babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

And thenews out of Maine is, depressing

bagkitty
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2008

Well Maine voted, and it is all but official... being proven right is small consolation, but I still maintain that it is a chump's game to allow the majority to vote on the civil rights of any minority... going through the courts is a much better strategy.


Comments

Infosaturated
Offline
Joined: Feb 28 2006

That's really sad. It's hard to wrap my mind around the idea that people would "inspired" enough about this issue to become activists in order to prevent gay marriage. It is seriously confusing. It's so difficult to generate activism in people and this is what does it?


Stargazer
Offline
Joined: Jun 9 2004

This is what happens when you let bigots decide who gets rights and who doesn't. In the end a lot of loving and caring people are losing out. What is sad is that this is Maine. I'm not even sure how they managed to stay so backwards in the US and it appears to be getting worse, not better.

 

Human rights should never ever be up for debate.

 

That's the thing bagkitty, the courts would rule against them, and they most likely know it. Just stick in another ballot issue and let the masses take care of it. Why this is such an issue for straights is beyond me.


Caissa
Offline
Joined: Jun 14 2006

The only "good" news is how close the vote was 53-47. That simply requires a 3% swing next time.

I wrote to a friend on Facebook who is originally from Maine and has just become a Canadian citizen, what Stargazer posted in her second paragraph. He concurred. Unfortunately, the USian model of democracy does not.

Of course, if the boundary had have been settled properly these people would all be NBers. Wink


DaveW
Offline
Joined: Dec 24 2008

well,  but the bigger picture is not just a 3 per cent swing -- but that 31 states have now outlawed ssm by referenda/plebiscites


Caissa
Offline
Joined: Jun 14 2006

Yes, that is the big picture, but here in NB many of us are cheering for our next door neighbour to come aboard.


Doug
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2001

I'm a little surprised that wasn't used as an ad, showing video of a nice neighbourhood in NB proving that gay marriage is not the end of the world. Then again, Americans generally don't like being told to be like somewhere else, so that might have backfired.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Virginia attorney general to colleges: End gay protections

 

 

 


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004
Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

*bump*


Polly B
Offline
Joined: Dec 15 2004

kropotkin1951
Online
Joined: Jun 6 2002

I love american democracy it is so great. You should use your military to spread it throughout the world and save all those misguided people who are not christian.  I'll bet those county officials go to church every Sunday to condemn the sins of others.


Joey Ramone
Offline
Joined: Apr 3 2008

bagkitty wrote:

I still maintain that it is a chump's game to allow the majority to vote on the civil rights of any minority... going through the courts is a much better strategy.

I disagree. Sustainable victories are built through mass action, not by relying on judges or other elites.  I've seen too many cases of hollow court victories ignored by governments because there is no grassroots campaign behind the legal win.  Progressive forces need to work harder to build public support for minority rights.


bagkitty
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2008

Joey... it is not a completely either/or situation. I would, though, suggest you would have a very hard time documenting a single instance where a real step forward towards legislative equality for the LGBT communities is the result of grassroots initiative (referenda) as opposed to court ordered or executive action. I agree completely that change "from on high" will not survive without extensive grassroot support, but I think there is a much better case to be made that the "court tactic" is the one that has provided results here in Canada, and in just about every other jurisdiction that comes to mind (South Africa, Spain, Argentina etc.).


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004
moved to end of thread

STR8MAN
Offline
Joined: Apr 20 2010

As a straight man, I do not want other men thinking about my butt and masterbating. I do not want other men pulling down my pants or grabbing my penis. And I most definitely do NOT want a finger, or penis, inserted in my rectum!


Maysie
Online
Joined: Apr 21 2005

The troll is gone.


bagkitty
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2008

Damn it Maysie, now we will never know how he would respond to a woman who wanted to introduce a strap-on into the proceedings. How am I supposed to conduct my research into the fetish interests of trolls if you keep tossing them off the bridge?Wink


Maysie
Online
Joined: Apr 21 2005

I actually thought I read Str8man's prose in a recent online dating site's ad.

Purely for research purposes you understand.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004
Could one of the Mods please delete STR8MAN 's post. Thanks!

Kaspar Hauser
Offline
Joined: Aug 15 2004

deleted


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004
NCLR Launches Visibility Campaign to Expose Tragic Case Where Sonoma County Separated Elderly Gay Couple, Sold Off All Belongings http://nclrights.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/nclr-launches-visibility-campa...

Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005

Joey Ramone wrote:

bagkitty wrote:

I still maintain that it is a chump's game to allow the majority to vote on the civil rights of any minority... going through the courts is a much better strategy.

I disagree. Sustainable victories are built through mass action, not by relying on judges or other elites.  I've seen too many cases of hollow court victories ignored by governments because there is no grassroots campaign behind the legal win.  Progressive forces need to work harder to build public support for minority rights.

I think that's exactly right.

Ultimately, all right and wrong is determined by the majority.  If the majority is large enough, even courts can't overcome majority will (e.g., court power or rulings can be completely eviscerated by changing the constitution...which is inherently a majoritarian document).

Long-term, majority rule cannot be circumvented.

With vigilence, the relatively near-term trajectory for equal rights for gays and lesbians looks very good.

Humans have been around for several hundred thousand years...and it's truly breathtaking to consider the progress that's been made in just the last century.  Less than 100 years ago, women couldn't vote in the US (and about 150 years ago, slavery was legal in many US states).

A lot of progress will be made in the next 100-150 years and, in the scheme of human history, that's a nanosecond.


Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005

bagkitty wrote:

I would, though, suggest you would have a very hard time documenting a single instance where a real step forward towards legislative equality for the LGBT communities is the result of grassroots initiative (referenda) as opposed to court ordered or executive action.

The good ol' libertarian-leaning state of Vermont (one doesn't even need a permit to carry a handgun in Vermont) legislatively created the right to same sex marraige in that state last year (the legislature overrode the "executive action" of the governor's veto).

ETA: Oh, and New Hampshire also passed a law permitting SSM in that state (the law took effect earlier this year).

ETAA: Sweden, through parlimentary action, also created the right of SSM in Sweden in 2009.

 



Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005

There are seven countries (so far) which legally recognize SSM:

The Netherlands passed legislation to permit SSM in 2001.

Belgium passed legislation to permitt SSM in 2003.

Spain passed SSM legislation in 2005.

Canada completed the task begun by courts by passing national legislation 2005.

South Africa passed legislation in 2006 to permit SSM.

Norway, also through legislation action, permitting SSM in 2008.

Sweden (see post above).


bagkitty
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2008

Hmmm, and when did legislators become anything other than than an elite? Perhaps I misspoke when I referred to "executive actiion", at least in part because of my understanding on how various legislative bodies function... All the instances I am seeing referenced are ones I would categorize as "change from above", with the possible exception of New Hampshire.

 

 


Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005

bagkitty wrote:

Hmmm, and when did legislators become anything other than than an elite? Perhaps I misspoke when I referred to "executive actiion", at least in part because of my understanding on how various legislative bodies function... All the instances I am seeing referenced are ones I would categorize as "change from above", with the possible exception of New Hampshire.

The two principal means by which almost all laws come into effect (at least in democracies) are: (1) legislative action (which is the primary means) or (2) court rulings.

The legitimacy of court rulings that create new rights, and which are substantially contrary to democratic will, are often questioned.  If, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court were to hold, as a matter of constitutional law, that a fetus is a "human" and thus entitled to all rights and protections of other humans, the only way for that rulings to be overturned would be a constitutional amendment (even a law subsequently passed by Congress and signed by the President could not overturn that decision).  The legitimacy of such a ruling would be hotly attacked.

While the legislative process often looks like the proverbial sausage-making factory, that process is answerable to a vote by the people (if voters don't like what the legislators have done, then the voters they can kick the legislators out of office and change the law).  Hence, it's rare for legislative action to be subsequently attacked as being democratically illegitimate.  The legitimacy of the legislative process is well accepted.

If rights created legislatively are more likely to be viewed as being legitimate, then I think the durability of the decisions creating those rights is likely to be greater than when rights are created by a process which may be viewed by a substantial portion of the public as being illegitimate.

That's why I'm so excited about the legislative decisions regarding SSM in Vermont and New Hampshire.


bagkitty
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2008

And now there are eight. The Althingi voted unanimously to alter the language of its marriage laws to allow same sex couples to marry. We can now start the countdown to when one of the god-ridden will announce that volcanic eruption in Iceland was a warning...


Lard Tunderin Jeezus
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2001

Caissa wrote:

Of course, if the boundary had have been settled properly these people would all be NBers. Wink

...strangely, they never put that up to a referendum...


bagkitty
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2008

Meanwhile, in California...

SanFranciscoChronicle wrote:
As the trial over California's prohibition on same-sex marriage enters its final stage today, the ban's sponsors are urging the judge to go a step further and revoke state recognition of the marriages of 18,000 gay and lesbian couples who wed before voters passed Proposition 8.

 


bagkitty
Offline
Joined: Aug 27 2008

Meanwhile, in Oklahoma:

TulsaWorld wrote:
Oklahomans for Equality released a statement saying the vote marked a 35-year journey to equality, beginning with a 1975 report commissioned by then-Mayor Robert LaFortune. That report recommended that the city adopt the nondiscrimination policy.

Thirty-five years to amend a municipal non-discrimination policy.

 


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments