salienne: (Default)
Dear DS9,

I am quite enjoying this same-sex relationship/marriage commentary episode. It's fun. And, thus far, actually good. And I love that the taboo isn't the same-sex aspect but, instead, the "Trills that knew one another" aspect.

I'd appreciate it a lot more, though, if your 'verse had same-sex relationships in the first place. Cop-outs are annoying. Even if you were written over a decade ago.

Grumbling and--WAIT, WHY DOES KIRA HAVE PURPLE HAIR IN THIS SCENE, IS IT THE LIGHTING OR IS IT ACTUALLY HER HAIR, YES I HAVE THE ATTENTION SPAN OF A RABBIT

-Me
salienne: (DW wth?)
...the US is one of the many nations that says no.

Linky to article

Obviously, a declaration wasn't going to do much anyway, but... really?

“We are opposed to any discrimination, legally or politically, but the nature of our federal system prevents us from undertaking commitments and engagements where federal authorities don’t have jurisdiction,” said Alejandro D. Wolff, the deputy permanent representative.

"We're against discrimination! Just... only if the federal government is doing it, not the States. Especially where that icky 'marriage' issue comes up."

On the bright side, gay rights were discussed at the UN! And had a fair amount of support! Yay!
salienne: (DW wth?)
About the "gay kisses" in Milk:

"See, if it's me, I'm kind of hoping I do screw it up," Letterman shot back. "That's what you want, isn't it?"

"To screw it up?" Franco asked.

"I mean, do you really want to be good at kissing a guy?" Letterman said as his audience howled with delight.


From here, which is actually a pretty good article.
salienne: (not broken)
And I quote from my textbook: "[The Supreme Court] overruled a Texas law criminalizing sodomy when practiced by two persons of the same sex. By a 6 to 3 decision, handed down on June 26, 2003, the Court affirmed that the rights of liberty and privacy guaranteed under the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment include the right of two consenting adults to engage in such acts within the home." (Emphasis mine)

So in 2003, just 4 and a half years ago, a third of the Supreme Court thought male homosexual relations (not marriage, but the sex act itself) should be illegal. As in, the State should control actual private practices that affect no one but the two (or more, I suppose) parties involved, even if it occurs only in the parties' personal residences.

To quote the ever reliable Captain Jack Sparrow, "That's a sad commentary in and of itself."

Profile

salienne: (Default)
salienne

July 2011

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
1718 19 20 2122 23
24 2526 27 28 2930
31      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags