http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/12/23/michigan-goddam Comments On: Meanwhile in Michissippi by Dan Savage en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Sat, 25 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Sat, 25 May 2013 14:00:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by Whoop Di Doo]]> Mon, 26 Dec 2011 00:17:40 -0800 The Stranger
Anyway: I find this part very telling:

"Snyder said the prohibition will not apply to employees of the state public universities or to state government employees."

because one of the big criticisms of this was that U of M and MSU would lose a bunch of their best professors who happened to be gay/bi and in same-sex relationships, and particularly that it would hurt U of M's excellent queer studies program. So they did listen to some of their criticism, but clearly not enough of it.
Posted by Whoop Di Doo]]> Mon, 26 Dec 2011 00:16:30 -0800 The Stranger
@22, Being gay is not a lifestyle choice, but an immutable fact of one's existence.
Posted by brendan]]> Sun, 25 Dec 2011 03:22:23 -0800 The Stranger I pointed out that the proportions of gay and straight people are irrelevant. He did not deign to respond to this glaring hole in his argument.
Posted by venomlash]]> Sat, 24 Dec 2011 16:43:33 -0800 The Stranger
Now, would Seattleblues feel comfortable in this situation? Would he say that any heterosexuals who say they want to legally marry people of the opposite sex are just trying to get 'special rights' for their own sexual orientation?

No, I think Seattelblues wouldn't. If he were in this situation, similar to the one gays are in our world, he would denounce it, and fight against it -- and rightfully so.
Posted by ankylosaur]]> Sat, 24 Dec 2011 14:19:14 -0800 The Stranger Yes, all persons can marry someone of the opposite gender. By your logic, a tax on yarmulkes would be fair because everyone, Jewish or Gentile, would be taxed equally. Do you agree with this statement?
Finally, there is a very great difference between mandating that local governments MUST provide certain benefits and mandating that they MAY NOT provide certain benefits. Nice false equivalency you have there.
Posted by venomlash]]> Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:28:02 -0800 The Stranger
"Well, you still don't understand how hate crime laws work, that's for damn sure."

Yes, actually I do. It's very simple. A crime against one man is measured as an outrage, the exact same crime against another as routine. It really isn't that hard to understand.

We either in our society believe that we're all equal citizens- or we don't. If an assault while shouting 'nigger' or 'fag' is to be held to a higher punitive standard the conclusion must be that the liberals who invented hate crimes don't.

Or they believe that what a person thinks should be regulated, but only if it offends the groups liberals like or believe oppressed. After all, that's all a hate crime enhancement does. It says that the crime isn't important, but the fact that it's directed against one of the governments favored groups is.

I'd wager my dog that hate crime conviction held on a person hitting a man while shouting 'cracker'is nonexistent. Unless maybe some liberal attorney brought the thing just to prove a point, but then it would be statistically irrelevant. And I love that dog, so I don't make the wager lightly.

"Now, this law would be entirely fair if gays were allowed to marry."

You really, really have a hard time with understanding this basic fact- gays can marry any time they like. They can't marry other men or other women, true. That's their call. But they can marry under precisely the same rules I could. I couldn't marry a close relative or more than one spouse though both would presumably reflect the consensual nature of the relationship and our desire to do so. Not being from Arkansas or Utah I'm not inclined to, but some people are and we discount that desire for greater social good. I can't marry another man, and neither can a homosexual man. Exact indiscriminate equality under the law. And again, a tiny minority has no faintest right to redefine marriage so that their wittle feewings won't be hurted.

Homosexuals can get insurance for their boyfriends of girlfriends, just as I could have as a single man were I inclined to do so. I could go into the insurance market, comparison shop the products, select one I thought a good value and buy it. With my own money.

"This bill explicitly forbids this practice, hamstringing local authorities from managing their workforce."

What, all of sudden a guy who thinks our federal government should have no limits at all of any kind is bothered by local government having their employment practices regulated by state government? Alrighty then! So, I'd guess you're against minimum wage rules, safe work practice rules, discrimination laws and all the other things that hamstring business by arbitrary dictates from the federal or state governments? No? It's only the federal government that should have absolute power? I'm confused!

