It’s a question that can only begin to be addressed in D.C, Iowa, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire and most of the rest of the developed world.
gastorgrabsays
It’s a silly article.
What is it like to be ‘me’ as compared to being ‘you’? How the heck could anyone answer that question?
How many ‘points of view’ does each person have?
If a tree falls in the forest……
.
Michigan-Mattsays
Vince… those states and in the households of SS partners who have been able to legally construct a “marriage” in spirit, if not quite in name. MM-partner and I have done so to protect our relationships and assets and future… others could as well in many states, if they wanted to.
We call ourselves married and our parish priest blessed our 16 yr union at the end of November… in church, in vestments, in front of our friends and family.
Marriage is a state of bliss and opportunity borne of purposeful partners. And no one can say no to those who want to achieve it.
Michigan-Mattsays
BTW gastor, long coupled SS partners generally are better adjusted and nicer to others than single and still predatory, slavishly self-centered gays-as-hunter types.
The shields, walls, protective armaments and insecurity are gone… and the need to fill the hollow, senseless and emotional void in their lives with self-affirming gestures of ego-centric acts gets replaced with true love.
It works. Try it. It isn’t silly. Heteros have long known that marriage is a civilizing force for good in men. It works great on all gays, too… except for Rosie O’Donnell.
Is there a practical difference between marrying a man and marrying a woman?
David in N.O.says
To echo Matt, we consider ourselves married as well and have for over 25 years now. We had a commitment ceremony (we are Episcopal) 20 years ago.
My 2 cents worth, is that being married keeps me centered and grounded in a way I might not be if alone. I’m certain without him I would be mighty miserable.
Vince in WeHosays
MM> If your partner was a non-citizen and got deported, your “state of bliss” would do nothing to save his ass from being shipped out. Please explain how it would.
“single and still predatory, slavishly self-centered gays-as-hunter types.”
I think yes, it does apply to gay men too. Generally when people are in relationships that are stable and they know they have somewhere to turn, they feel comfortable and confident enough not to resort to nastiness with others.
@ Vince in Weho: What’s a nice gay lib doing in a place like this? Don’t tell anyone at Mickey’s I’m one of THEM (those homocons), or I might face a drubbing at the office. By the way, my psychiatrist says hello; I told him about you and he says you are probably suffering from some personality disorder listed in the DSMV. I know you like numbers but I’m sorry I don’t have the specific code handy.
@everyone else, Long-term emotional security does wonders for people. We all need it. That’s an obvious point. Sometimes, though, married or coupled people can become snobbish and clannish and exclusive, which is why I’m not really big on going to dinner parties for married couples. I like being around single people or unconventionally coupled folks; they may be a bit cattier (like our friend Vince in WeHo), but they are often easier for me to converse with because they aren’t as worried about keeping up appearances.
This is the big choice the gay folks face, right? Do you want to remain a unique community or do you want to move to Orange County, buy a house, and become suburban and bourgeois like so many straight couples?
Michigan-Mattsays
The Griper> what’s the effect of having kids?
I can also answer that one, Griper. It’s stabilizing, draws out the nurturing abilities of SS parents, it reinforces the relationship is not ego-centric but centered on the welfare of others… and on and on.
One of the worst attributes str8s peg to gays is the over indulgent, self-centered, me-cultured fascination that gays have with the man in the mirror… marriage and kids does a great job of keeping those selfish impulses in check –if you’re going to be good at it, that is.
Michigan-Mattsays
Vince, if my partner was an illegal I’d be working my ass off to get him/her legal and do whatever was necessary and legal to maintain that status… but since few illegals who do NOT commit crimes are rarely deported in America, I’d think you might do a better job of picking a realistic scenario that tests a constructed marriage or domestic union.
I wasn’t speaking of you, personally, when I said gay men are uber-selfish… but living in WeHo, my hunch is you’re probably so deep in self-centered narcissistic men you’d have trouble getting face time in a mirror in the morning.
ILoveCapitalismsays
Vince, don’t mind the unnecessary (and in some cases, sadly-all-too-habitual) poo-flinging that is coming at you from certain quarters.
I gathered as your main point in @1 and 2, that we’ll know more about marriage’s effects on gay men when more gay men have it. And/or when someone studies it in states where gay men do have it. Your point is fair.
It is equally fair to point out in response, that gay men can be married for practical purposes if they want to be, regardless of whether their State has gay marriage. No person (or couple) should hold their breath waiting for State recognition, before they move forward in their lives. Especially in CA which has a form of gay civil unions that is the equal of marriage for nearly all State (CA) purposes.
Clearly, there are a number of different, fair points to be made on this topic. In regards to the second one that I just re-stated: one would hope that, if gay individual X truly has been made ‘less egocentric’ and better by his LTR, he could show rather less nastiness/defensiveness in how he presents his point to you.
AJsays
While the actual emotions and commitment involved in marriage is a very real and important part of the relationship, unfortunately having the state recognize it is very important as well. And unfortunately, even when not committing crimes, too many gay couples are separated because of immigration laws. It’s a VERY real situation.
While being in a committed relationship is the most important aspect of marriage, too often it’s not enough for thousands of loving gay couples out there.
ok michigan-matt, i’ll accept that answer to my comment. now, one more question, did that study factor out that stabilizing effect before coming to the conclusion it did on marriage?
Michigan-Mattsays
ILC> “Vince, don’t mind the unnecessary (and in some cases, sadly-all-too-habitual) poo-flinging that is coming at you from certain quarters.”
Ahhh, the ol’ ax grinding schtick still at the ready… with a knuckle-dragging pettiness that makes QueenNancy look warm and personal by comparison. Sigh. Once again, ILC, please reference the two letters found in Vince’s comments at #8… some things with you never change. I shudder at the level of personal animus you have towards others that makes your vendetta-prone traits so pronounced.
Griper, to answer your question, it’s a little of both… you might want to read the authors’ conclusions; here:
The money quote, on point: “There are many possible explanations
for such findings. Perhaps less antisocial men
simply make more attractive marital partners and are thus
more likely to be selected for marriage. Alternately, it may
be that marriage is a less attractive option for men who
engage in higher levels of antisocial behaviors, and they
are thus less likely to select into marriage. The latter possibility
would be consistent with the theory of the active
gene-environment correlation (in which individuals select
into environments consistent with their genotype31,32),
a well-known theory thought to underlie mate
selection in general. Regardless, given that marriage also
appears to facilitate desistence from antisocial behavior,
future research should seek to distinguish between and
better understand these selection processes.”
Remember, this was a study by behavioral geneticists… like economists, behavioral geneticists rarely reach the same conclusion on anything.
Heliotropesays
Why shouldn’t committed monogamy be a plus for the happiness of couples of men, women, man and woman or woman and house cat? It is not the certificate that does magic, it is the commitment.
My wife and I love how Oscar Levant defined marriage: The triumph of habit over hate. Look, commitment takes effort. You have to break through the annoyances of your partner in favor of the communion of spirit and understanding that underlie the union itself. That leads to the happiness of knowing that love and understanding awaits even your dumbest moments. However, it is possible to overwhelm love and understanding with abuse, intolerance, sloth, and any number of self-centered vices.
It is up to you. If your partner is a free agent then you have a problem. Rather than a union, you have a contest. I doubt that the habit of thinking and acting for the union will overcome the narcissism of the one or both of you.
ILoveCapitalismsays
ILC blah blah blah
And, the unnecessary MM poo-flinging continues. A thread wouldn’t be complete without it. Thanks buddy! 🙂
ILoveCapitalismsays
So, back on topic:
Does [married men being nicer] apply to gay men too?
Despite the counter-examples of some gay men out there talking about their marriages… Eric Erbelding, perhaps others… I still believe the answer may be “yes”, as gay men would also be subject to the reasons given in the study:
1) That nicer people are more likely to get married.
2) That people tend to be made nicer by being married.
Clearly both of those are “on average”, not absolutes.
Vince in WeHosays
ILC >> Thank you. I”ll heed your advice.
MM’s spending time responding to you rather than addressing AJ’s valid points speaks volumes. Additionally, his generalizations about single GM like myself say even more.
thank you for your answer, matt. and i did read the co0nclusion prior to my questions. it was that conclusion which prompted my questions in the first place.
and in agreement with you i must conclude that the study has very little value on the merits of it. thus i’d never use it as evidence for any argument when the topic of marriage is being discussed.
ILoveCapitalismsays
MM’s spending time responding to you
Some of his comments can be OK, but it freaks him out when people disagree with him. If he’s in his poo-flinging mode (i.e. being unfair, impugning people instead of responding to their points), I may jump in to divert his attention elsewhere, i.e. to me. I don’t mind, and it almost always works. He seems to have granted me some odd power to trigger him.
Michigan-Mattsays
ILC, that’s some hubris and chutzpah on your part to claim others are taking the thread away from the valid theme –you’re the guy who can’t seem to get over being called on the carpet… complete with near-stalkerish behavior of going back yrs into the past to revisit issues you felt weren’t aired sufficiently to your special benefit.
I’ll give you this, ILC, you grind those ol’ axes to where there’s nothing but 1/2 a handle left… over and over. Poo-flinging while claiming others are at fault. It’s gotta be a social pathology the way you practice it.
Vince’s point was addressed, in case you missed it while standing at the sharpening stone with your ax handle. But that’s ok… we’re used to the ax grinding schtick. It’s predictable and pedantic.
Lesliesays
A hodgepodge of comments: Elizabeth Edwards – classy, driven and someone for your heart to cry out for; Barrack Hussein Obama – a whiny, egotistical little freak; Democrats – the ultimate party of “No”; The Republicans – get more balls baby; DADT, I don’t care what sexual persuasion you are , if you defend our nation, I RESPECT and LOVE you! Amen and Amen,………
ILoveCapitalismsays
See Vince? There it is!
ILoveCapitalismsays
hubris and chutzpah
No, just reality.
I haven’t taken the thread off topic, MM. You have.
ILC >> Are nut-jobs the exception or the rule on gaypatriot? I’ve only been here a few days and American Elephant, R.O. Lopez and Michigan Matt are already on the list.
By the way, am I the only one who has read AJ’s links? No one is mentioning them. AJ seems to have called MM “on the carpet” (to phrase MM) with MM’s post #15. Yet, he remains mum.
Bobbiesays
@AJ There’s a very simple solution to couples being separated because of immigration laws.
Follow the law.
rustysays
Um, I thought that if a male US citizen marries a woman from a foreign country and vice-versa, there are protections for the foreign born partner. I remember that folk who marry a national, they can then take steps to become a naturalized citizen.
Vince in WeHosays
Rusty >> There are those protections even for straight people who don’t “follow the law” in reference to post #32.
For example, if you are a non-U.S. citizen whose visa (work or otherwise) has expired and you are living here illegally, and find someone to opposite sex marry you, pass all the initial evaluations, within 3 years, you can obtain U.S. citizenship. I’ve been asked to get married on three different occasions in the four years I’ve been in L.A. And, in all three instances (two Israeli’s and one Australian), they eventually found someone else to marry them and began the process. It happens ALL the time.
ILoveCapitalismsays
Vince: The older I get, the more I see that everyone is nutty, to someone else. I must confess that I am have neither the ability nor the desire to defend 2 of the names you mentioned. But I will say that there are a lot of good folks here and some of my best friends are gay conservatives.
For myself, I eschew the “conservative” label because I am a libertarian on the social issues. Some conservatives tell me I’m right to draw that distinction, i.e. I’m not really one of them. For example, I put zero value on tradition – except as it may serve to protect liberty (which means my real value is liberty alone). Other conservatives see my conservative-leaning stands on fiscal and foreign policy issues and tell me that I have indeed crossed over to the Dark Side, with them 🙂 And some Democrats claim I am insanely conservative. Whatever.
Political labels aside, then you get into the personality issues. I have noticed, as you have, that a few right-leaning commentors on this blog get very intense, when met with disagreement. While others handle it better. Complicating all sides of that equation, is that blog-commenting in general tends to be a pastime, even a blood sport. I tend to be on both sides of it, as I will let commenting be mellow/respectful if the other person does, but also get into the personality confrontations if the other person does. Let’s leave it at that.
Vince, while I might caution you about getting too far into ILC’s echo chamber here (it is, afterall, a seductive little ploy)… but, of course, you’re free to do what you want — as are most here.
Sorry to have missed AJ’s “important” point about intrnl gay couples being separated because of Eric Holder not responding to a core democrat constituency… but seriously, you think that’s really a big issue to our community?? With all the other issues like gay adoption, workplace rules, domestic partner benefits, teen suicides, state constitutional provisions against SS marriage, et al? Look carefully at the deductive study by UCLA’s law center… the 24k figure is an estimate… my gut hunch, given my experience of living in a densely immigrant-heavy university town, is the number is far, far, far lower than the pro-gay law center estimates.
