Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Gay Couple Elope to Canada

LGBT Canada same-sex marriage eloped

  • Please log in to reply
126 replies to this topic

#1 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 12:53 PM

http://www.sfgate.co...MNGCE3OV2K1.DTL

I thought this was very touching, and is an excellent example of why many gay people want the actual rite of marriage as well as the civil recognition.

Quote

In the language of their generation, Gus and Elmer were friends.

They worked together, took cruises together and sang in the same church choir. They lived together for nearly six decades but never held hands in public.

Then, last month, Gustavo Archilla, 88, and Elmer Lokkins, 84, crossed the Canadian border near Niagara Falls and were married.

"We eloped," Lokkins said in his Manhattan apartment one recent afternoon, before breaking into song. "To Niagara in a sleeper, there's no honeymoon that's cheaper."

Archilla and Lokkins did not marry for political reasons, financial reasons or legal reasons. Through their 58 years together, they mostly stood by as others fought for rights such as civil unions or domestic partnerships.

Marriage meant more to them. It was something sacred, they said, an institution they cherished even as it shunned them.

The couple capture what some in the gay rights movement say is an essential but unappreciated point in the argument for same-sex marriage: It offers something more basic and profound than survivor rights or shared health care. For many gays and lesbians, the power of marriage lies in the sanctity of its tradition, its social legitimacy -- the very thing opponents of gay marriage are mobilizing at the highest levels to protect.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#2 Yama

Yama
  • Islander
  • 310 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 01:04 PM

And, of course, in the United States their "marriage" is not recognized.  Which I think is a good thing.
Straight, conservative, capitalist and pro-life African-American Christian.  Any Questions?

#3 prolog

prolog

    The Merry Programmer

  • Islander
  • 1,062 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 02:22 PM

You want to give a reason why, or are you falling back on the "God says so!" defense?

#4 Shalamar

Shalamar

    Last Star to the Left and Straight on till Morning

  • Forever Missed
  • 17,644 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 02:36 PM

Yama, I see it as a very bad thing.  If two people love one another and wish to make the commitment of marriage, I believe that it is their right, no matter their genders. To hold that from them is the wrong.

My congratulations to Gus and Elmer.
The three most important R's
Respect for One's Self / Respect for Others / Responsibility for One's Words & Actions.

Posted Image

#5 Yama

Yama
  • Islander
  • 310 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 03:13 PM

Personally, I think the "God says so" defense is pretty good.  For a different issue, it was what got Dr. King involved with the civil rights movement.  (For the uninitiated, I am referring to the "coffee cup" incident.)

But more particularly, I think that marriage is one of the defining institutions of who and what we are as a society.  Perhaps more, it is one of those "customs" or "tradtions" that defines us as human.  It provides the best means of raising children and has even been correlated to individual productivity and health; even when compared with "long-term" relationships (both heterosexual and homosexual).  As such, I hold it sancrosanct and think it should be limited to a man and a woman.

And at the risk of generating the ire of other members of this forum -- as if I have not done that already  :devil:  --  once we have expanded the definition of marriage to include gay couples, I do not see how we can, on principle, exclude polygamy or polyandry.  In fact, unseemly as it may appear, most of the rational used can also be used to support pedophilic and pederastic relationships.  And if you don't believe me regarding the last bit, then you haven't listened to the rational given by such groups as NAMBLA.  Aside from the horrid subject matter, they arguments they use are almost identical to wht is used to support gay and other non-traditional unions.
Straight, conservative, capitalist and pro-life African-American Christian.  Any Questions?

#6 Josh

Josh

    He stares...

  • Islander
  • 13,774 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 03:42 PM

[B]^

I know a lot of very happy polygamists. Frankly, one of the biggest problems with American society today is their intense desire to judge and place judgment on others. We would be a lot better off if people will leave other people alone and let them live their lives.

In short, if they want to marry, they should be allowed to marry.  The religious protesters place far too much value on tradition and not enough on the evolution and equality of society.
"THE UNICORNS ARE NOT TO BE TRIFLED WITH!" - John Burke.

#7 Yama

Yama
  • Islander
  • 310 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 03:54 PM

Josh, on Dec 18 2003, 08:42 PM, said:

I know a lot of very happy polygamists. Frankly, one of the biggest problems with American society today is their intense desire to judge and place judgment on others. We would be a lot better off if people will leave other people alone and let them live their lives.

In short, if they want to marry, they should be allowed to marry.  The religious protesters place far too much value on tradition and not enough on the evolution and equality of society.
^Josh, the interesting and unavoidable thing about your post above is that you have just made a moral or value judgment about "The religious protesters" and "American society" in general.

I sincerely and honestly respect your opinion -- even as I disagree with it -- but how is what you've just done any different from what you accuse them of doing?

And by the way, my argument is not that there are no happy polygamist.  It is that I don't think polygamy is best for society as a whole.  If the individual's happiness is the moral standard of society, then you must support "happy pedophiles" (which is a point I was trying to make above).
Straight, conservative, capitalist and pro-life African-American Christian.  Any Questions?

#8 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:26 PM

Where to start...

Polygamy, polyandry, homosexuality, heterosexuality...these are/have been "normal" forms of "marriage" between consenting adults in many human cultures.

I don't know why you throw in pedophiles (a pederast IS a pedophile, but one who is specifically fixated on sex with boys), because I can't think of an instance or a culture in which adults having sex with children is considered normal or acceptable (and I was an anthro major, so that's not an uninformed statement).

To add to that, I am happy to support any form of marriage between adults in which there is true commitment and no coercion.

I can't imagine any sane person condoning behavior which harms someone else, and pedophiles are at the top of my list of people with harmful behavior.

Edited by Rhea, 18 December 2003 - 04:32 PM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#9 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:32 PM

Rhea, on Dec 18 2003, 02:26 PM, said:

I don't know why you throw in pedophiles (a pederast IS a pedophile, but one who is specifically fixated on sex with boys), because I can't think of an instance or a culture in which adults having sex with children is considered normal or acceptable (and I was an anthro major, so that's not an uninformed statement).
I have no problem with homosexual marriage, but... hypothetically, if there was a culture that did accept pedophilia, would it be okay? Surely the argument has to be founded on something more than, "Well, other people are doing it, and it's accepted as normal and acceptable!".
St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#10 Josh

Josh

    He stares...

  • Islander
  • 13,774 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:33 PM

^

I don't consider it our place to judge what other cultures do but I'm conflicted on this one.

I don't know. Where do you draw the line and when does drawing the line become a hole you can't get out of?

Comparisons to the war on Iraq are not welcome.

Edited by Josh, 18 December 2003 - 04:34 PM.

"THE UNICORNS ARE NOT TO BE TRIFLED WITH!" - John Burke.

#11 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:39 PM

Place me in the line of Is it my responsibility? No then what business is it of mine what others do in their home. I just really do not care one way or the other

#12 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:42 PM

Josh, on Dec 18 2003, 03:33 PM, said:

I don't consider it our place to judge what other cultures do but I'm conflicted on this one.

I don't know. Where do you draw the line and when does drawing the line become a hole you can't get out of?

Comparisons to the war on Iraq are not welcome.
But they are inevitable when you start talking about the concepts of absolute morality vs. relativistic morality.

I am very comfortable with saying that what the Taliban did to women in Afghanistan was wrong, even if their culture said it was completely acceptable.
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#13 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:44 PM

Rovvie, I edited while you were writing. LOL!

I can't imagine any sane cuture/ethos that condones any behavior harmful to others, especially to children.

I don't comprehend why religious folks persist in linking homosexuality with pedophila, as though they were synonymous - or that acceptance of one implies acceptance of the other.

Edited by Rhea, 18 December 2003 - 04:50 PM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#14 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:45 PM

G1223, on Dec 18 2003, 03:39 PM, said:

Place me in the line of Is it my responsibility? No then what business is it of mine what others do in their home. I just really do not care one way or the other
But, for example, if you live in an apartment building and you hear your downstairs neighbor beating his wife, it is your responsibility to intervene as much as possible (whether that means calling the police or breaking in and punching the bastard's lights out). We are our brothers' and sisters' keepers.
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#15 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:50 PM

Rhea, on Dec 18 2003, 10:26 PM, said:

because I can't think of an instance or a culture in which adults having sex with children is considered normal or acceptable (and I was an anthro major, so that's not an uninformed statement).
last thought before i go to bed

It was my understanding that in ancient egypt (and in other ancient societies) incest was practiced, and also what we would consider to be sex with children.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#16 Atavus

Atavus

    Buying more stuff on eBay

  • Islander
  • 4,116 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:51 PM

Yama, on Dec 18 2003, 08:13 PM, said:

But more particularly, I think that marriage is one of the defining institutions of who and what we are as a society.
I agree with you there, but if we exclude people from joining in this kind of matrimony, which is a custom as you say, it does not make our society seem very fair or equal does it?

Perhaps a different way to look at it would be if we redefined the importance of marriage. Even in this day and age, it is frowned upon (in some western countries) if a woman gives birth to a child without being married. So, if anything, shouldn't we start by redefining marriage in people’s minds as something that is the ultimate admission of love and commitment, instead of something that makes us look good in god’s eyes or should be done because one is pregnant, as it is sadly seen by many?

If this is the case, then same sex marriages should not be excluded, or if anything, just to be fair, heterosexual marriages should be.

Quote

Perhaps more, it is one of those "customs" or "traditions" that defines us as human.
And since every heterosexual is equally as human or inhuman as a homosexual there, again, is no reason to bar anyone from being married on the basis of sexual orientation. I'm not arguing for the right for 13 year olds to marry, since in most cases, they are far from done in their mental development, but two people of legal age should be allowed to say I do, wherever, whenever to whomever.

Quote

[...]and has even been correlated to individual productivity and health; even when compared with "long-term" relationships (both heterosexual and homosexual).[...]
Really, do you happen to have those studies handy? I would be interested in reading them. :)
Avid fan of "Everybody Loves Hypno-Toad" and Sophie

3000 posts and counting! :) - 18 October 05

#17 Yama

Yama
  • Islander
  • 310 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:57 PM

Rhea, on Dec 18 2003, 09:26 PM, said:

Where to start...

Polygamy, polyandry, homosexuality, heterosexuality...these are/have been "normal" forms of "marriage" between consenting adults in many human cultures.

I don't know why you throw in pedophiles (a pederast IS a pedophile, but one who is specifically fixated on sex with boys), because I can't think of an instance or a culture in which adults having sex with children is considered normal or acceptable (and I was an anthro major, so that's not an uninformed statement).

To add to that, I am happy to support any form of marriage between adults in which there is true commitment and no coercion.

I can't imagine any sane person condoning behavior which harms someone else, and pedophiles are at the top of my list of people with harmful behavior.
Well, I am not an "anthro major" but I am a bit of a polymath and I must disagree: there were and still are cultures were sex with children was considered "normal". Read some of Plato's work on ancient Greece; he was an approving pederast.  Even today, there are still some societies which practice it.  I remember a report of a region in India where it is considered quite normal; it only became an issue when it was found that eight-year-old girls from the area were being sent marry Arab men.  Granted, the last is more an issue of coercion than "marraige" but I emphasize that the reason it brought notice was not that the girls were marrying at age eight and nine but that in this particular case, they were being transported outside of the country, India, to do so.

Maybe it depends on your definition of "child" but I do think an eight-year-old is a child.  Indeed, many people -- and not just religous zealots -- would think that fourteen-year-old is still a child but it is the age of consent in canada and many states in the United States.

And, Rhea you should really be very, very careful if you are arguing that most cultures do not accept or condone pedophila and/or child marriages as a basis for your position on gay marriages.  The reason why most cultures don't is because children are not considered capable of reproducing.  And as far as I know, a gay couple is not capable of reproducing, either.

And for the record, no, I am not saying that the sole purpose of marriage is for reproduction.  But I am saying that if you make the prohibition of child marriages somehow the norm or standard rationale, then for many of those same reasons, you must also prohibit gay marriages.  And, conversely, if you support gay marriages, you have eliminated one of the prohibitions against child marriages, etc.

I guess it comes down to how you define "child"; and my answer is, ask NAMBLA.
Straight, conservative, capitalist and pro-life African-American Christian.  Any Questions?

#18 Yama

Yama
  • Islander
  • 310 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 05:05 PM

Rhea, on Dec 18 2003, 09:44 PM, said:

Rovvie, I edited while you were writing. LOL!

I can't imagine any sane cuture/ethos that condones any behavior harmful to others, especially to children.

I don't comprehend why religious folks persist in linking homosexuality with pedophila, as though they were synonymous - or that acceptance of one implies acceptance of the other.
Why does NAMBLA (the North American Man-Boy Love Association) link homosexuality with pedophilia?

Their argument is, the same "prejudice" and "bigoted Judeo-Christian morality" that condemns homosexuality is the same "prejudice" and "bigoted Judeo-Christian morality" that condemns their pederasty.  I am curious, on what principled argument do you disagree with them?

And by the way, NAMBLA does not support "forcing" or the coercion of children.  They advocate "loving relationships" with minors.

And finally, unless someone misunderstands my position, I vehemently oppose everything NAMBLA stands for.  But I am constrained to admit, if you accept their first premises (which I do not), then their position is quite logical.
Straight, conservative, capitalist and pro-life African-American Christian.  Any Questions?

#19 Yama

Yama
  • Islander
  • 310 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 05:19 PM

Atavus, on Dec 18 2003, 09:51 PM, said:

Yama, on Dec 18 2003, 08:13 PM, said:

But more particularly, I think that marriage is one of the defining institutions of who and what we are as a society.
I agree with you there, but if we exclude people from joining in this kind of matrimony, which is a custom as you say, it does not make our society seem very fair or equal does it?

I think it's quite fair and equal.  Behaviour and practices that are not deemed beneficial to society are never regarded and protected to the same degree as those that are.

We may disagree with what benefits society but I don't think we disagree with teh fact that some things are and should be regarded differently.  To touch on my current bugaboo in this thread, if we didn't, then we would say that laws that do not allow adults to have sexual relations with children are unfair and unequal to pedophiles.  Again, NAMBLA makes that argument.

Atavus, on Dec 18 2003, 09:51 PM, said:

Even in this day and age, it is frowned upon (in some western countries) if a woman gives birth to a child without being married.

Count me among those who frown upon out-of-wedlock births.  It has devastated this society, most especially the Black community.  What's your point?

Atavus, on Dec 18 2003, 09:51 PM, said:

Yama, on Dec 18 2003, 08:13 PM, said:

Perhaps more, it is one of those "customs" or "traditions" that defines us as human.
And since every heterosexual is equally as human or inhuman as a homosexual there, again, is no reason to bar anyone from being married on the basis of sexual orientation. I'm not arguing for the right for 13 year olds to marry, since in most cases, they are far from done in their mental development, but two people of legal age should be allowed to say I do, wherever, whenever to whomever.

Okay, if they should be allowed to say "I do" then others -- including me, the government and society at large -- should be able to say, "It doesn't matter.  You're still not entitled to all the rights, privileges and benefits of heterosexual married couples."

The canard that two adults have a "right" to do whatever they want to do as long as it does not harm another person -- while it does sound very good -- is just plain silly.

To use a non-sexual example, if two adults -- of legal age, obviously -- enjoy taking baseball bats and crushing the skulls of puppies, they should be allowed to do so with impunity?

Indeed, more than that, from what you seem to be arguing, not only do they have a right to do so, but I would be wrong in condemning them.  After all, they are adults, of legal age, and they are not harming another person.

Atavus, on Dec 18 2003, 09:51 PM, said:

Yama, on Dec 18 2003, 08:13 PM, said:

[...]and has even been correlated to individual productivity and health; even when compared with "long-term" relationships (both heterosexual and homosexual).[...]
Really, do you happen to have those studies handy? I would be interested in reading them. :)

Aside from a rather extensive report from the Heritage Foundation -- which I admit I cannot find at the moment -- here is a good collection to begin with:

1.  The Alan Guttmacher Institute, "Trends in Abortion in the United States, 1973-2000," January 2003 and Andrea J. Sedlak and Dinae D. Broadhurst, The Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1996, xviii, 5-19.

