Sure, there’s a lot of local politics, but from Trenton to Washington to Hollywood, there’s lots of other news going on too. Marriage equality advocates have gathered at the statehouse today for a potentially historic vote to legalize gay marriage in NJ, while Gov. Christie says he would veto such a bill, and suggests a statewide referendum in November instead. Meanwhile, the Oscar nominations are out and tonight is President Obama’s third State of the Union address.
What was the best picture in 2011? Do you think gay marriage should go to voters in November? Tell us what you think about this, or anything else: this is your open thread.
I believe gay partners should have equal rights, but marriage is between a man and a woman. Civil unions, full health rights, sharing their finanaces, etc, but I don’t see why this institution can’t be preserved for a man and woman as it was intended. The interest group that really wants gay marriage to pass is divorce lawyers – sad to say but their business will be booming even more than it is now.
Let the people vote. Although what will probably happen is the people will defeat it and then some activist judge will over turn the peoples will and legislate from the bench making it legal. We’ve seen this before. No reason to go to the movies when It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia is on every night.
1000 days today without a federal budget. How’s that for fiscal responsibility? You can’t be over budget, I suppose, if you never propose a budget.
“preserved for a man and woman as it was intended.”
Intended by…..? Name your religious entity here.
“The interest group that really wants gay marriage to pass is divorce lawyers – sad to say but their business will be booming even more than it is now.”
Yes, because straight people don’t get divorced.
Hooey. If two people want to get married, let them. It’s hilarious that all the “small government” people want laws that restrict personal behavior but are all for less regulation of business even when that regulation protects people. Odd alternate reality we live in these days. When someone like Newt can get on his moral high horse….laughable.
I agree with Gurl. You can’t have some citizens more equal than others when it comes to rights. What business is it of mine–or others–if two adults who profess love for one another want to get married? How does this chip away at my own marriage, your marriage? Answer: It doesn’t. So yeah, I hope it passes but with Christie at the helm, it probably won’t.
I’m a Netflix gal, so unfortunately, I didn’t get to see a lot of the 2011 flicks. Hope to rent some before the awards.
As far as Obama’s address, I am sure he will tell us that everything is fine and hunky-dory and to just hang on and hope for change, at least until November 2012.
If there’s one thing that Obama has been resoundingly successful at, is galvanizing a tremendous number of Americans to fervently hope for change in 2012!
“When someone like Newt can get on his moral high horse….laughable
“I think you can substitute a lot of politicians names in there, not just newt. Including a former President. Plenty to go around on both sides of the aisle.”
Ha, yes! I am anxious to see how he’ll explain his decision to veto the pipeline bill. If he even addresses that.
Wow, the right wing is out in force today. AM radio on the fritz?
“Ha, yes! I am anxious to see how he’ll explain his decision to veto the pipeline bill. If he even addresses that.”
He won’t explain it. 20,000 Jobs lost. Who needs jobs? Who needs non Middle East sources of oil? It’s all for the environment! But, whoops, it isn’t. Canada will sell all the oil to China and burn a considerable amount of it just to deliver the oil.
This president is a fool.
I do not disciminate….I love everyone, however Jesus said that men and women will become confused and go with their own sex, its a sin. I cannot go along with same sex marriage when it so blatenly is clear that it is wrong. I will not support it, but I know we are ALL sinners and fall short. I vote NO!
Imagine if the issue of school integration were put before the voters in Alabama in 1954. Is that how rights issues are decided? Public majority? The word inalienable keeps coming to mind.
Yes for gay marriage. Civil unions are simply not the same as “married”. To stick with civil unions is to be satisfied with separate but equal. There is no way a gay marriage threatens the institution of marraige or a straight couples marriage. Gay people just want the same benefits and rights as straight married couples – no more and no less!
ROC – you are 100% right! Sometimes it takes legistlation to do what’s right and not necessarily put it out to the people for a vote. If we did that in the 60′s we wouldn’t have the civil rights laws we have today!
And for those who think it is not right I agree. Gay should not have to pay the government the same taxes, pay more for partner benefits, and not have the same rights in terms of their legal rights. That is not right. So maybe another angle is to just provide a tax break if you are gay. I guess it might be a significant tax cut as we all should place high value on our legal rights….
Or maybe there is too much invested in the word “marriage” and that is the issue. Let the religious institutions do the “marriages” and for the rights granted by the federal and states laws, EVERYONE gets a civil union (probably a more apt name for what the laws grant), that way everyone gets the same right and marriages remain to be between whatever the religious institutions think its right. This is about all law abiding citizens ability to have the same rights (although straight criminals are allowed to marry..intereting).
The pipeline is a non-issue, ROC. As we see reactionaries tripping all over each other as to who hates global warming scientists and Darwinists the most, and who wants to drill baby drill the quickest, and who wants the inalienable rights granted by the flattering glow of incandescent bulbs in the worst way, those Brits over there in Europe are doing something remarkable. Now that’s the kind of “jobs” we need.
http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2IcqkK/inhabitat.com/uks-first-marine-energy-park-to-harvest-27-gigawatts-of-wave-power-by-2050/
This is too hot a potato for me to tangle with, allthough I do believe to live and let live. What I wonder are why there are seemingly so many many more Gays these days, than just 5 yers ago. Parades in NYC have estamated the Gay Parade numbers at over 10,000. (and growing)
Why ?
Sandy, I don’t think there are more gay folks but I think more and more gays and lesbians are becoming more comfortable coming out.
I am not a christian or jew or moslem. you god nor your sin apply to me. my partner and I have been together 17 years. We are asking for the same rights other couples have. Health insurance etc. Heterosexual minorities who long for justice and equality are some of the first to vocal against our marriage. Christians bash us as if the crusades are back and they are fighting for their lives. Maybe we should bring back the Nazi death camps where they gassed Homosexuals to death, only this will make all these christians and heterosexual minorities happy. They have their rights, no need to worry about anyone else now. You think this is too rash a post, well try dealing with being considered a second class person, and being bullied and beaten up for half your life.
“I do not disciminate”
Sure you do if you don’t think gay families should have the same rights as you. It was not too long ago that miscegenation was not legal. Many parts of the bible frown on it.
Let’s be very careful before we all join hands and sing, “Jesus Loves Me”.
“. Many parts of the bible frown on it.”
Miscegenation? I think that’s an ignorant statement. Race mixing is not mentioned at all in the bible. It’s inter-religious marriage that’s frowned upon. Christians marrying non-Christians in the New Testament and Jews marrying pagans in the Old Testament. In fact Moses married a black woman!
I think young couples should not be able to be wed. After the age of 25 hetro-sexual and same sex couples should be free to wed, same rights and laws. The only tragedy I see are children stuck in dead end marriages…
Personally, I’m just wondering why those most irate above about the denial of the rite and tie of marriage never seem to agitate for similar freedoms and tolerances in Islamic majority nations. Even, as well there, for some revision of divorce laws. No takers? Not even you at your most wimpishly jocose, Spiro T.?
As for the State of the Union address, which is about y\to start shortly, in so many ways our sitting President is an extremely touchy and self-defensive boob, installed in a position way above his pay grade. (As might have been evident upon careful examination of his record in both the Illinois and US senates. No one else wondered about all those times he merely mystifyingly voted “present?” Really?)
What’s interesting is how so many of his battered, frazzled defenders fall back upon the issue of Obama’s “intelligence.” Intelligent he may well be, (even as Jimmy Carter would surely be even quicker to assert his intellectual superiority over his Republican and Democratic enemies alike). But intelligence with some crucial governing smarts, some genuine vision that doesn’t represent mere cant. Obama is no Harry Truman, in other words. Nor is he an LBJ. He is a probably smart yet mainly empty suit. Goodat rhetoric when armed with a teleprompter, yet otherwise very average indeed when it comes to genuine political ability and vision.
As well, at least “Justified” is on later.
herb—”Plenty to go around on both sides of the aisle.”
nice try—ok, not really. sad try. What makes Newt so special is that, unlike his contemporaries, he is not simply a hypocrite—he consistently has defined the word for our times. he takes down jim wright and then gets nailed for the exact same ethics violation. He pillories bill clinton while he’s having his own affair. he wont sign the Marriage Vow, but promises to constitutionally ban gay marriage (there’s “small government” for you, eh?) it’s an unfunny, endless joke. i liked Newt better when he sucked off Fannie Mae’s teat in irrelevance.
ROC—”Imagine if the issue of school integration were put before the voters in Alabama in 1954. Is that how rights issues are decided?”
be still my beating heart!! good for you!
“Miscegenation? I think that’s an ignorant statement.”
i wish that were true. sadly, i have seen plenty of ministers cite Genesis 1:25 (“according to their kinds”) as a defense for banning race mixing. perhaps you should not toss the “i” word around so freely.
“I’m just wondering why those most irate above about the denial of the rite and tie of marriage never seem to agitate for similar freedoms and tolerances in Islamic majority nations”
cathar, i’d venture to say you’re not wondering at all. you know why. it’s the same reason you don’t. please don’t pretend the right is leading some sort of human rights crusade on this issue. that would be even bigger nonsense than what you attempt above.
Hahahaha ROC what you don’t know is a lot. I have a house full of dog eared books that say otherwise. Silly man.
I think heterosexual divorce rates, especially celebrities w their short-term sham marriages, do more to harm the idea of marriage than two consenting adults of the same gender.
I just want my danged light bulbs back!!
The government shouldn’t be in the marriage business at all for the same reason that the government should not issue licenses for baptisms and bar mitzvahs. Marriage as most people define it is a religious construct. What the gov’t calls marriage is a legal relationship that defines joint ownership of property, legal custody of children, estate law, decision making for an incapacitated partner, etc. I believe the government should issue civil union licenses, not marriage licenses, to all, including same sex partners, and leave the marriages to the religious institutions. And your church, synagogue, mosque, etc. has the right to discriminate as to who can get married within their institution. If you want a religious marriage, go to a church.
“Personally, I’m just wondering why those most irate above about the denial of the rite and tie of marriage never seem to agitate for similar freedoms and tolerances in Islamic majority nations. Even, as well there, for some revision of divorce laws.”
Cathar, that is because we have little, if any, control about what happens in other nations in regards to marriage and human rights. We can and DO, however, have the right to protest against what goes on here and we do so at the polls. No, things don’t happen overnight but if we make enough noise and fuss, it will happen eventually.
Equally important, our government CAN pick and choose with whom to do business. I, personally, would not want to do business with ANY country that treats its citizens the way most Islamic nations treat theirs. Forget marriage laws, their human rights records are reprehensible. So, please, someone tell me why our President chooses to do business with such countries while voting against the option to become independent of foreign oil while providing jobs for many Americans. So far, I haven’t heard any cogent arguments in his defense.
Ditto Mrs M I’ll wait along with you for an answer to your question.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned “The Artist” on this open thread. It’s got my vote for best picture.
Hey Maobama where are the jobs? Oh wait, I found them.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/us-bridges-roads-built-chinese-firms-14594513?tab=9482930?ion=1206853&playlist=14594944
Yes, Herb…why are we giving jobs to the Chinese when thousands of our own citizens are out of work? If anyone needs any more reasons not to re-elect Obama, there you have it.
“Maobama’? Herb, really. And cranky pants, you do go on about such nonsense. The topic is gay rights HERE, so why would we all start posting about similar rights in Islamic countries?
Oil independence and blame for losing jobs to China. We’re really working the talking points today. Wonder why jobs are going to China? Read on …
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/business/apple-america-and-a-squeezed-middle-class.html?pagewanted=all
Workers’ dorms, 12-hour workdays, uniforms…sounds a bit like a concentration camp but with “pay,” and I use that word lightly.
For those of you who won’t click on the link or read it because it’s from NYTimes, here’s the gist of why high tech companies outsource:
That’s because nothing like Foxconn City exists in the United States.
The facility has 230,000 employees, many working six days a week, often spending up to 12 hours a day at the plant. Over a quarter of Foxconn’s work force lives in company barracks and many workers earn less than $17 a day. When one Apple executive arrived during a shift change, his car was stuck in a river of employees streaming past. “The scale is unimaginable,” he said.
Foxconn employs nearly 300 guards to direct foot traffic so workers are not crushed in doorway bottlenecks. The facility’s central kitchen cooks an average of three tons of pork and 13 tons of rice a day. While factories are spotless, the air inside nearby teahouses is hazy with the smoke and stench of cigarettes.
Foxconn Technology has dozens of facilities in Asia and Eastern Europe, and in Mexico and Brazil, and it assembles an estimated 40 percent of the world’s consumer electronics for customers like Amazon, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola, Nintendo, Nokia, Samsung and Sony.
“They could hire 3,000 people overnight,” said Jennifer Rigoni, who was Apple’s worldwide supply demand manager until 2010, but declined to discuss specifics of her work. “What U.S. plant can find 3,000 people overnight and convince them to live in dorms?”
Golly, Martta, what should be done? Require the companies to hire American? That would be interfering with the free market. Most big corporations pay no US Federal tax, so you can’t pull the tax reduction lever. US job training? Sounds like another entitlement to me. Try to take the lead in developing industries like low-carbon energy. Too expensive and unnecessary since we have so much coal and oil to burn.
Interesting article but I don’t agree with the generalization that we don’t have the manpower or the skills here in America to do those jobs. What we don’t have are Americans (most of them anyway) that would work under those conditions described in the article. We also don’t live in a Communist country with the Communist mindset. So it’s a conundrum, indeed.