It is important to non-American gays caught in the dilemma of having to be separated for 6 months from their get-out-of-jail-free-card American partner… that’s a burden? If it’s true love, nothing can stop it, right?
But AJ’s and your focus raises a much more important and larger question. No one will contend that our immigration laws and rules are objective or prudent. We’ve got 25-40 yrs of pro-immigration advocacy groups literally whittling down nearly every law and rule with the intention of making them toothless and unenforceable –for immigration lawyers and clients, that’s always a “win”. The same is true here –and it’s destroying our rule of law and the immigration system almost as fast the Mexican drug cartels. Like I said, if my partner were faced with the dilemma, I’d work to get it corrected… not work to undermine the system.
Gays could have pressed the Obama Admin to extend to gay partners –not married gays, just partners– the same consideration afforded with married hetero couples with immigration issues… absent DOMA references. They didn’t because gayLeft advocacy groups who think this is a critical issue of worldwide justice were patently ineffective in lobbying for the change. It’s done on a case-by-case basis and that’s hardly an effective way to manage our immigration standards. We need better leaders in our community; not more carve-out provisions in federal and state law to afford us special protections.
Frankly, to me, it’s about as important an issue to our community as gay hegemony and discrimination in muslim countries… we got bigger fish to fry in our community and far more important issues that can truly advance gay freedom.
The_Livewiresays
MI-Matt,
Actually I know of a straight couple where the wife emmigrated to England because her English husband *couldn’t* immigrate here, so it’s not like it’s a slam dunk either.
ILoveCapitalismsays
seductive
That’s a new one. MM has called me tons of things; never yet that.
So, president hissy-fit dipset from his press conference today. I’d suggest that that is conduct unbefitting a president, but certain people hate it when the immaturity and petulance of their Dear Leader is commented upon.
Vince in WeHosays
V the K >> Stay on topic, will ya?
ILoveCapitalismsays
hehe 🙂
anon23532says
Not sure to the question, but for straight men, their wives turn bitchier. Having just seen Sex and City 2, there’s nothing but cattiness from the women.
Vince in WeHosays
I hear wives in general start withholding blowjobs once married. Don’t know if it’s true or not.
Depends on which state/country you live in.
It’s a question that can only begin to be addressed in D.C, Iowa, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire and most of the rest of the developed world.
It’s a silly article.
What is it like to be ‘me’ as compared to being ‘you’? How the heck could anyone answer that question?
How many ‘points of view’ does each person have?
If a tree falls in the forest……
.
Vince… those states and in the households of SS partners who have been able to legally construct a “marriage” in spirit, if not quite in name. MM-partner and I have done so to protect our relationships and assets and future… others could as well in many states, if they wanted to.
We call ourselves married and our parish priest blessed our 16 yr union at the end of November… in church, in vestments, in front of our friends and family.
Marriage is a state of bliss and opportunity borne of purposeful partners. And no one can say no to those who want to achieve it.
BTW gastor, long coupled SS partners generally are better adjusted and nicer to others than single and still predatory, slavishly self-centered gays-as-hunter types.
The shields, walls, protective armaments and insecurity are gone… and the need to fill the hollow, senseless and emotional void in their lives with self-affirming gestures of ego-centric acts gets replaced with true love.
It works. Try it. It isn’t silly. Heteros have long known that marriage is a civilizing force for good in men. It works great on all gays, too… except for Rosie O’Donnell.
Is there a practical difference between marrying a man and marrying a woman?
To echo Matt, we consider ourselves married as well and have for over 25 years now. We had a commitment ceremony (we are Episcopal) 20 years ago.
My 2 cents worth, is that being married keeps me centered and grounded in a way I might not be if alone. I’m certain without him I would be mighty miserable.
MM> If your partner was a non-citizen and got deported, your “state of bliss” would do nothing to save his ass from being shipped out. Please explain how it would.
“single and still predatory, slavishly self-centered gays-as-hunter types.”
Wow, you really have me pegged.
what that article didn’t point out is the effect that having kids might have an effect on social behavior.
I’ll drink to what MM & David said.
I think yes, it does apply to gay men too. Generally when people are in relationships that are stable and they know they have somewhere to turn, they feel comfortable and confident enough not to resort to nastiness with others.
“Married men are nicer” is one of those statements that cries out to be appended with “…under the sheets.”
@ Vince in Weho: What’s a nice gay lib doing in a place like this? Don’t tell anyone at Mickey’s I’m one of THEM (those homocons), or I might face a drubbing at the office. By the way, my psychiatrist says hello; I told him about you and he says you are probably suffering from some personality disorder listed in the DSMV. I know you like numbers but I’m sorry I don’t have the specific code handy.
@everyone else, Long-term emotional security does wonders for people. We all need it. That’s an obvious point. Sometimes, though, married or coupled people can become snobbish and clannish and exclusive, which is why I’m not really big on going to dinner parties for married couples. I like being around single people or unconventionally coupled folks; they may be a bit cattier (like our friend Vince in WeHo), but they are often easier for me to converse with because they aren’t as worried about keeping up appearances.
This is the big choice the gay folks face, right? Do you want to remain a unique community or do you want to move to Orange County, buy a house, and become suburban and bourgeois like so many straight couples?
The Griper> what’s the effect of having kids?
I can also answer that one, Griper. It’s stabilizing, draws out the nurturing abilities of SS parents, it reinforces the relationship is not ego-centric but centered on the welfare of others… and on and on.
One of the worst attributes str8s peg to gays is the over indulgent, self-centered, me-cultured fascination that gays have with the man in the mirror… marriage and kids does a great job of keeping those selfish impulses in check –if you’re going to be good at it, that is.
Vince, if my partner was an illegal I’d be working my ass off to get him/her legal and do whatever was necessary and legal to maintain that status… but since few illegals who do NOT commit crimes are rarely deported in America, I’d think you might do a better job of picking a realistic scenario that tests a constructed marriage or domestic union.
I wasn’t speaking of you, personally, when I said gay men are uber-selfish… but living in WeHo, my hunch is you’re probably so deep in self-centered narcissistic men you’d have trouble getting face time in a mirror in the morning.
Vince, don’t mind the unnecessary (and in some cases, sadly-all-too-habitual) poo-flinging that is coming at you from certain quarters.
I gathered as your main point in @1 and 2, that we’ll know more about marriage’s effects on gay men when more gay men have it. And/or when someone studies it in states where gay men do have it. Your point is fair.
It is equally fair to point out in response, that gay men can be married for practical purposes if they want to be, regardless of whether their State has gay marriage. No person (or couple) should hold their breath waiting for State recognition, before they move forward in their lives. Especially in CA which has a form of gay civil unions that is the equal of marriage for nearly all State (CA) purposes.
Clearly, there are a number of different, fair points to be made on this topic. In regards to the second one that I just re-stated: one would hope that, if gay individual X truly has been made ‘less egocentric’ and better by his LTR, he could show rather less nastiness/defensiveness in how he presents his point to you.
While the actual emotions and commitment involved in marriage is a very real and important part of the relationship, unfortunately having the state recognize it is very important as well. And unfortunately, even when not committing crimes, too many gay couples are separated because of immigration laws. It’s a VERY real situation.
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/11/09/Gay_Brazilian_May_Be_Deported_from_US/
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/gay-immigrants-deported-legal-marriage-doma/story?id=12006429
While being in a committed relationship is the most important aspect of marriage, too often it’s not enough for thousands of loving gay couples out there.
ok michigan-matt, i’ll accept that answer to my comment. now, one more question, did that study factor out that stabilizing effect before coming to the conclusion it did on marriage?
ILC> “Vince, don’t mind the unnecessary (and in some cases, sadly-all-too-habitual) poo-flinging that is coming at you from certain quarters.”
Ahhh, the ol’ ax grinding schtick still at the ready… with a knuckle-dragging pettiness that makes QueenNancy look warm and personal by comparison. Sigh. Once again, ILC, please reference the two letters found in Vince’s comments at #8… some things with you never change. I shudder at the level of personal animus you have towards others that makes your vendetta-prone traits so pronounced.
Griper, to answer your question, it’s a little of both… you might want to read the authors’ conclusions; here:
http://news.msu.edu/media/documents/2010/12/b58978f2-85ae-413a-8ded-065c352f81a2.pdf
The money quote, on point: “There are many possible explanations
for such findings. Perhaps less antisocial men
simply make more attractive marital partners and are thus
more likely to be selected for marriage. Alternately, it may
be that marriage is a less attractive option for men who
engage in higher levels of antisocial behaviors, and they
are thus less likely to select into marriage. The latter possibility
would be consistent with the theory of the active
gene-environment correlation (in which individuals select
into environments consistent with their genotype31,32),
a well-known theory thought to underlie mate
selection in general. Regardless, given that marriage also
appears to facilitate desistence from antisocial behavior,
future research should seek to distinguish between and
better understand these selection processes.”
Remember, this was a study by behavioral geneticists… like economists, behavioral geneticists rarely reach the same conclusion on anything.
Why shouldn’t committed monogamy be a plus for the happiness of couples of men, women, man and woman or woman and house cat? It is not the certificate that does magic, it is the commitment.
My wife and I love how Oscar Levant defined marriage: The triumph of habit over hate. Look, commitment takes effort. You have to break through the annoyances of your partner in favor of the communion of spirit and understanding that underlie the union itself. That leads to the happiness of knowing that love and understanding awaits even your dumbest moments. However, it is possible to overwhelm love and understanding with abuse, intolerance, sloth, and any number of self-centered vices.
It is up to you. If your partner is a free agent then you have a problem. Rather than a union, you have a contest. I doubt that the habit of thinking and acting for the union will overcome the narcissism of the one or both of you.
And, the unnecessary MM poo-flinging continues. A thread wouldn’t be complete without it. Thanks buddy! 🙂
So, back on topic:
Despite the counter-examples of some gay men out there talking about their marriages… Eric Erbelding, perhaps others… I still believe the answer may be “yes”, as gay men would also be subject to the reasons given in the study:
1) That nicer people are more likely to get married.
2) That people tend to be made nicer by being married.
Clearly both of those are “on average”, not absolutes.
ILC >> Thank you. I”ll heed your advice.
MM’s spending time responding to you rather than addressing AJ’s valid points speaks volumes. Additionally, his generalizations about single GM like myself say even more.
thank you for your answer, matt. and i did read the co0nclusion prior to my questions. it was that conclusion which prompted my questions in the first place.
and in agreement with you i must conclude that the study has very little value on the merits of it. thus i’d never use it as evidence for any argument when the topic of marriage is being discussed.
Some of his comments can be OK, but it freaks him out when people disagree with him. If he’s in his poo-flinging mode (i.e. being unfair, impugning people instead of responding to their points), I may jump in to divert his attention elsewhere, i.e. to me. I don’t mind, and it almost always works. He seems to have granted me some odd power to trigger him.
ILC, that’s some hubris and chutzpah on your part to claim others are taking the thread away from the valid theme –you’re the guy who can’t seem to get over being called on the carpet… complete with near-stalkerish behavior of going back yrs into the past to revisit issues you felt weren’t aired sufficiently to your special benefit.
I’ll give you this, ILC, you grind those ol’ axes to where there’s nothing but 1/2 a handle left… over and over. Poo-flinging while claiming others are at fault. It’s gotta be a social pathology the way you practice it.
Vince’s point was addressed, in case you missed it while standing at the sharpening stone with your ax handle. But that’s ok… we’re used to the ax grinding schtick. It’s predictable and pedantic.
A hodgepodge of comments: Elizabeth Edwards – classy, driven and someone for your heart to cry out for; Barrack Hussein Obama – a whiny, egotistical little freak; Democrats – the ultimate party of “No”; The Republicans – get more balls baby; DADT, I don’t care what sexual persuasion you are , if you defend our nation, I RESPECT and LOVE you! Amen and Amen,………
See Vince? There it is!
No, just reality.
I haven’t taken the thread off topic, MM. You have.
BTW, FTR and FWIW… I don’t live within 100 miles of West Hollywood, but I have noticed that some great gay guys just might. (*cough*)
ILC >> Are nut-jobs the exception or the rule on gaypatriot? I’ve only been here a few days and American Elephant, R.O. Lopez and Michigan Matt are already on the list.
By the way, am I the only one who has read AJ’s links? No one is mentioning them. AJ seems to have called MM “on the carpet” (to phrase MM) with MM’s post #15. Yet, he remains mum.
@AJ There’s a very simple solution to couples being separated because of immigration laws.
Follow the law.
Um, I thought that if a male US citizen marries a woman from a foreign country and vice-versa, there are protections for the foreign born partner. I remember that folk who marry a national, they can then take steps to become a naturalized citizen.
Rusty >> There are those protections even for straight people who don’t “follow the law” in reference to post #32.
For example, if you are a non-U.S. citizen whose visa (work or otherwise) has expired and you are living here illegally, and find someone to opposite sex marry you, pass all the initial evaluations, within 3 years, you can obtain U.S. citizenship. I’ve been asked to get married on three different occasions in the four years I’ve been in L.A. And, in all three instances (two Israeli’s and one Australian), they eventually found someone else to marry them and began the process. It happens ALL the time.
Vince: The older I get, the more I see that everyone is nutty, to someone else. I must confess that I am have neither the ability nor the desire to defend 2 of the names you mentioned. But I will say that there are a lot of good folks here and some of my best friends are gay conservatives.
For myself, I eschew the “conservative” label because I am a libertarian on the social issues. Some conservatives tell me I’m right to draw that distinction, i.e. I’m not really one of them. For example, I put zero value on tradition – except as it may serve to protect liberty (which means my real value is liberty alone). Other conservatives see my conservative-leaning stands on fiscal and foreign policy issues and tell me that I have indeed crossed over to the Dark Side, with them 🙂 And some Democrats claim I am insanely conservative. Whatever.
Political labels aside, then you get into the personality issues. I have noticed, as you have, that a few right-leaning commentors on this blog get very intense, when met with disagreement. While others handle it better. Complicating all sides of that equation, is that blog-commenting in general tends to be a pastime, even a blood sport. I tend to be on both sides of it, as I will let commenting be mellow/respectful if the other person does, but also get into the personality confrontations if the other person does. Let’s leave it at that.
Interesting number crunching here
Vince, while I might caution you about getting too far into ILC’s echo chamber here (it is, afterall, a seductive little ploy)… but, of course, you’re free to do what you want — as are most here.
Sorry to have missed AJ’s “important” point about intrnl gay couples being separated because of Eric Holder not responding to a core democrat constituency… but seriously, you think that’s really a big issue to our community?? With all the other issues like gay adoption, workplace rules, domestic partner benefits, teen suicides, state constitutional provisions against SS marriage, et al? Look carefully at the deductive study by UCLA’s law center… the 24k figure is an estimate… my gut hunch, given my experience of living in a densely immigrant-heavy university town, is the number is far, far, far lower than the pro-gay law center estimates.
It is important to non-American gays caught in the dilemma of having to be separated for 6 months from their get-out-of-jail-free-card American partner… that’s a burden? If it’s true love, nothing can stop it, right?
But AJ’s and your focus raises a much more important and larger question. No one will contend that our immigration laws and rules are objective or prudent. We’ve got 25-40 yrs of pro-immigration advocacy groups literally whittling down nearly every law and rule with the intention of making them toothless and unenforceable –for immigration lawyers and clients, that’s always a “win”. The same is true here –and it’s destroying our rule of law and the immigration system almost as fast the Mexican drug cartels. Like I said, if my partner were faced with the dilemma, I’d work to get it corrected… not work to undermine the system.
Gays could have pressed the Obama Admin to extend to gay partners –not married gays, just partners– the same consideration afforded with married hetero couples with immigration issues… absent DOMA references. They didn’t because gayLeft advocacy groups who think this is a critical issue of worldwide justice were patently ineffective in lobbying for the change. It’s done on a case-by-case basis and that’s hardly an effective way to manage our immigration standards. We need better leaders in our community; not more carve-out provisions in federal and state law to afford us special protections.
Frankly, to me, it’s about as important an issue to our community as gay hegemony and discrimination in muslim countries… we got bigger fish to fry in our community and far more important issues that can truly advance gay freedom.
MI-Matt,
Actually I know of a straight couple where the wife emmigrated to England because her English husband *couldn’t* immigrate here, so it’s not like it’s a slam dunk either.
That’s a new one. MM has called me tons of things; never yet that.
Here’s an interesting little ditty:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/12/10/divorce
So, president hissy-fit dipset from his press conference today. I’d suggest that that is conduct unbefitting a president, but certain people hate it when the immaturity and petulance of their Dear Leader is commented upon.
V the K >> Stay on topic, will ya?
hehe 🙂
Not sure to the question, but for straight men, their wives turn bitchier. Having just seen Sex and City 2, there’s nothing but cattiness from the women.
I hear wives in general start withholding blowjobs once married. Don’t know if it’s true or not.