2. Kelly J. Kelleher, et al., "Increasing Identification of Psychosocial Problems:1979-1996," Pediatrics 105 (June 2000): 1313-1321 and Deborah A. Dawson, "Family Structure and Children's Health and Well-Being: Data from the 1988 National Health Interview Survey on Child Health," Journal of Marriage and the Family 53 (August 1991): 573-584.

3. John S. Santelli et al., "The Association of Sexual Behaviors with Socioeconomic Status, Family Structure, and Race/Ethnicity Among U.S. Adolescents," American Journal of Public Health 90 (October 2000): 1582-1588; John P. Hoffman and Robert A. Johnson, "A National Portrait of Family Structure and Adolescent Drug Use," Journal of Marriage and the Family 60 (August 1998): 633-645; Patrick J. Darby et al., "Analysis of 112 Juveniles Who Committed Homicide: Characteristics and a Closer Look at Family Abuse," Journal of Family Violence 13 (1998):365-374; Judith Rubenstein et al., "Suicidal Behavior in Adolescents: Stress and Protection in Different Family Contexts," American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 68 (1998): 274-284.

4. Elizabeth Thomson et al., "Family Structure and Child Well-Being: Economic Resources vs. Parental Behaviors," Social Forces 73 (September 1994): 221-242.

5. Paul R. Amato and Danelle D. DeBoer, "The Transmission of Marital Instability Across Generations: Relationship Skills or Commitment to Marriage?" Journal of Marriage and Family 63 (November 2001): 1038-1051; Alfred DeMaris and K. Vaninadha Rao, "Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Stability in the United States: A Reassessment," Journal of Marriage and the Family 54 (February 1992): 178-190; Katherine Trent and Scott J. South "Sociodemographic Status, Parental Background, Childhood Family Structure, and Attitudes Toward Family Formation," Journal of Marriage and the Family 54 (May 1992): 427-439.

6. Nadine F. Marks and James D. Lambert, "Marital Status Continuity and Change Among Young and Midlife Adults," Journal of Family Issues 19 (November 1998): 652-686 and Catherine E. Ross et al., "The Impact of the Family on Health: The Decade in Review," Journal of Marriage and the Family 52 (November 1990): 1059-1078.

7. U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2001, Table No. 666 and Linda J. Waite and Maggie Gallagher, The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially (New York: Doubleday, 2000) 97-123.
8. Edward O. Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1994) p.364.

9. Sonia Miner Salari and Bret M. Baldwin, "Verbal, Physical, and Injurious Aggression Among Intimate Couples Over Time," Journal of Family Issues 23 (May 2002): 523-550 and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Intimate Partner Violence, National Crime Victimization Survey, May 2000, 4-5, 11.

10. Sonia Miner Salari and Bret M. Baldwin, "Verbal, Physical, and Injurious Aggression Among Intimate Couples Over Time" and Andrea J. Sedlak and Dinae D. Broadhurst, The Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect.

11. Terrence P. Thornberry et al., "Family Disruption and Delinquency," Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice, September 1999.

12. U.S. Census Bureau, "Historical Poverty Tables," Table 4 and June O'Neill and M. Anne Hill, "Gaining Ground? Measuring the Impact of Welfare Reform on Welfare and Work," The Manhattan Institute, Civic Report 17.

13. Corey L.M. Keyes, "The Mental Health Continuum: From Languishing to Flourishing in Life," Journal of Health and Social Behavior 43 (2002): 207-222 as cited in The Family in America New Research, October 2002.

14. Just about anything by Barbara Dafoe Whitehead

Edited by Yama, 18 December 2003 - 05:57 PM.

Straight, conservative, capitalist and pro-life African-American Christian.  Any Questions?

#20 Atavus

Atavus

    Buying more stuff on eBay

  • Islander
  • 4,116 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 05:21 PM

^^Wow, that's quite an extensive list. Thanks for typing it up. I'll look at it in more detail tomorrow when I have some time. :)
Avid fan of "Everybody Loves Hypno-Toad" and Sophie

3000 posts and counting! :) - 18 October 05



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: LGBT, Canada, same-sex marriage, eloped

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users