Compare and contrast; one of my high school english teachers drilled that into my head. ?Compare and contrast: Slave rights and gay rights; the contrasts are easy, the comparisons are profound. Slaves could not get legally married either. They could not create and sign contracts, and what is marriage mostly (legally speaking) but a huge contract with thousands of rights and responsibilities. ?Navanethem Pillay, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights spoke there last year saying, “That just like apartheid laws that criminalized sexual relations between different races, laws against homosexuality are increasingly becoming recognized as anachronistic and inconsistent both with international law and with traditional values of dignity, inclusion, and respect for all.”? Apartheid: A system of laws applied to one category of citizens in order to isolate them and keep them from having privileges and opportunities given to all others. ?Stop gay apartheid.
Posted: Apr 6, 2009 at 10:16 am
· @Reply
· [Flag?]
This map would be stronger if it distinguished between DOMAs and constitutional amendments, so we could see which states can pursue this in the courts.
I suppose I should also state for the record that comparing being unable to get married to slavery and/or apartheid does our cause no favors whatsoever.
Posted: Apr 6, 2009 at 11:27 am
· @Reply
· [Flag?]
That map’s a little confusing. I mean, how are they supposed to color California, which has domestic partnerships (aka civil unions), a marriage ban, and a pending court verdict? Or Nevada, which has a marriage ban and pending domestic partner legislation? Or Vermont, which has civil unions and pending marriage legislation?
Posted: Apr 6, 2009 at 11:40 am
· @Reply
· [Flag?]
Compare and contrast; one of my high school english teachers drilled that into my head. ?Compare and contrast: Slave rights and gay rights; the contrasts are easy, the comparisons are profound. Slaves could not get legally married either. They could not create and sign contracts, and what is marriage mostly (legally speaking) but a huge contract with thousands of rights and responsibilities. ?Navanethem Pillay, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights spoke there last year saying, “That just like apartheid laws that criminalized sexual relations between different races, laws against homosexuality are increasingly becoming recognized as anachronistic and inconsistent both with international law and with traditional values of dignity, inclusion, and respect for all.”? Apartheid: A system of laws applied to one category of citizens in order to isolate them and keep them from having privileges and opportunities given to all others. ?Stop gay apartheid.
This map would be stronger if it distinguished between DOMAs and constitutional amendments, so we could see which states can pursue this in the courts.
I suppose I should also state for the record that comparing being unable to get married to slavery and/or apartheid does our cause no favors whatsoever.
That map’s a little confusing. I mean, how are they supposed to color California, which has domestic partnerships (aka civil unions), a marriage ban, and a pending court verdict? Or Nevada, which has a marriage ban and pending domestic partner legislation? Or Vermont, which has civil unions and pending marriage legislation?
There’s a much better map on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.....in_USA.svg
@boarderthom: Weren’t you posting this exact clause under a different name extensively throughout the site a few weeks ago?
Yeah I agree–the NPR map SUCKS…. For 1) it hasn’t been updated with the results of the 2008 elections on AZ and FL.
I like this map much better
This map looks a hell of a lot better than it did a few years ago.
Yes there’s a sea of blue but look at that big, fat, marriage equality state slap bang in the middle.