same-sex marriage is now legal in ALL of the u.s.- now what? (please read description)
lumbia33
2015-06-28
Views 174
the supreme court decision was inevitable- (a. due to the ever-increasing amount of states and countries supporting the institution of marriage for everyone, and (b. due to the fact that these same individuals pay taxes and are expected to contribute to capitalist society just like heterosexuals. also, the organizing around this issue was largely framed by tons of political lobbying and celebrity endorsements- and with that, tons of money.
same-sex marriage may be a contentious issue, but not as contentious as, say, africans being murdered by the police consistently; or the senate's support of obama-era trade deals; or tax dollars being used to murder innocent families via drones, bulldozers or other forms of displacement; the government's treatment of eritrea (as the country is not a u.s. ally); the deportation of hatians from the dominican republic, despite being born in the d.m.; and so on... how many people who have been fighting for what they deem a 'victory' have been paying attention to all these other things, and how many people have organized around these issues?
the largest irony in the supreme court ruling is clarence thomas' response- but who's surprised? "“The corollary of that principle is that human dignity cannot be taken away by the government. Slaves did not lose their dignity (any more than they lost their humanity) because the government allowed them to be enslaved.”
'ol slaves were just a sangin' and dancin' away while they got beat... the gub'mint 'ALLOWED' people to be enslaved, languages and spiritual practices were forced out of people; people were forced to carry on the name of the slavemaster, and no dignity was snatched away. riiight... the other irony is, i've seen some of the people who can now legally get married make similar statements. no one can deny the racism that exists in the LGBTQ community either.
and of course, the so-called supreme court he sits on, in 1967, made a similar decision on marriage when it came to interracial couples. the other irony (or not really) is that thomas is in an interracial marriage. the fact that the love between two consenting adults needs to be voted on as a human right is so ridiculous and illogical.
i may not personally support the institution of marriage as it stands under capitalism; the history of marriage is largely tied to labor. that said, i wholeheartedly support the decision for two consenting adults to marry, if that is their decision to do so.
same-sex marriage may be a contentious issue, but not as contentious as, say, africans being murdered by the police consistently; or the senate's support of obama-era trade deals; or tax dollars being used to murder innocent families via drones, bulldozers or other forms of displacement; the government's treatment of eritrea (as the country is not a u.s. ally); the deportation of hatians from the dominican republic, despite being born in the d.m.; and so on... how many people who have been fighting for what they deem a 'victory' have been paying attention to all these other things, and how many people have organized around these issues?
the largest irony in the supreme court ruling is clarence thomas' response- but who's surprised? "“The corollary of that principle is that human dignity cannot be taken away by the government. Slaves did not lose their dignity (any more than they lost their humanity) because the government allowed them to be enslaved.”
'ol slaves were just a sangin' and dancin' away while they got beat... the gub'mint 'ALLOWED' people to be enslaved, languages and spiritual practices were forced out of people; people were forced to carry on the name of the slavemaster, and no dignity was snatched away. riiight... the other irony is, i've seen some of the people who can now legally get married make similar statements. no one can deny the racism that exists in the LGBTQ community either.
and of course, the so-called supreme court he sits on, in 1967, made a similar decision on marriage when it came to interracial couples. the other irony (or not really) is that thomas is in an interracial marriage. the fact that the love between two consenting adults needs to be voted on as a human right is so ridiculous and illogical.
i may not personally support the institution of marriage as it stands under capitalism; the history of marriage is largely tied to labor. that said, i wholeheartedly support the decision for two consenting adults to marry, if that is their decision to do so.
Report form
