted ass. fwiw.

ETA: Proposition K, which would have protected sex workers from police abuse and violence, has been defeated. That's it, CA, I'm not buying as much as a cup of coffee as we pass thru SFO this year. (I don't buy the argument that arresting sex workers is a necessary part of fighting sex slavery. If you're arresting the slaves, you're arresting the wrong people.)

ETA: At least, as I type this, Proposition 4 (which would mandate parental notification for minors' abortions) is trailing.

ETA yet more: anti-abortion referenda in Colorado and South Dakota have also failed, but anti-gay initiatives have succeeded in Arizona, Florida, and Arkansas. Gods know why US states waste so much time and money passing laws which are only going to be found unconstitutional in the end.
dreamer_easy: (love)
Via [livejournal.com profile] drhoz: Copy this sentence into your livejournal if you're in a heterosexual marriage, and you don't want it "protected" by the bigots who think that gay marriage hurts it somehow.

I have yet to hear an explanation of how extending the legal protections, privileges, and responsibilities of marriage to serious, dedicated gay couples would affect my own legal protections, privileges, and responsibilities.

What's more, I'm impatient with patently false arguments that gay marriage will destroy freedom of religion or opinion and the family unit. The latter is a particularly bizarre argument: how will legitimising and supporting stable two-parent families lead to more single parent families, polygamy, etc?

If - when - gay marriage is legal, Christian churches would no more be forced to marry Adam and Steve than they would be to marry Jon and I. Teachers will not be forced to teach acceptance of homosexuality in the classroom. (See A Commentary on the Document "Six Consequences if Proposition 8 Fails", which debunks lies about the November California referendum on banning gay marriage.)

Jon and I have no children and are unlikely to have any children. If anyone is attacking our marriage, it's the opponents of gay unions who insist that the purpose of marriage is to produce offspring.
dreamer_easy: (homeoboxual)
Meanwhile, Californians get to vote on whether to ban gay marriage.

ETA: Say No To Proposition 8 could use a few bucks.
dreamer_easy: (homeoboxual)
Debunking The Sarah Palin Rape Kit "Debunkers" (ta, [livejournal.com profile] stephen_dedman!)

Chuppah chaps seal union in same-sex first

Court Rules That Anti-Trans Discrimination Is Sex Discrimination: "...Diane Schroer, a highly qualified special forces veteran who was offered a position at the Library of Congress as a terrorism research analyst. The Library withdrew the job offer when Schroer informed them that she was in the process of changing sex." (Bigotry wastes resources. The worst example I ever heard was a lost child being left to die in the Australian bush because his father wouldn't let a blacktracker onto the property.)

Judge rules Florida gay adoption ban unconstitutional. (Bigotry. Wastes. Resources.)

Eating disorders on the rise in Australian boys: "Australia's obesity epidemic is being blamed for a sharp rise in the number of boys and men developing anorexia as more teens get bullied for being overweight and become confused about healthy food guidelines."

Profile

dreamer_easy: (Default)
dreamer_easy

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11 121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 9th, 2025 02:22 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios