Republican Mayor "Comes Out" for Gay Marriage

Jerry Sanders, San Diego's Republican mayor, reverses his opinion on gay marriage in a tearjerker of a press conference.

Read more here.

Aaron Toleos

Comments

[John]

Nice,

And he did just because it is the right thing to do.

If only more politicians would take that step, and just do the right thing.

[John Howard]

So he didn't consider the ethics of same-sex conception at all? I wonder if he even knows about the possibility of same-sex conception, or of the need to enact an egg and sperm law to stop genetic engineering and preserve natural conception rights.

Civil unions should be exactly like marriage but without guaranteeing a right to attempt to conceive children together.

[musclehippy]

Excellent point Howie! How about you start contacting elected officials and have them REALLY start to push the topic. 'Kay.

[John Hosty-Grinnell]

"Civil unions should be exactly like marriage but without guaranteeing a right to attempt to conceive children together."

One big problem with your fears John, people already have the right, even without marriage or civil unions. You are putting the cart before the horse. You should be trying to outlaw Franken-babies, THEN try denying the rights of equality to gays.

Right now Musclehippy is building an army of Little John Howard Juniors he cloned from skin cells he took of my hand you shook.

Sorry guys, I know I shouldn't have, but I couldn't resist... ;)

[musclehippy]

LOL! A tempting thought. Actually, I have fantasies about cloning ME and then unleashing "myselves" upon the next GOP party convention. Would'nt THAT be a hoot! =)). In all seriousness though JH it is somewhat kinda sad to hear you refer to these kids as "franken" babies. I assume that you're just being "tongue-in-cheek" right? Really, there's no major big difference in reproductive outcome using SSP. It's NOT cloning(something that I'm personally against, unless yer talking about cloning your own body parts for use on your own body, e.g. organs say). If you can support our marriage rights than I don't really see what the major deal is here in wanting to cement the relationship to it's logical conclusion. Right?

[John Hosty-Grinnell]

In all honesty MH, I am hesitant to support anything I don't fully understand. I haven't yet looked into the plausibility of SSP, so if you want to educate me, I'm all ears (genetic joke intended).

[Musclehippy]

Yah I hear ya. I myself must acknowledge the fact that, to the best of my knowledge this procedure has never been performed on human subjects. It could very well be that this procedure just would'nt work with same sex couples. I am however, VERY optimistic about the scientific plausibility factor of this procedure becoming a REALITY though! One must admit though, it certainly would be a very intersting project to see come to fruition, provided that the child was physically healthy and mentally astute. I tip my hat to the neverending field of science and its steady progression toward total enlightenment of The Human Animal.

[Tom]

Ya, and while we're trying to clone ourselves or create our own Fraken-babies, the religious right will be trying to figure out how they could actually advocate aborting gay fetuses (that one precious exception in their relentless crusade) once genetics can deliver that information. Scary stuff!

[John]

Yeah, Tom that is legitimate concern.

[musclehippy]

Soooo....we should just bury our collective heads in the sand and just not bother with this line of research cuuuuz it's "scary stuff"? And while we're on the subject "tom" I'll thank you not to refer to our future sons as "franken" babies. It is a rather derogatory remark coming from a supposed member of a community that has had to tolerate a VAST amount of name calling based solely on MISinformation and stereotyping! After all bud if you don't think yer man enough to be a father then hey guess what, DON'T BE ONE! Case closed.

[Tom]

Wow! Muscle, chill a bit. Your reaction was totally unexpected and while I do not entirely understand the level of your indignation (vitriol?), I'll be 'man' enough to apologize for any unintended offense. Actually, I never used the "Fraken" expression before. I actually picked it up on this blog and thought it spoke to the fear I have for genetic or social engineering of any kind. Maybe the Nazi zeal for this type of scientific inquiry gives me some pause. I think that was valid. But upon more reflection, I probably will refrain from using such an electrifying term in the future. Bottom line: children are a gift and an enormous responsibility no matter how we come to be their caretakers. I should know, I'm a happy grandfather of 5.

