Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Dept. of Two Cheers for Various Things

We Won
We Won't Lose

This entry was originally posted at http://kaffyr.dreamwidth.org/222394.html?mode=reply, where there are currently comment count unavailable comments. You can comment there or here; I watch both.


( 6 comments — Leave a comment )
May. 10th, 2012 05:04 am (UTC)
How much you wanna bet they worded it so people were confused? There is just too much shifty going on here for me to like...ugh.


*Adds to post*

May. 10th, 2012 05:13 am (UTC)
The sad thing is that I think everyone going in to the voting booth in North Carolina knew exactly what they were voting for, and that is tragic. The regressive cultural impulses in North Carolina appear to cross race and gender lines, so that people who've historically been oppressed, and should know better, like poor people, female-type people and non-white-type people all seemed to want to vote against not-heteronormative people.

It's always the truth: the ones in power divide us, make us fight and hate each other, keep us all down, and keep themselves in the penthouse.

But Obama? Yeah. I'm glad he finally returned to his original stance.
May. 10th, 2012 05:32 am (UTC)
Actually, according to this article, a bunch of people have no idea what they actually voted on/for. Hooray for stupid uninformed people in large groups. :/
May. 10th, 2012 05:55 am (UTC)
Thanks for the links, and boo to me, as a supposedly informed person (a reporter, no less), for missing this well-publicized part of the story.

(However, the overall numbers of the win still suggests to me that a disquieting number of people knew exactly what they were voting for; that their bias against equal rights for one group outweighed any awareness they might have had that the amendment for which they were voting also affected other groups.)
May. 10th, 2012 04:58 pm (UTC)
Oh, yeah, I wasn't even beginning to say that *everyone* was blameless in their prejudiced voting. Some people did indeed know exactly what the deal was. But they were helped by the people who really couldn't be arsed to pay attention. Guess that's always the way . . .
(Deleted comment)
May. 11th, 2012 03:59 am (UTC)
Goodness, don't worry about ignorance - even if you are living in the States, it can be frustratingly hard to grasp.

Obama's interview is an important symbolic gesture - incredibly important, since this is the first time an American president has come out in support of same-sex marriage - but it changes no laws. Most laws concerning who can and can't get married are made at the state level here, and far too many states have laws and/or constitutional amendments (state constitutions) forbidding same sex marriage and, in some cases, even forbidding civil unions. There are some federal laws that apply to marriage, largely having to do with taxes and how spouses can get government pensions or benefits when their spouse dies, and there is, of course the federal Defense of Marriage Act. None of those have been changed one iota by Obama's statement.

The ban to which the newspaper cover refers is a particularly mean-spirited state level ban on marriage and civil unions, approved in the state of North Carolina.

Still and all, Obama's statement is, as I said, an important symbolic and cultural step that could help, or at least signal the inevitability of eventually giving proper civil rights to everyone.

Folks with a greater and better grasp of the system and situation here, please feel free to add and correct.
( 6 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

March 2019

Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Akiko Kurono