NYT: The Sit-In at the Altar: No ‘I Do’ Till Gays Can Do It, Too

[ruggerson]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/fashion/03delay.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

The Sit-In at the Altar: No ‘I Do’ Till Gays Can Do It, Too

By KAYLEEN SCHAEFER

LAST July, Kelly White and her boyfriend became engaged. They had a cozy picnic of wine and cheese on a hill before he presented her with a watermelon-flavor Ring Pop and asked her to marry him. “I’d rather not say if he got down on one knee or not,” she said. “It’s embarrassing.”

But they won’t end up at the altar anytime soon: they said they would not marry until gay and lesbian couples are also allowed to.

“I usually explain that I wouldn’t go to a lunch counter that wouldn’t allow people of color to eat there, so why would I support an institution that won’t allow everyone to take part,” said Ms. White, 24, a law student at the University of California, Davis. “Sometimes people don’t buy that analogy.”

Whether it makes sense or not, some heterosexual couples, mostly in their in 20s and 30s, are protesting the inability of gay and lesbian couples to marry by putting off their own marriage. Unless wedded bliss is available to everyone, in every state, they say, they want no part of it.

(more)

[xchrom]

1. that is so sweet!

they have my thanks.

[MasonJar]

2. Wow! That should really help advertise the discrimination if others

also take that stand.

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. I have heard of churches doing this, too

Clergy and congregations saying that they will officiate for no legal marriage until they can officiate for the legal marriage of same-sex couples too.

[davidinalameda]

4. this is very nice

I'm glad we have allies like these two

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

5. Good for them!

There should be more couples out there doing this.

[ThomCat]

6. Now THOSE are dedicated allies.

Wow!
:applause:

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FreeState]

8. Hu?

Does the progressive focus on social issues like gay rights send a message to the vast majority of americans that progressives care more about gay marriage than the 40 million americans who have no healthcare at all for practical purposes, and the 18000/year who die from lack of healthcare.

No, most Americans are not one demential and can see that there are indeed more than one or two issues that deserve our attention.

After all, gays are indeed more affluent than the general population.

They are? Wow, which peer reviewed study did you get this from? Or are you repeating a lie that the Family Research Council among other extreme right hate groups have repeated over and over again hoping we all will believe it? See: http://www.noglstp.org/economic.html

Thomas Frank was correct in that the Dems fail to attract redstaters because the dems turned their backs on economic populism for the masses. But do the Dems also REPEL the vast majority of americans with their focus on social issues for a select few, like gays?

Wow, nothing like demeaning a minority by stating their issues are not as important than the majorities. I think its this kind of behavior that is what puts off Americans, they are sick of being told who to demonize and blame.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

10. yeah its the progressives that dont want health insurance...

republicans have so vehemently wanted free health care for all americans


the only reason anyone blames progressive focus on social issues is because gay people/women/ethnic minorities lack power. so their debates are almost always framed by someone else. their rights are considered secondary to everything.


also gays arent more affluent then the general population. mostly lesbian couples are poorer than most heterosexual couples.

[closeupready]

11. Is the focus on equal rights being "progressive", or is it being "fair"?

Semantics. Either way, the message Americans take from Dem support for equal rights is twofold: 1) Dems are rewarding their most loyal constiutency by declining to throw them under the bus in the face of controversy (spine); and 2) Dems like Hilary or Kerry may not support gay marriage, but at least they are trying to be fair.

And by the way, in what world are the issues of access to healthcare and gay marriage mutually exclusive ones???

Finally, the party of the marriage amendment tried to use homophobia to win support from voters this past election, and it failed. Not only that, it may have helped win VA, thus giving Dems the Senate.

So the answer to your straw man argument "on social issues, who is more repulsive?", the voters have spoken. Republicans are.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[closeupready]

13. Not my problem.

The "haves and have-mores" had their six years, and they blew it. Time for a change.

Thanks for playing.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

15. so what your saying is the dems are as bad as the gop? right?

which may have some valid points...but why are you dragging gay rights into this?