[John Howard]

One big problem with your fears John, people already have the right, even without marriage or civil unions. You are putting the cart before the horse. You should be trying to outlaw Franken-babies, THEN try denying the rights of equality to gays.

I agree with musclehippy not to call them Frankenbabies, though that stigma will be unavoidable should someone make a baby from same-sex parents.

As to the cart/horse, I am trying to get the Egg and Sperm law and protect marriage's conception rights at the same time. I don't think these issues should be separated, just as we didn't separate the Loving's conception rights from their marriage rights. They are the same thing. I agree that turning SSMs into CU's without conception rights will be useless unless we also enact the egg and sperm law immediately afterwards, like one minute later, max. Preferably it should be done simultaneously, because if one happens first without the other following, it offends marriage.

[John]

"One big problem with your fears John, people already have the right, even without marriage or civil unions. You are putting the cart before the horse. You should be trying to outlaw Franken-babies, THEN try denying the rights of equality to gays."

WTF?

I don't want to do either. I don't want to outlaw "Franken-Babies", and I certainly don't want to deny equality to anyone.

[John Howard]

John, would you outlaw same-sex conception for the immediate present and foreseeable future in exchange for full equal protections in all other aspects of marriage, right now?

Same-sex conception might never even be possible, let alone be safe and cheap enough for peopel to actually want to try. And if it ever does become possible or safe, Congress could change the law to allow it again, at which point all the Civil Unions would become marriages. But you'd get the federal recognition and a way to get Civil unions in all fifty states right away, at the same time that we banned conception rights.

I of course would continue to argue that we should never allow same-sex conception, and Civil Unions should not become marriages, but I wouldn't be the only one making a case. So merely enacting the Compromise today does not guarantee either of our preferred futures, it only puts the real question before us in clear focus and achieves the mundane aspects that we all ought to agree on, for now.

[musclehippy]

HAHA! Excellent points Howie! More conservative drivel! Blah,blah,blahhhhh. And as for you tom well, what can I say? Some "homosexuals" should probably stay in their closets and continue humping their female wives,girlfriends, fiances, concubines whatever. For those of us REAL HOMOSEXUAL MEN who can see beyond the next 15 minutes of our existences on this world and who have never lowered our standards to make it with the opposite sex, THOSE are the men(and lesbian females)who will indeed claim this world and be the TRUE inheritors of human society. And no, tom, it's not "nazi" zeal to support this type of technology! Just because scientific concepts baffle your imagination doesn't mean that we all want to live like Mr. Howard or Mr. Cocksnacker!! LOL! To those gays/lesbians who want to exist as second class citizens for the remainder of their lives, hey all, GO FOR IT! Just don't get to pissed at the rest of us who want MORE out of life than circuit party club hopping and then quiet, conformist settlement into the upper yuppy middle class realm! Of which I suspect your probably a member of. It just does'nt suit all of us Tom. So sad to see what our civil rights movement has fallen into: Ass kissing up to the breeders, shitting on those of us who's income falls below the $1,000,000 a month mark and mocking those of us who actually WANT to raise a TRUE, LEGITIMATE GAY FAMILY!!

[Tom]

You're passionate Muscle; I'll give you that. However, your characterizations of me are so far off the reality chart that I dismiss your flamboyant rhetoric as mindless stereotyping of those within your own community. Very amusing that someone should create their own one-man passion play and play the lead role. You must have spent years doing this in the mirror. What's the point?

