[Rich Lee]

Originally Posted by JViello

On another note that relates to our home state regarding "gay rights"...

It was said that not allowing gays to marry in this state was denying them certain rights. Fair enough...so we passed a civil union bill and civil unions have been recognized so all gay partnerships can attain the same "rights" as a married couple such as insurance and medical decisions and whatnot.

Well, now I see that the gay marriage bill is being pushed. Why? Was it about rights or changing the definition of marriage? (<==honest question) If it was about rights, they have been attained - no?

No, a civil union is far from marriage. JViello, if you and your wife moved to another state, you'd still considered married, right? A civil union doesn't accomplish this for homosexual couples. (And yes, gay folks do move from time to time!)

Could you imagine if you were told by your new state, "our state doesn't acknowledge Connecticut marriages. As a matter of fact, our state doesn't offer 'your kind' marriage of any sort."

[JViello]

Originally Posted by Rich Lee

No, a civil union is far from marriage. JViello, if you and your wife moved to another state, you'd still considered married, right? A civil union doesn't accomplish this for homosexual couples. (And yes, gay folks do move from time to time!)

I see that point, thank you for pointing it out.

Any other items that would make a redefinition of marriage viable over civil unions?

[Rich Lee]

Originally Posted by JViello

I see that point, thank you for pointing it out.

Any other items that would make a redefinition of marriage viable over civil unions?

It hasn't brought civilization to an end in the countries that now have it: Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, and Spain.

No matter how one slices it, there isn't going to be any increase or decrease in the actual number of gay people in any country's population. (In the 1950s, it was estimated to be at 10 percent of humans.) Some politicians feel that chaning the law would "legitimize" a certain lifestyle. Whatever.

Are they really concerned that two guys living down the street are married and the guys' gay marriage threatens their straight marriage? But if those two guys had remained in a civil union, their marriage would be as sound as on their wedding day? Right...with 50 percent ending in divorce, I don't think it would make a difference.

What's the real concern?

[skytrekker]

Originally Posted by conservethequiet

Hey, I’m wondering how your search for a Connecticut home is going. Someone pointed toward New Haven as being a good city and many people have pointed out that being gay isn't a big deal in Connecticut and I agree with both statements.
The first issue of a regional paper debuted with the first civil-union in the town of Woodstock, Connecticut as its front-page story. While many of us viewed their civil union as a sad thing to settle for (they were an older couple who was afraid they wouldn't live for marriage in Connecticut), some locals wrote letters to the editor calling the paper "liberal trash" and "a threat to their 3 young children."
I guess my point is that we're still an evolving State, so please don't expect us to be perfect. Suburbs are probably the most socially liberal part of the state but the neighborhoods surrounding Yale and UConn are also liberal centers. Please don't move to the suburbs to have a good lifestyle. City or country in Connecticut offers the best lifestyle.
I have to suggest Pomfret. It has been my home for my nineteen years of life and the people here are usually considerate, open-minded and genuine. You can make friends here or be left alone depending on what you prefer. There's a cozy cafe (in a converted barn), a great ice cream stop (waffle cones are what locals know to order) and Connecticut's best vineyard (pretend you never left the West Coast!). Many conservation groups own land in town including The Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy and the State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. I spent 13 years in Pomfret’s great public school system and I am now enrolled at a top liberal arts college in Vermont.
I hope you find a place to call home!

When I go to Providence- I drive through eastern CT-Pomfret is one town I love- and I agree with what you say totally. Eastern CT is indeed an escape from the rest of the world.

[skytrekker]

Originally Posted by JViello

That's exactly what I said. What part did you miss? Be yourself.



I'll make this easy for you. Special rights are rights that not everyone gets. It's that simple. An example. "Gay based hate crimes". Crime is crime, assault is assault. I would expect the police to treat an assault the same whether the person was gay or straight. Why show preferential treatment?

Equal is equal. I've never heard of an assault done out of love.



