The Good and The Bad

[queenriley]

We'll start with The Good because, well, The Good is just THAT good.

Iowa. Iowa legalizes same sex marriage. Iowa. IOWA! Go Iowa! I want to squish it in a big hug and snuggle it. The Supreme Court heard the case and determined the prior language defining marriage between one man and one woman was unconstitutional. They voted to abolish the defining language and make same sex marriage legal. The vote was UNANIMOUS. Aw, IOWA!!!!!!!

CNN
MSNBC



And The Bad. So ANGRY right now. Time Warner Cable, just about the only viable internet provider in the Greensboro area (it has long had a monopoly in this city), has decided to make us a "test city" to try out their new idea of tiered internet. What does that mean? That means that you buy a plan for how much internet you will use each month and when you exceed that, you have to pay an overage fee. The caps are RIDICULOUS. Seriously. The highest you can go is 40GB per month, and that's going to cost us $55 per month before their fees and taxes. Just streaming one online movie takes up, on average, 8GB. I do most of my tv watching online! We're not sure what we're going to do, but we will NOT be keeping our Time Warner internet service. There aren't a lot of other options though. Comcast serves some of Greensboro, but not all. Earthlink MIGHT come to our area, but at this point in time does not service the specific apartments I live in. AT&T isn't any better.

Big Broadband Users: Get Ready to Pay More

Time Warner is also doing this in Austin and San Antonio, Texas as well as Rochester, NY.

Comments

[major-dallas.livejournal.com]

yeah, they are doing that here, so as to screw Netflix users obviously...thank heavens I have AT&T DSL, which has no plans to do such a horrid thing.

My question for Iowa will be this though; Will it force churches to marry people who do not meet their tenants of faith? If so the Supreme Court will throw out the law on those merits, violating the separation of church and state and all.

[major-dallas.livejournal.com]

Ah okay, read up on it a little, Iowa struck down a law that bans Gay Marriage, not that they passed a law legalizing it. Major difference there. I have no problems with same sex marriages, so long as the Church is not forced into performing it by the state. Though to be quite honest, I think its time that marriage be redefined in the legal status as Domestic Partnership. This can still be performed by the Justice of the Peace, and no one would be told they couldn't have one, but it should be limited to one Domestic Partner at any time, as in no Polygamy ;)

[queenriley.livejournal.com]

They lifted the ban on gay marriage and made it legal. Gay marriage IS legal in Iowa now.

And no, churches will not be forced to marry homosexuals if they don't want to. Just like they aren't forced to marry Catholics or Jews or Hindus if they don't want to. Just like Catholic churches don't have to officiate second marriages to formerly divorced individuals if they don't want to. Just like Massachusetts and Connecticut, nobody will be forced to be involved in homosexual marriage. Gay marriage has been legal there for awhile now and the sky hasn't fallen and the rights of the religious have not been infringed upon, nor have our children been taught horrible things, or any of the other flimsy social reasons that get bandied about.

[major-dallas.livejournal.com]

Christine, only know that my intent in all of this, is that no half-measure is passed or endorsed. I agree with Elton John that Gay Couples should abandon the term "marriage", but still fight for Civil Unions that carry the same weight, with all the benefits and responsibilities. So in a Hospital, A Gay man's Domestic Partner through a Civil Union, can make medical decisions as Husbands and Wives have done since for ever and that a Gay Couple who are in a Civil Union can adopt, but also pay the same taxes married couples have since forever.

You get my drift? I'm tired of all this back and forth nonsense of little things here and there, no American should be discriminated against, based on their Gender, their Sexual Preferences (Within Reason; no to Pedos and Necrophiliacs), Race, Religious Preference and their Political Beliefs.

That's where I am at.

[cathschaffstump.livejournal.com]

I like Iowa. I really do.

Catherine

[mrs-bombadil.livejournal.com]

Couples should abandon the term "marriage", but still fight for Civil Unions that carry the same weight, with all the benefits and responsibilities.

I think that fighting over the semantics of a single word is silly. If you are committed and devoted enough in your relationship to want the formalizing of it called a "marriage" and you want your spouse called a "husband" or a "wife", then you should be able to. And your government can call it whatever as long as it's the same regardless of the gender combination. And your church can call it whatever it wants when you choose, or not, to have your bond sanctioned by it.

Yay for freaxin Iowa!

[klrtinkerbelle.livejournal.com]

And you all thought I was crazy for visiting Iowa all those years! LOL

[queenriley.livejournal.com]

I agree with mrs_bombadil. I don't want to call what my husband and I have a "civil union" simply because we didn't get some sham church wedding. Marriage has been around, and called marriage, LONG before Judaism or Christianity. Religion does not hold the monopoly on a word. By taking marriage out of the law and making the legal granted unions "civil unions" while the religiously performed unions "marriage", you're creating a seperate but equal situation which is all too often far from equal.

I realize I was a bit snarky with you, major_dallas, but you have to understand, that is one of the main non-religious arguments against homosexual marriage and it's just flat out the dumbest argument I think I've ever heard. OF COURSE churches won't be forced to perform same sex marriage if they don't want to! They aren't forced to perform any kind of marriage they don't want to that is perfectly legal, and some of them willingly perform marriage ceremonies that aren't at all legal. If nobody forces them to perform marriages they don't want to now, why in the world would it suddenly change for a same sex coupling? Seriously? That's the argument for it? It's asinine.

[queenriley.livejournal.com]

Alas, I was blind to it's wonderfulness! I have seen the light, now. :D