Oh my god...he did it.

El-Jaro El-Jaro
If this is real...wow. I think he just tackled one of the larger issues for GLBT couples (I would've put this there, but I couldn't)

thoughts? comments?
04/16/2010
  • Weekly Special: Hot Vibes! Buy 1 Vibrator And Get 1 FREE
  • Better Price Sale - Save 50%
  • Better Price Sale - Save 70%
  • Better Price Sale - Save 60%
  • Better Price - Save 40%
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
All promotions
Darling Dove Darling Dove
It's pretty cool :3
I'm glad for all the people that this helps. It was always kinda stupid to be honest, how it was handled.

My only irritation isnt with the issue itself but that people keep saying its more "special rights" for glbtq people when IMO its just allowing them the rights they should have had as humans who're all equally as human and deserving as the rest of us.
04/16/2010
GNGenie GNGenie
Quote:
Originally posted by Darling Dove
It's pretty cool :3
I'm glad for all the people that this helps. It was always kinda stupid to be honest, how it was handled.

My only irritation isnt with the issue itself but that people keep saying its more "special ... More
Amen to that. It irks me to see how many people act like "it's a privilege, not a right" because the people involved are homosexual. Seriously: how would straight people feel if they were in the same situation?
04/16/2010
Sir Sir
I do not agree with this. At all. In fact, it pisses me off because it's setting homosexuals apart from heterosexuals who are married.

Just give homosexuals the right to marry, dammit, rather than acting like they have "special privileges"! Give them the same rights as every other person in the U.S., rather than skipping around it and doing all of this bullshit!
04/16/2010
Sir Sir
Let me add that I think that it's good that he's finally doing something "positive," but instead of doing this, he should have made it that homosexual marriage is allowed, because quite honestly, two people who are together (heterosexual couple) do not get visitation rights. Just because a homosexual couple is together does NOT mean that they are wanting to get married at any point. And if they ARE wanting to, they should be allowed to.

It aggravates me how people can go around the subject, give people the rights that they should ALREADY have, when they can do it the easy way and just give them the rights that they deserve.

Yeah, it's good for those individuals who were having problems with it. I agree with that. But at the same time...it just aggravates me how people are "alright" with this, when what we've been fighting for is EQUAL rights, not SEPARATE, DIFFERENT rights. Now, homosexual individuals have DIFFERENT rights from heterosexuals. This ISN'T what they were fighting for, so it ISN'T a victory. And Obama, of all people, a person of multiracial descent, should know EXACTLY what that means.
04/16/2010
El-Jaro El-Jaro
Quote:
Originally posted by Sir
Let me add that I think that it's good that he's finally doing something "positive," but instead of doing this, he should have made it that homosexual marriage is allowed, because quite honestly, two people who are together ... More
I can see where you're coming from on this.

From my perspective, marriage is a legally binding contract that goes as far back as The Code. Those who take the biggest gripe with non-straight weddings have some deluded (in my opinion) thought that marriage is some predestined, divinely imparted gift blessed upon those who apply penis to vagina.

What I think the Pres is trying to do is take the separate but equal approach until it become even more ridiculous so that it can only become a non-issue. In the mean time, though, at least one more road block is out of the way and discrimination has been reduced even a small amount.
04/16/2010
Sir Sir
Quote:
Originally posted by El-Jaro
I can see where you're coming from on this.

From my perspective, marriage is a legally binding contract that goes as far back as The Code. Those who take the biggest gripe with non-straight weddings have some deluded (in my opinion) ... More
I understand what you mean. I calmed down a bit, so I understand that it's (hopefully) a good step in the right direction. There should not have to be, in the year 2010, any "steps," though. It should just be equality, period. I suppose that I expect too much of people, or perhaps just expected too much of this president.

So all that I can think of now is how Martin Luther King Jr. fought for equal rights, and that one small school down in the South would not allow a little girl to enroll because her skin was darker than the rest of the students'. And how there were separate bathrooms for people because of their skin color, and how states' reasoning behind that was that they were "separate, but equal."

Edit: Are you trying to say that the president is, perhaps, trying to open people's eyes to how ridiculous it is?
04/16/2010
LikeSunshineDust LikeSunshineDust
I think you guys are overlooking one of the first sentences in the article. "President Barack Obama is ordering that nearly all hospitals allow patients to say who has visitation rights and who can help make medical decisions." This isn't the government deciding that someone can visit their same-sex partner; it would be the patient's decision of who can visit them, whether it be their same- or opposite-sex partner, best friend, neighbor, mentor, anyone.

From what I know about Obama's decision (just from reading this article), I think it's a great move toward equality. Not separate equality, but true equality. It's not "Ok, straight people can do this, but gay people have to do it this way." It's "Everyone has a right to decide who is at their bedside in a moment of need."
04/16/2010
El-Jaro El-Jaro
It could also be interpreted as: If you accept gov. money through one of these two programs, you can't discriminate in this/these situation(s).
04/16/2010
Miss Cinnamon Miss Cinnamon
Quote:
Originally posted by LikeSunshineDust
I think you guys are overlooking one of the first sentences in the article. "President Barack Obama is ordering that nearly all hospitals allow patients to say who has visitation rights and who can help make medical decisions." This ... More
I was gonna say... I mean, those with same-sex partners still get visitation rights, but that's not all of it. This basically lets the patient decide who should be allowed in to see them while in the hospital, etc.
04/16/2010
Sir Sir
Quote:
Originally posted by Miss Cinnamon
I was gonna say... I mean, those with same-sex partners still get visitation rights, but that's not all of it. This basically lets the patient decide who should be allowed in to see them while in the hospital, etc.
I wonder why, then, they're saying all of this stuff about BGLT? It has nothing to do with sexual orientation, it's simply giving the person who's in the hospital bed the right to choose who comes to visit them. Media. HAHAHA!
04/16/2010
Adriana Ravenlust Adriana Ravenlust
Quote:
Originally posted by Sir
I understand what you mean. I calmed down a bit, so I understand that it's (hopefully) a good step in the right direction. There should not have to be, in the year 2010, any "steps," though. It should just be equality, period. I ... More
The problem is, life doesn't care how we think it "should" be and thinking that way will only frustrate you further.
04/16/2010
Miss Cinnamon Miss Cinnamon
Quote:
Originally posted by Sir
I wonder why, then, they're saying all of this stuff about BGLT? It has nothing to do with sexual orientation, it's simply giving the person who's in the hospital bed the right to choose who comes to visit them. Media. HAHAHA!
Yup, that's pretty much it-- the press! I'll bet their current title picked up a lot more hits for the article than "Obama Orders Hospital Visitation Rights for, Well...Everyone". It's all about how you sell it.
04/16/2010
Sera Sera
Quote:
Originally posted by El-Jaro
If this is real...wow. I think he just tackled one of the larger issues for GLBT couples (I would've put this there, but I couldn't)

thoughts? comments?
gee, i don't know.
08/21/2010
Curves Curves
i was so happy to hear about this! it's so important and it finally came into play.
04/24/2011
Dusk Dusk
I really see Sir's point. We need to get over all this crap and just make equal rights for everyone. Either everyone gets to get married or none of us do and we make up some other title for the system.

Example: The university I'm working for next year allows my spouse to live with me in my apartment for free. If I have a same sex partner, they get to live with me for free no matter our 'standing' since clearly we can't be married. Since my partner is a man, and we are not married, we can't live together.

Screwed up much?

I'm all for equal rights, but I really do mean equal for everyone. Not something special for some and not others, and oh those others get a bunch of stuff the first group didn't get.
04/24/2011
Gunsmoke Gunsmoke
Quote:
Originally posted by Dusk
I really see Sir's point. We need to get over all this crap and just make equal rights for everyone. Either everyone gets to get married or none of us do and we make up some other title for the system.



Example: The university ... More
I think we need more polygamy - why do we stigmatize it? As long as it's between consenting adults. Isn't that the litmus test?
04/25/2011
Total posts: 17
Unique posters: 11