When a thread is locked by a Host for not meeting the Statement of Purpose of a forum (found under "About this forum" above posts on forum's main page), the software automatically inserts the phrase "off topic" no matter the real reason.
To discover the reason the thread was locked, please look to typically the last post where the Host who locked replied with the reason. Sometimes a Host will not reply before locking, in which case please pm them and ask.
Please understand that Hosts have no ability to not have the phrase "off topic" inserted into the OP. It is the software, often inaccurate, and happens on every host locked thread.
There is no reason to restrict marriage based on an intrinsic inborn characteristic like sexual orientation or skin color. None. To do so is bigotry, period. I don't care if it is couched in "freedom of religion" terms or legal terms or "think of the children" terms. It is wrong to do so and I am very glad that the SCOTUS has finally ruled so.
There has been too much bigotry against other people due to these inherent characteristics and it needs to stop. Judging someone as lesser, as evil, as sinning because of their inherent, inborn characteristics is wrong. Dead wrong. Anyone doing so needs to be called on their behavior (if possible without risk). Laws denying someone equal rights due to those characteristic need to be changed. ASAP. Period.
Marriage statutes provide legal rules, basically, about stuff, about assets, about who has rights to what, including being able to have access to your spouse while in the hospital and other similar things many take for granted. It doesn't say anything about procreation, or love, or any of that. Perhaps a church wedding might, but a church wedding in and of itself is not a legal marriage (though there are common law marriages, etc, here and there. I am speaking in general terms). Legal marriage is a license given by the state, a legal partnership.
There is no reason to deny that between couples, no matter their inherent inborn characteristics. There is no reason to deny them that even if you think those inborn inherent characteristics are by choice which brings up a larger issue of what the fuck. My mom did not "decide" to be left handed and have her hand tied to her chair in school. My cousin did not "decide" to be born with red hair and bullied during his school years. My uncle did not "decide" to be gay and be beaten. My grandfather did not "decide" to have dark skin and be denied the legal ability to marry my grandmother in many states.
And yes, I know left handedness or hair color in no way compares to the shit that has happened to too many in other categories of inherent inborn characteristics but I have found bringing it up to those who claim choice makes them think. A little. So I add them in.
I have seen several posts on DU about polygamy, with strong words going back and forth. IMO, this piggybacks the recent ruling on marriage equality but also is very different than the recent ruling on marriage equality.
The recent ruling on marriage equality is about not denying someone based on their inborn inherent characteristic of sexual orientation. This will, hopefully, extend beyond the issue of marriage into greater acceptance of others overall. Stopping the stupid hurtful "pray the gay away" bullshit. Stopping any acceptance of bullying or criminal acts towards people because of their sexual orientation. Acknowledgment and acceptance that denying rights is bigotry and wrong.
The discussion on polygamy is about expanding the legal aspects of marriage based on desire for legal protections in partnerships. They both are about marriage, they differ WIDELY and wildly in that 1 group has experienced persecution for something out of their control, the other has not.
They are VERY different issues with the similarity right now of questioning the legal definition of marriage. Maybe it is time to ALSO discuss marriage statutes, what "marriage" means, legally, yes even socially. But this in no way means I am saying the 2 issues, the 2 categories, are in any way the same as they are not.
I apologize in advance for not wording this the absolute best way as I am sure I have not. I will try to respond to those who are wishing discussion as this is thoughts in progress.
I woke to eerie colors, so yellow and smelling of smoke. The skies are grey but nothing on the radar. The sun is yellow, everything is yellow.
So off to the internets to find BC has a lot of fires and the winds are from the n/ne. There are many fires in BC. Part of Port Hardy on the wet north end of Vancouver Island has been evacuated, there is a fire right north of Vancouver near Sechelt, etc etc etc.
The temperature is much cooler this morning but due to a pressure trough near the coast, hot dry winds from inland BC will kick that back up this afternoon, increasing our fire danger again and bringing us smoke in the air.
BC fires app
Profile InformationGender: Do not display
Member since: Sat Oct 16, 2004, 10:10 PM
Number of posts: 115,654
- 2022 (2)
- 2020 (2)
- 2019 (1)
- February (1)
- 2017 (104)
- 2016 (89)
- 2015 (90)
- 2014 (15)