It's Christmas Eve, and I have family and friends to spend time with, so wish you all a very Merry Christmas and the best of the new year.
Posted by Seattleblues]]> Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:02:14 -0800 The Stranger
I suppose it's by a commenter's ability to actually acknowledge and think about (and provide an answer to) arguments that they're presented with that one can measure how much they actually want to engage in a debate or exchange of ideas (as opposed to simply making statements of belief or expressing their -- all too often negative -- emotions).
Posted by ankylosaur]]> Sat, 24 Dec 2011 07:31:03 -0800 The Stranger Posted by thatdude]]> Sat, 24 Dec 2011 02:39:30 -0800 The Stranger Posted by yucca flower]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 22:07:30 -0800 The Stranger If a gay man is mugged, it's just a mugging. If his assailant calls him a "goddamn queer" during the attack, it's also a hate crime. If a straight man is mugged, it's just a mugging. If his assailant calls him a "fucking breeder" during the attack, it's also a hate crime.
You are just as protected as any flaming homosexual. Stop complaining about how Teh Ghey is getting special rights at your expense, you ignorant scrub.
Now, this law would be entirely fair if gays were allowed to marry. (Remember, a tax on yarmulkes is a tax on Jews. Please reason by analogy from that.) Heterosexuals can procure such benefits for their loved ones by tying the knot. Homosexuals do not have that option, as Dan keenly points out.
Finally, you're missing one thing. There was no requirement that civil union partners of government employees be given benefits; individual governmental entities were given free rein to make that decision on their own. This bill explicitly forbids this practice, hamstringing local authorities from managing their workforce.
Posted by venomlash]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 18:58:38 -0800 The Stranger
Since integrity or literacy (I sometimes think the first, sometimes the second...) is a virtue Savage lacks entirely, let's recap the actual article from the Detroit Free Press.

This wasn't aimed at homosexual couples. There's a single unsupported contention to that effect in the article, but the actual ban applies to gay and straight unmarried couples alike.

You don't have a right to health care attached to your job, even if you're a married couple. You certainly don't have any basic right to have your employer provide health care to your boyfriend or girlfriend gay or straight. This would be true if you worked at the local hardware store, for a huge corporation or for the state, local or federal governemnts.

Michigan and every state but New York, California and the other ignorant Eastern state that allow gay unions to be erroneously called marriage all have full marraige equality already. That your feelings are hurt by the societal reaction to your life choices is unfortunate, but hardly the stuff of a civil rights movement.

Mr. Savage, I sincerely hope your maturity this year comes to match your chronological age, or at least equates to a chronological age in double digits. Not everything is an attack on you, or on gays generally. You aren't part of a persecuted minority one step away from concentration camps. You have not one iota less rights than I as a heterosexual citizen have. You can marry, if you engaged in relationships that conceivable could lead to marriage. You can live, work, vacation, eat, play in any place I can. You can engage in a relationship with as many consenting adults as your perversions require, and no one will care or try to stop you.

In fact you have more rights, more protections than I do. If I'm mugged on Capitol Hill (highly unlikely, since I never visit that open air freak show) it's a muggging. If you do it's a hate filled attack on one of the nations special citizens, A GAY MAN!!!! The mugger in my case likely won't serve a day in jail. In yours he might spend a couple years in prison.

Grow up already. Acquire or copy or borrow some basic integrity and honesty. Shed the whiny 'poor, poor little gay ME!!!! rants, and just maybe you might be worth considering taking seriously. Or you could just stick to teaching perverts how to be better perverts and leave politics to people with some basic grip on reality.
Posted by Seattleblues]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:01:21 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Mattyx]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 14:54:18 -0800 The Stranger Posted by DRF]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 14:47:56 -0800 The Stranger Posted by OuterCow]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 14:07:00 -0800 The Stranger Posted by venomlash]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 13:05:47 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Doctor Memory]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 12:57:52 -0800 The Stranger cause heteros are the salt of the earth
but then who's the sugar?
just tell me -- who's the sugar?
without sugar, salt is tasteless
consider that...
And: a merry Hitlermas!
Posted by ankylosaur]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 12:48:48 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Dingo]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 12:23:42 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Original Andrew]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:41:48 -0800 The Stranger
(it's time to feed the staff.....)
Posted by oinkoink]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:09:52 -0800 The Stranger
Danny's favorite words.

Danny loves him some buttugly butch ACLU lawyers
with bad haircuts.....

Hey, Danny-
how about an update on the ACLU lawsuit against the school where the poor homosexual cheerleader got suspended for kissing in the hallway.....
Posted by The ACLU is going to sue! pass it on.....]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:07:59 -0800 The Stranger
I give it another 2 years before Snyder or some other moron finally inks a deal to cede water rights in the Great Lakes to Arizona and New Mexico (which they've been angling to do for years), and at that point we can just sit back and watch the entire state de-populate.

(And yes, I grew up there. Shit like this is why I'd never consider moving back.)
Posted by Doctor Memory]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:05:33 -0800 The Stranger
Because homos are schpeeeshul.

And taxpayers should pay for homos' schpeeeshul relationships.

Posted by $how u$ the Money]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:05:33 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Hernandez]]> Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:55:05 -0800 The Stranger