No, it's sad that to many that's what out IS. jjbradleynyc said it about perfect, you should listen to what he wrote.

You want to hold hands going down the street? Fine. You want to live life undesturbed? Fine. You want your own parade JUST for being gay? Not totally fine in my book.

I would say the same for "black" or "Irish" or whatever. If they let others in to march with them in the "gay parade", perhaps that may be a way to "include" everyone and it would be more acceptable. If not, just join an existing parade with a group that represents your interests just like other people do. (I.E. Evironmental groups or veteran groups etc)

Lets do an A-B comparison with pictures so I can perhaps help educate you.

These are from the same "Gay Parade" in Frisco.

Example #1, Dykes on bikes. All fine by me, just people participating in a parade:


Example #2, two guys walking down the street half naked to show they are gay. Why? What's the point? THAT is what people like myself don't want to deal with or accept whether straight or gay.



If you can't see the difference, I don't know what to say.



Again, that's what I wrote, I'm not sure where YOUR mind is in this. As for the family thing, well it's okay to not agree on everything but that's America and my right as well. I'll leave it at that out of respect for other members here.



I was prefaced with "A". Basic english knowledge dictates that it would be in the singular tense, meaning I was speaking for myself thank you.



Not sure what you are looking for, but you may not find it here or anywhere if you can't see and respect some of the points I wrote here. Respect and tollerance is a two way street.

Hey JV

those pics look like either San Fran or NYC on pride day-
and both those cities are pretty wild and open liberal places.
Those gals on the bikes- and the guys in the jocks may shock Nebraska, but in NYC, L.A, or San Francisco NO.

If Nebraska cannot handle it- does that make it bad? I can assure you that what goes on behind closed doors with straight couples is probably less shocking openly but can be far worse. The gay men and lesbians are just venting their pride- would I do it? No- but thats just me- I tend to live a rather conservative lifestyle.

[BigHouse9]

Originally Posted by JViello

I actually grew up in one of the hardest "black" neighborhoods in Waterbury with a single mother. I've seen things first hand that you probably haven't a clue about.

Your arguement is like a gun control argument which says make new laws to stop the guys who are already breaking the laws from breaking the laws. LOL

IF the current laws were inforced there would be no need for "special" laws right? Good, so that's clear.

IF the current prosecutors and judges have a bias, what makes you think a new law would discourage them when what they are supposedly doing is already illegal?

You think the social injustice that goes on in the courtrooms is a racial problem, I happen to think it's a social problem.

I could throw the Duke lacross players back at your example. White boys getting unfairly smeared by an overzealous white prosecutor with an agenda. Where is there protection aside from the money their respective families have to fight their wrongfull accusations? If they were poor white boys they'd be in jail.

How would a judge or prosecutor know if the victom was gay? Can he "spot a gay at 50 feet"? Can he "just know"? Are all gays that "obvious"? I bet there are gay guys and women all around you that you have no idea about.



I didnt' think you would respond in a manner that furthers the dicsussion. Oh well.


Rich Lee: I understand what you are saying about the Wyoming incident. It makes me sick myself to think of such a crime in ANY capacity can take place.

However, I will say there are also women targeted. Do we have special women laws? How about the edlerly that are sought out as a target. Do they get special prosecution laws? What about the rich who get targeted because they "carry bank" around?

See my point? I think giving special rights/laws above and beyond a benign law that says "assault is bad, regardless of color, culture or sexual orientation" is going down a slippery slope we shouldn't.

Do I think that anyone who assaults someone because they are gay (How they know the person is, is beyond me...but) or denies them housing (Which is already illegal) or whatever is wrong and should be punished? Yes. But I would say the same for a white person, black person, Puerto Rican person or whoever was wronged.

On another note that relates to our home state regarding "gay rights"...

It was said that not allowing gays to marry in this state was denying them certain rights. Fair enough...so we passed a civil union bill and civil unions have been recognized so all gay partnerships can attain the same "rights" as a married couple such as insurance and medical decisions and whatnot.

Well, now I see that the gay marriage bill is being pushed. Why? Was it about rights or changing the definition of marriage? (<==honest question) If it was about rights, they have been attained - no?

Moreover, a recent example of how this can whiplash back is when my wife was approached by one of her employees who has a domestic partnership for about 7 years. She was asked to add her partner on her insurance benefits. She did and all was well.

Two months later, the insurance for the parnet was dropped. Why? They are a heterosexual couple. They are now suing and it's a mess my poor wife has to deal with on top of her already stressful job.

What's the difference? They were domestic partners? Granted they have the option of marrying, but they said they didn't want to follow that practice as they are not religous but wanted the same rights as a married couple which the civil union bill gives. That's a real situation, what would be some of your take on that subject?

P.S. I appreciate the discussion and I myself am in no way heated on this...just a discussion about a subject facing our state that I think can be had in a civil manner by all.

Very good post. Thanks JViello for making a point without a flame fest

[brattpowered]

The OP asked a simple question. It's amazing how these types of questions turn into full-on arguments and ill will when someone with "gays-on-the-brain" decides to chime in without concern for answering the question.

[WallStreetWarrior]

I'm not even sure if the thread starter is still interested, but I'll offer up a suggestion. I would take a look at Glastonbury, CT. I've never lived there, but have spent a good amount of time there, and it's not that I think there's a lot of gay people there, but I think there is a lot of culture there.

Being as conservative as I am, it's hard to get into the mindset of being an openly gay male, but I'll do my best. Glastonbury has a very neat center to the town with lots of coffee shops(Daybreakers is a favorite), and some neat family owned art shops and such. Shopping is very convenient with chain stores and more expensive amateur designer shops both in the area. Hartford is very accessible as well for nightlife. I'm not an expert on this particular issue, but to my knowledge there may be a gay pride day in or around Glastonbury even-- not positive though.

There actually is a stat on city-data.com that shows the suspected amount of households with gay/lesbian partners. Of course this stat is compiled of the unreported same-sex unmarried households. It's close to the bottom on most of the town profile pages. Glastonbury is about .4% gay, and .4% lesbian, so there is a fair amount of couples in the town.

Good luck finding a home, and keep us posted!

[skytrekker]

I would assume the person started this thread as either made the decision to move here-or has decided not to-in either case he does not seem to be around.

[Gif]

Allow me to respond to Yankee's lack of understanding the need to be "out" and his or her heterosexual myopia.

While being "out" may mean different things to different people, the underlying theme is the ability to be yourself, openly and honestly. For example, enjoying the open acts of holding hands with one's partner, speaking of one's domestic life with others, and so forth. In essence, to partake in the simple acts that straight couples do without a moment's thought. One should feel free to be "out", regardless of his or her sexuality.

Regarding yankee's insinuation that gays and lesbians seek out "special rights", there is nothing special about having one's marriage recognized by the state and enjoying all of the benefits and costs of this legal recognition. Is it a special right when straight marriages are sanctioned by the state? No, just as it isn't special when gay relationships get sanctioned by the state. Is it special when straight men and women add their spouses to their tax returns, insurance plans, frequent flier mile clubs, AAA memberships, etc.? No, it is just taken as fact. Why can't gay couples enjoy such benefits without being condemned as seeking "special rights"? Yank seems to have double standards.

Onto the yankee's comment about placing stickers all over the car or marching in pride parades. Why should these acts evoke a hateful reaction? And why would this response be condoned as "normal"? These stickers are no more offensive than bumper stickers proclaiming that the driver supports his Christian family or is proud of his honor roll student. They all tell us a bit about the driver and his lifestyle.

I certainly hope that this Yankee doesn't speak for all of the citizenry in CT. If so, I wouldn't go. This thinly veiled contempt for anything different than straight (and narrow) lives will no doubt make life there for anyone who doesn't fit rather uncomfortable. Maybe that's the idea.

A former yank living it up in NM