[Lula]

TOM SAID:

"flamboyant rhetoric as mindless stereotyping of those within your own community"

THANK YOU

[musclehippy]

Hey tommy baby I calls it likes I sees it. And what the hell's up with you Lula? At times all you spout is "mindless" rhetoric, soooo....let's not go calling the kettle black here Mr. Pot. 'Kay. =)). My views are VERY forward thinking and VERY progressive, and from the start Lula I've always kinda wondered where you TRULY stand in our community. All I keep hearing from you is the same ol' regurgitated blah blah I've already heard from the beginning of this rights movement back in the '70's. Yes, Lula it was VERY interesting verbiage. BACK THEN! Time to take a fresh approach though. My views on SSP seem very frightening to you. Why? Because it means that our lives will now be filled with something MORE concrete and meaningful than "queer as folk" or "will and grace" re-runs! LOL! YES, I do have a few issues with these "gay" dudes who did'nt have the courage to stay true to their sexual orientation and actually lowered themselves to make it with the opposite sex. Tells me that something is DEFINITELY amiss here. If they were too weak then to admit to themselves EXACTLY WHO and WHAT they were back then how the hell can they be trusted to not just skip on back to enemy side when the heat gets turned up a bit? See what I mean Lula? I understand the fact that you come from a religious kook family scenario Lula and I TRULY am sorry that one of our kind had to be subjected to that type of BS. Maybe now you can see why we CAN'T afford to be ACCOMADATIONISTS Lula. Yes! Peaceful co-existence with the enemy is ALWAYS desirable, but does it really, truly work??? Now there's something to ponder.

[John]

"Peaceful co-existence with the enemy is ALWAYS desirable, but does it really, truly work??? Now there's something to ponder."

What we have to do is energize the straight allies.

http://www.sevenstraightnights.org/

[Tom]

At least Lula is a voice of reason. She (I'm gender-guessing here) can defend herself when she faces the enemy (we've seen many on this site during the Con-Con days; and I don't think she or I would include you, Muscle, in this category however obnoxious and belligerent you can be sometimes); but she respects differences of opinion and is a bridge-builder. She identifies with the gay community and is smart enough to know we must all hang together. Put a little love in your life, bro, because you sound overly consumed with anger.

[Lula]

mh, I really don't care if you don't consider me a "true gay."

I was offended by your first accusation of that a while back, but now I really don't have time to accommodate your superiority complex, or to entertain your misguided contempt for ALL straight people.

Speaking as someone who struggled to free himself and recover from a severely fundamentalist family, which included various forms of abuse, I have absolutely no respect for your slap in the face to those of us who have struggled to find a voice amidst such an oppressive and emotionally unhealthy environment.

Seriously, mh, your lack of empathy is disgusting.

And the lack of depth in analyzing the struggles of other gays is nauseating.

You say you're "TRULY SORRY" for what I myself have gone through. Well, mh, your empathy rings hollow.

Does it ever occur to you, even for but an instance, that some of us were gay CHILDREN surrounded by religious fanatics, trying to love ourselves when we were taught to HATE ourselves?

Really, man. You deserve a huge FU right now.

"Maybe now you can see why we CAN'T afford to be ACCOMADATIONISTS Lula."

I've seen it all along, thanks.

John, I absolutely agree with you. Our energies should now be spent mobilizing our straight allies instead of trying to continue to debate an opponent who is deaf to us and refuses to acknowledge the inevitability of social justice and social progress.

And on this, I agree with mh: We need to educate and mobilize those within the gay community who are ignorant as to important pending political battles, but always know what VJ is playing what club.

[Lula]

Tom, I've used the moniker "Lula" as a tribute to and reminder of the strong women I've known who have stood up to the dysfunctions of patriarchal structure.

I am a gay male completely comfortable being male.

I don't even do drag. ;)

(not to diss my cross-dressing sistahs)

[Lula]

CORRECTION:

"John, I absolutely agree with you. Our energies should now be spent mobilizing our straight allies instead of trying to continue to debate an opponent who is deaf when it comes to us, and who refuses to acknowledge the inevitability of social justice and social progress"

[Tom]

Lula: LOL! That's why I try NEVER to assume. I had a friend who went by LulaBelle - the collision of his abbreviated first name and his surname.

[Lula]

"Maybe now you can see why we CAN'T afford to be ACCOMADATIONISTS Lula."

I also don't think we can afford to be ISOLATIONISTS, and ostrasize those who wish to actually aid us in our fight.