ROMA, not DOMA

[takoma]

Senator Menendez of NJ has come out for the Respect for Marriage Act, which repeals DOMA: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/world/europ...d-at-75.html?_r=1&hp. I think he has written a good explanation of his change of heart.

[Anonymous]

Bad link.

[takoma]

Anonymous wrote:Bad link.

Should have been http://blog.nj.com/njv_guest_blog/2011/12/dis...against_same-se.html.

[Anonymous]

I think this change of heart reflects what is going on in the population at large. A substantial number of people have changed their opinions over that time period.

Here is the trend in Gallup Polls:



Here is the trend in Pew Forum polls (note that by 2011 the numbers increased to 46% For, 44% AGAINST, 10% undecided.

[Anonymous]

For all elitists like me criticize the entertainment media for dumping crap on us, they've done a great job of curing us of some prejudices. I give a lot of the credit to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For all elitists like me criticize the entertainment media for dumping crap on us, they've done a great job of curing us of some prejudices. I give a lot of the credit to them.

I think you have a point, although I am not sure how much they led or followed. It was not that long ago that they used gay characters for scandal or shock value (remember the era of shocker gay sitcom kisses, and basic instinct?) to sitcoms that laugh along with campy gay characters (Will and Grace, Queer Eye) to integrating gay characters into regular stories. I suppose they have led by a little. Anyway that is an interesting point to think about.

[takoma]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all elitists like me criticize the entertainment media for dumping crap on us, they've done a great job of curing us of some prejudices. I give a lot of the credit to them.

I think you have a point, although I am not sure how much they led or followed. It was not that long ago that they used gay characters for scandal or shock value (remember the era of shocker gay sitcom kisses, and basic instinct?) to sitcoms that laugh along with campy gay characters (Will and Grace, Queer Eye) to integrating gay characters into regular stories. I suppose they have led by a little. Anyway that is an interesting point to think about.

I'd say it's a mix. They followed certain parts of the country, but spread the (r)evolution to areas that would otherwise not have been carried along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this change of heart reflects what is going on in the population at large. A substantial number of people have changed their opinions over that time period.

Here is the trend in Gallup Polls:



Here is the trend in Pew Forum polls (note that by 2011 the numbers increased to 46% For, 44% AGAINST, 10% undecided.

Although this indicates a salutary trend in public opinion, the fact remains that same sex marriage should be legalized immediately everywhere based on principle, rather than on what the majority thinks. It's a basic civil right, period.
Would we have had desegregation if we had waited for the majority to be ok with it? I think not.

--angry hetero mom

[TheManWithAUsername]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all elitists like me criticize the entertainment media for dumping crap on us, they've done a great job of curing us of some prejudices. I give a lot of the credit to them.

I think you have a point, although I am not sure how much they led or followed. It was not that long ago that they used gay characters for scandal or shock value (remember the era of shocker gay sitcom kisses, and basic instinct?) to sitcoms that laugh along with campy gay characters (Will and Grace, Queer Eye) to integrating gay characters into regular stories. I suppose they have led by a little. Anyway that is an interesting point to think about.

[That was me, BTW - accidentally anonymous.]

I think it was a mix too. Regardless, it was just economically motivated, so I wouldn't call them heroic or anything, but it's still cool that they did so much good by my estimation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this change of heart reflects what is going on in the population at large. A substantial number of people have changed their opinions over that time period.

Here is the trend in Gallup Polls:



Here is the trend in Pew Forum polls (note that by 2011 the numbers increased to 46% For, 44% AGAINST, 10% undecided.

Although this indicates a salutary trend in public opinion, the fact remains that same sex marriage should be legalized immediately everywhere based on principle, rather than on what the majority thinks. It's a basic civil right, period.
Would we have had desegregation if we had waited for the majority to be ok with it? I think not.

--angry hetero mom

I agree. But I don't see gay marriage getting resolved the same way.

[takoma]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although this indicates a salutary trend in public opinion, the fact remains that same sex marriage should be legalized immediately everywhere based on principle, rather than on what the majority thinks. It's a basic civil right, period.
Would we have had desegregation if we had waited for the majority to be ok with it? I think not.

--angry hetero mom

I agree. But I don't see gay marriage getting resolved the same way.

It should not be long before the issue gets to SCOTUS, and then (I hope) it will be resolved exactly as school integration was.

[TheManWithAUsername]

takoma wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although this indicates a salutary trend in public opinion, the fact remains that same sex marriage should be legalized immediately everywhere based on principle, rather than on what the majority thinks. It's a basic civil right, period.
Would we have had desegregation if we had waited for the majority to be ok with it? I think not.

--angry hetero mom

I agree. But I don't see gay marriage getting resolved the same way.

It should not be long before the issue gets to SCOTUS, and then (I hope) it will be resolved exactly as school integration was.

If you mean that the Court will decide it on equal protection grounds, as I understand it that possibility was foreclosed long ago by the ridiculous lie that homosexuals are not traditional victims of discrimination.

[takoma]

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

takoma wrote:It should not be long before the issue gets to SCOTUS, and then (I hope) it will be resolved exactly as school integration was.

If you mean that the Court will decide it on equal protection grounds, as I understand it that possibility was foreclosed long ago by the ridiculous lie that homosexuals are not traditional victims of discrimination.

You may be right, which is why I added "I hope". But "separate but equal" was long accepted until the Court decided otherwise. I expect it will be a split decision, but the fact that Ted Olson believes the arguments are persuasive gives me hope that it will be favorable.