[readmoreoften]

19. To me, you're no better than a person who'd stab me in the neck and watch me die.

You are in the way of the person I love most in the world having health care. You are in the way of insuring that the person I love most in the world isn't homeless after I die. I'm growing to believe that people like you are every single-- and I mean SINGLE-- bit as much of my enemy as a Republican. There's no two ways around it. You want to harm me. You want to see me and the people I love harmed.

Last time I checked, gays were also part of humanity.

[NMMNG]

23. As a matter of fact, they are.

National Health Care? We're Halfway There

Rep. Dennis Kucinich Tackles Healthcare

If you'd only see past your blind hatred of gays you'd realize Dems are working on healthcare for everybody, while also working to ensure all citizens have equal rights.

[foreigncorrespondent]

25. Really?

#1: Peoples lives are not a wedge issue. If you believe that, then please tell what about your life is a wedge issue. And if you can't think of anything, then guess what? You will find out that you are in fact a bigot who believes the right wing talking points you are so happy to be throwing around here right now.

#2: The Dem's have been in power before, and guess what happened? We got DoMA and DADT! So much for the Dem's actually being for equality for everyone, huh?

So please, stop throwing around your right wing talking points. It really does get tiresome to face it on left wing boards.

[bliss_eternal]

26. Well said, ....!

:applause: Thank you, foreigncorrespondent!

[foreigncorrespondent]

27. Thank you! (n/t)

[Jamastiene]

30. Actually, there are many many Dems who are raring to go.

If our government cannot do two things at once with that many people elected, we have a real big problem. I think our government is capable of doing more in the work for the poor, but I do not think they are only working on gay issues like you do. That's just your prejudice showing through.

[Jamastiene]

29. Hear here.

It took things getting so bad that even some traditionally right wing constituents said, "no more, this has to stop." The majority of the country wants change, not the same old same old.

Well said, closeupready.

[NMMNG]

16. Gays are not more affluent than the general population

That is a myth perpetuated by the RW bigots.

And why do you think that because Progressives are paying attention to GLBT rights that they cannot also focus on health care? Progressives have the ability to handle more than one issue at a time.



But do the Dems also REPEL the vast majority of americans with their focus on social issues for a select few, like gays?

Hardly. Not only are GLBT individuals not "a select few", but they are one of the Dems most consistent voting blocs. Just because bigots like yourself consider our rights of no consequence doesn't mean everybody does. Would you suggest the Dems ignore all of the Methodists in America (who are about the same in number as we are) because they are a "select few"?

[bicentennial_baby]

17. Excuse the fuck outta me?

"Gays", as you like to call them, are no more affluent on average than any other American...get an f'n clue, from this Econ major.

and to this "But do the Dems also REPEL the vast majority of americans with their focus on social issues for a select few, like gays?"

No, Dems don't win b/c they don't know how to fight back, simple as that. It has nothing to do with gays, but for what it's worth, they simply take the GLBT communities for granted, and then cast us aside when convenient...Get it?

and frankly, Fuck them!

[readmoreoften]

18. So sick of this shit. Gays are more affluent, my ass. How long do we have to put up with

lies and slander? I'm sorry but it makes me sick. How long do I have to listen to this kind of offensive bullshit? Especially when my partner is a cancer survivor, homeless, and can't be included on my health insurance?

[TwentyFive]

20. If a RED STATER favored economic populism - why the hell would he vote Republican?

The Republican party is the party of economic darwinism, not populism. If he votes for the GOP because he hates fags, then he's cutting off his own future and I can't help him.

Every election the republicans drag out the 'TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS' accusation. This forces the Democrats to retreat and backpedal on things like school loans, education, head start, unions, and other programs designed to improve the lives of the disadvantaged. Democrats are always backpedaling on economic issues because the swing voters fear the TAX AND SPEND LIBERAL will come after their middle class income.

Gay rights are not the cause of the Democrats abandoning economic populism. Republican attacks on TAX and SPEND LIBERALS are to blame. The fact that 80% of gays vote Democratic helps economic populism.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ThomCat]

39. "put the interests of certain racial minorities, female yuppies and gays over the interest of

the common good."

Do you realize how bigoted that is?
You just announced that the common good is straight white men.

Racism prevents racial minorities from getting equal access to whatever populist economic programs might get implemented. If you don't right racism too then you're giving the economic benefit to white people.

Sexism prevents women (not just the "yuppies" you seem to dislike) from getting equal access to populist economic programs too. So you if we don't fight sexism you're only giving the benefits to men.

And homophobia excluded GLBT people from getting equal benefit (and in fact, basic equal rights) so you're reserving advancement for straight people only.

The end result of your prejudices would be that only straight white men would really get the help. The rest of us would all get kicked to the curb. You must be a straight white guy. Nice of you to advocate for only your own self interest. :eyes:

[ThomCat]

40. The more I read this garbage

the more it's obvious that your perception of the "ordinary working people" is limited to people just like yourself. The rest of us don't exist in your world. We don't count. We're just "client interest groups."

That's so sad. And the rest of your post is just sad egotistical ranting. I'm ashamed to share a party with you.

[Sapphocrat]

21. Oh, bullshit.

"gays are indeed more affluent than the general population"

Yeah, and we don't care about the poor, either. :eyes:

Stop throwing around that tired (and debunked) talking point that we're all "Will and Grace."

This lesbian is poor and uninsured -- and completely screwed because some people think equality means special privileges for a "select few."

You are the only one I see "repelled" by equality.

[Gelliebeans]

22. Wow

:wow:
Care to site those opinions with legitimate links? Who will we throw under the bus next week? :sarcasm:

[foreigncorrespondent]

24. Tell me...

...do you often use right wing talking points on left wing boards?


On edit: typo

[Jamastiene]

28. I can't even afford my prescription medicine that I desperately need.

I live in an impoverished area in a red state too. Even a degree isn't going to up my income to the poverty level here much less above it. I could climb out of poverty in some other states, but not here. Here, I will make less IF I can get a job in my chosen field, but most likely, I will end up working at Wal-Mart because they are our last major employer here. It's a backwards early 1900's little town that still prides itself for its racism and right wing Christian values of hate while the majority in this state (the more purple areas) have moved on to more progressive values. It's also a staunchly anti-labour anti-union town too again while the rest of the state has moved on. So workers in my hometown make much less and the quality of work is lower here as well because workers do not take pride in the work that they do for small beans. That just continues the poverty cycle. There are a few of us even here who want change, but it is so slow coming precisely because so many of the Dems here act afraid of their Republican masters.

Plus the progressives/dems/etc. keep giving in to the bigoted, hate spewing right wing Christians in red states, one of those select few that has been getting its way forever and a day now. Most Christians overall are at least tolerant and nonviolent, but instead the face of Christianity America decides to showcase to the world is hateful and bigoted. What does that portray to the rest of the world? That it is ok to hate people based on a misinterpretation of the Bible based on willful ignorance. Most scholars have disputed the gay sinner claims, btw. And this country's major documents, i.e. the Constitution and Bill of Rights, (what Bush has been using as toilet paper) state something to the effect that all of us deserve equal rights and justice, not just a select few.

So, I agree that we need to quit pandering to the "select few" who have kept this country down for the last 25 years or so. It hasn't helped our progressive causes to focus on them so much. We should step outside that rut and start standing up for the majority of us, who are all in the same boat with economic issues. It's the economy, stupid, indeed.

The reality is that it is time to quit pandering to that "select few" of Christians in low population red states that think hatred is a Christian value while the majority of the country is ready to start making progress in the majority's quality of life. For Democrats to play our cards like the Republicans do would make us no better than them. Why have a two party system if both parties are just going to join in the hate? Pandering to the right is just fascist. What next? Round up all the GLBT people and just herd them into concentration camps because they dare to think they should be treated equally? That mentality hasn't worked so far. It makes the parties indiscernable if Dems join in the hate. One party needs to stand up for the poor AND the other social issues. That's what the Democratic Party is supposed to stand for.

Ditching Dem values over the last few years is what has given the "spineless Democrats" and "yellow bellied" comments any credence. That in turn makes us look weak on defense and the cycle of political chess check mate (the Republican strategy for the last I don't know how long) just continues. It works because Dems let it work. Politics is exactly like a game of chess. We can outsmart them, but the "popular opinion" that is being portrayed by the MSM's propoganda has gotten into some people's heads. It's just propoganda. There is even progress here where I live with a few of us who are willing to say that we demand to be treated as equal citizens regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, or any other qualifier that is routinely used to beat groups of people down.

Btw, I'm gay and NOT rich. Very few gay people are, in actuality, affluent as you describe us. I don't know where you got that idea. You must not know any gay people if you think that. Or maybe you don't know any poor people so every gay person you have met is rich just by proxy. Which is it? I wonder where you get that. It's bullshit and the rich gay meme is just not true. Do you think all Jewish people are rich too?

[Danger Mouse]

32. Well spoken...

Don't worry about that asshole, on DU, the VAST MAJORITY is 100% behind you. Read my post below for another example of 'Christian love' at work.

[Sapphocrat]

41. Terrific post!

I wish I could nominate it on its own. :thumbsup:

[Danger Mouse]

33. Hey...

douchebag...looks like you got pwn3d!! :popcorn:

[terrya]

34. "Gays are more affluent than the general population"?

Generalize much?

See, the trouble with that is that it perfectly falls into the bigots nonsense about us priviledged homos demanding "special rights".

Demanding and expecting the same rights as heterosexual couples should have nothing to do with economic status. It's a moral issue. It's a simple matter of equality...we gay people deserve the same rights as everyone else. Period. And that most certainly includes the rights of same-sex legally recognized marriages.

That story is a nice one. I want to thank the OP for posting it. I know people like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have said that they won't get married until our rights to marriage are recognized. But it's very heartening to read of non-celebrity heterosexuals who recognize the same thing and are putting their attitudes into practice.

[davidinalameda]

38. people are repelled by social issues?

very interesting analysis; completely wrong but interesting

gays are NOT mor affluent than the general population; that is a complete myth

basic civil rights for Americans, gays included, do not repel the vast majority of Americans

take a look at some of the recent polls on civil unions; a majority of Americans favor those

the majority of Americans favor a repeal on the ban of gays and lesbians serving openly in the military; the US is the only western power that does not allow gays and lesbians to serve openly

[bliss_eternal]

9. What a wonderful couple.

Had I known in 1997 that * would declare war on same sex marriage, I would have chosen this path as well. This movement needs more hetero couples willing to take a stand and speak out against the inhumanity of it.

Kicked and nominated. :)

[JudyM]

14. So it's not the repugs who are destroying marriage, not gays. Gotta love this! nt

[Danger Mouse]

31. A friend of mine in Wisconsin...

Was voting on November 7th. While in line, she overheard a conversation between a husband and wife.
Here's an excerpt from our conversation:
me: what were they saying?
her: wife: what's this amendment thing about?
her: (me, in thought: fucking idiot, are you kidding me????? get your info straight before you vote)
her: husband: well, if you want those fucking q****s to have the right to MARRY, then you vote no
her: if you think that marriage is sacred and for only a man and a woman, like the bible states, then you vote yes.
her: if you value marriage, then you vote yes
me: he actually said that?
me: haha
her: those fucking f*****s don't deserve special rights like normal people

An example of Christian love at work. Hearing made me that want to be physically ill. And she said that everyone there was agreeing with the man.
It makes me so angry, I can't even say...how can be people be so fucking hateful and call themselves Christian? What the fuck is wrong with them??

[sugar magnolia]

36. I think this is a great way to actually live your beliefs

One of the women quoted in the article is a good friend of mine, so of course I think she rocks. :)

[Rising Phoenix]

37. that is so cool

it warms my heart

[ccorces1]

42. I have heard of people doing this...

But as much as I respect them for stanbding up for their beliefs so adamantly, will it make a difference?