12/01/2005

Amazing!

The former apartheid capitol of the world, South Africa, legalizes marriage rights for same-sex couples.

In the post apartheid years, tremendous strides have been made in GLBT rights in South Africa.

South Africa's post apartheid constitution states that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals have the same rights as any other individual. Section 9 of the Constitution outlaws discrimination in South Africa based on sexual orientation.

Thursday's ruling was the latest in a series of legal wins for gays and lesbians dating back to 1998 when sodomy was decriminalized.

The following year immigrant partners of South African lesbians and gays were allowed to apply for permanent residence.

Same-sex adoption was legalized in 2002 and in 2003 the government bowed to pressure and permitted domestic partner benefits.


Could these be lessons learned from a terribly discriminatory country? If South Africa of all countries can recognize the humanity of its GLBT citizens, why can't we? Aren't we "the land of the free" too?

41 Comments:

At 13:00, Blogger lovin' it said...

Nah. I'd think they'd be more concerned with getting their AIDS crisis and economy under control before worrying about these types of things.

Isn't that the liberal line whenever conservatives express an interest in the status of marriage rights?

 
At 14:05, Anonymous Tom said...

Shows what great things can happen when religious conservatives lose control of a country! I can't wait until they're out of power in the US!

 
At 14:06, Anonymous Tom said...

Shows what great things can happen when religious conservatives lose control of a country! I can't wait until they're out of power in the US!

 
At 22:46, Blogger dorsano said...

They're a backward country, Callie - What can we possibly learn from them?

 
At 06:51, Blogger lovin' it said...

hey tom, you want to see america be more like South Africa? How about you spare the rest of us the agony and just move there yourself? If you can't afford the plane ticket, I'll help you out.

Just leave my country alone, would ya?

dorsano - South Africa has the highest rate of aids infection in the world. Are you sure emulating their social policies is a good idea?

 
At 10:07, Anonymous Tom said...

Uh, sorry Lovin It, but the US is just as much my country as it yours. Since you seem to hate freedom and equality under the law so much, why not get yourself over to Iran? You'll be so happy to be living under a government that enforces your idiotic beliefs. Or, considering that the US will be so much better once you and your ilk are in heaven - why not just go there now?

 
At 12:49, Blogger RedStateExile said...

We have an AIDS crisis and an out of control economy too, but we prefer to ignore it and hide behind righteous indignation and moral superiority ("not in this great Christian nation!").

Whatever!

 
At 12:54, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Tom-

Give it time! The world is waking up and so is our country. It's slow and painful, but it's necessary to the growth process. Somehow I don't think the dark ages have yet been had here. I think they are trying to put us there. We will survive though. :)

Dorsano-

You make me laugh!! Hahaha!

Can't be too backwards to recognize the humanity of all of its citizens?

Or, considering that the US will be so much better once you and your ilk are in heaven - why not just go there now?

DOH!!!!

 
At 08:24, Blogger lovin' it said...

tom - I like my country just the way it is. You're the ones trying to change it.

Callie - Out of control economy? Where in the world would you prefer to live? Whose economy would you like to emulate?

AIDS epidemic? South Africa has the highest infection level in the world. One in 4 adults are HIV positive. Their life expectency is 50 years for women and 48 for men. The US has a life expectency of of 71 for women and 67 for men. Less then one in 100 adults have AIDS.

You tell me which country has the better social policies. I think it would be a mistake to start emulating South Africa. They sure seem to be doing something wrong.

 
At 22:30, Anonymous Anonymous said...

omg moron how can u compare SA to USA? Our population is 10x as large as south africa. duh. common sense.

 
At 13:32, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Bad sense of humor, name-calling, and no sources!!

Tsk, tsk...a little time out will do you good.

 
At 21:46, Blogger dorsano said...

dorsano - South Africa has the highest rate of aids infection in the world. Are you sure emulating their social policies is a good idea?

Actually, lovinit - if you knew your ass from a whole in the ground, you'd know that homosexuality is not the not the cause of South Africa's AIDs problem (or the world's) -

you'd know that there is a proportionately lower number of homosexual women infected with HIV or AIDS than hetorosexual women,

and you'd know that the rate of infection among homosexual men has declined steadily from its historical high in the 1980s and matches the rate of infection among hetorosexual men,

and you wouldn't assume that all homosexuals practice unsafe sex

but you don't really care about facts - you just make shit up as you go.

 
At 13:48, Blogger lovin' it said...

dorsano - I never said any of those things. Who's assuming now?

My point is that everything in society is interconnected. South Africa's AIDS problem was caused because too many of their citizens engaged in promiscuous non-marital sex and ended up infected with AIDS. Basically, they did not respect marriage as the institution in which sex was permissable. Acceptance of non-traditional relationships is just one more symptom of the loss of respect for marriage. AIDS is the other symptom.

 
At 19:58, Blogger dorsano said...

dorsano - I never said any of those things. Who's assuming now?

I'd conceed that if it weren't for this subsequent statement Acceptance of non-traditional relationships is just one more symptom of the loss of respect for marriage ... which is the cause of aids.

1). The thread topic was same-sex marriages.

2). You linked AIDs to the acceptance of same-sex marriage (as you did in your subsequent statement)

Acceptance of non-traditional relationships is just one more symptom of the loss of respect for marriage.

That statement's not substantiated - but if you believe it's ture than

same-sex marriages would help to both restore respect for marriage, encourage monogamous relationships and reduce sex outside of marriage.

 
At 05:53, Blogger lovin' it said...

dorsano - I challenge you to point out one society, present or past, that accepted homosexual relationships as equal to heterosexual marriage, that still holds I high view of monogamy. South Africa certainly doesn't.

You have to deal with reality, not just what you'd like to exist. People's additudes and actions are not held in isolation. Any time traditional marraige is reduced in importance or sacredness, it inevitably leads to promiscuity. Which leads to greater AIDS risks, which South Africa amply demonstrates.

 
At 22:37, Blogger dorsano said...

You were talking about AIDS, lovinit. dorsano - South Africa has the highest rate of aids infection in the world. Are you sure emulating their social policies is a good idea?

Unsafe sex is the major cause of the spread of AIDs. If we engaged in safe sex, we could all be as promiscous as we cared to be and AIDS wouldn't be the problem that it is.

It no longer (if ever) had anything to do with homosexuality. SDT's have been part of the human condition well before the 60's

Why did you bring AIDs up in this discussion?

 
At 06:45, Blogger RedStateExile said...

What I think is hilarious (actually I guess it's more sad)about this whole discussion is that AIDS has been a part of the health care crisis for what, 20 years now, but in the US the first recognition WHATSOEVER of gay relationships OFFICIALLY wasn't until 2000 with the VT civil unions and internationally in 2001 the Netherlands was the first country to EVER extend FULL marriage rights to gay couples.

So, we have a couple of decades of AIDS then a few days of court decision in South Africa, which doesn't even take effect for another year!, and suddenly gay marriage is the CAUSE of AIDS in South Africa!

There is NO CONNECTION!

(BTW, those dates above were from: http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Center&CONTENTID=18408&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm)

 
At 09:29, Blogger lovin' it said...

I never said that gay marriage caused South Africa's AIDS crisis. I said South Africa's AIDS crisis was caused by the same mindset that eventually also led to acceptance of gay marriage. Both come about via a loss of respect for the sacredness of God-ordained marraige.

And it is a dangerous myth to believe that "safe sex" will prevent the spread of AIDS. Obviously condom usage will help, but condom failure rates range from 5-20%. Monogamy or abstinence are the only foolproof options.

 
At 12:59, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Let's see, this whole thread was about marriage and promoting monogamy. Yet YOU immediately get on a kick about AIDS. Let's see, who's making comparisons then?

You said yourself: "I think it would be a mistake to start emulating South Africa."

Why? Because marriage will lead to more AIDS? That's stupid. Marriage promotes monogamy. What's SO bad about a gay kid growing up and actually knowing that he can marry someone he falls in love with?

I can only speak for myself, but I had nothing to wait for. If I had grown up in a world where I could have known that I would have been able to marry someone I love one day, then maybe I would have believed all the crap in school about abstinence and waiting until marriage. Fortunately, I just happen to be a monogamous and non-promiscuous kind of person, and I've been blessed to find the same in my partner.

Unfortunately, there are a lot who don't foresee the goal in their future. Then they get crap from folks like you on one side saying "wait for marriage" when marriage doesn't apply to them...YET.

You can't even probably comprehend the absurdity of being told all your life to wait for something that you can't participate in, just so you finally love and be loved fully.

It doesn't even register with you, so I don't even know why I bothered at all.

 
At 18:03, Blogger dorsano said...

Obviously condom usage will help, but condom failure rates range from 5-20%. Monogamy or abstinence are the only foolproof options.

You're confusing pregnacy with AIDs

 
At 18:22, Blogger dorsano said...

I said South Africa's AIDS crisis was caused by the same mindset that eventually also led to acceptance of gay marriage. Both come about via a loss of respect for the sacredness of God-ordained marraige.

You never said that until now - you may have thought it - but you never said it.

I believe that God blesses a gay couple's marriage just as much as he blesses mine - probably more - gays had to work a hell of lot harder to get it.

 
At 18:25, Blogger dorsano said...

I said South Africa's AIDS crisis was caused by the same mindset that eventually also led to acceptance of gay marriage. Both come about via a loss of respect for the sacredness of God-ordained marraige.

Only in twisted logic does a lack of respect for the institution of marriage lead to marriage

 
At 06:26, Blogger lovin' it said...

dorsano - the AIDS virus is hundreds of times smaller then a sperm cell. If condoms failed that often for pregnancy, they'd never work against AIDS. You've just got your facts wrong. They fail 2-5% of the time for preventing pregnancy and 5-20% of the time against spreading viral infections like AIDS.

 
At 12:14, Blogger RedStateExile said...

dorsano-
I wasted time trying to find his "supposed" facts since he doesn't provide any links for us. Nothing came up. I'm not surprised.

Man, he's all over the place, but none of it makes any sense. WOW!!!

 
At 15:39, Blogger lovin' it said...

Follow this link for helpful information on condom failure rates for preventing pregnancy.

http://www.contraception.net/resource_centre/barrier.asp


Here's a link to a UN report showing the failure rate for a condom preventing the spread of AIDS to be 10%.

http://www.thebody.com/cdc/news_updates_archive/2003/jun23_03/condom_debate.html

I hope this is helpful.

 
At 16:32, Blogger dorsano said...

The surest way to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases is to abstain from sexual intercourse, or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and you know is uninfected.

Sounds like good reason to encourage gay marriage.

 
At 13:46, Blogger lovin' it said...

"Only in twisted logic does a lack of respect for the institution of marriage lead to marriage"

Loss of respect for the institution of knighthood led to such nonsense as knighting pop singers and artists.

Loss of respect for the purpose of an institution will often lead to the inclusion of those who previously did not qualify. Marriage is no different.

 
At 15:06, Blogger dorsano said...

previously did not qualify

Maybe their DNA isn't "human" enough for you?

Anyone who cares so much about the institution of marriage, that they are willing to put up with the rejection, shunning and sometimes outright hate directed at them,

seem worthy of the instutition it seems to me.

 
At 05:23, Blogger lovin' it said...

Anyone can qualify for marriage. It only requires that you marry someone.

Redefining marriage to include same-sex couples is no more valid then including polygamy, group marriage, or what have you. You can call it whatever you like, but that does not make it so.

You stated earlier that you believe God blesses same-sex couples just as much or more then yours. Which God do you worship? The Hebrew Bible, the Christian New Testament, the Koran, and the Hindu Upanishads all condemn homosexuality as a sin. Is this some personal God of your own imagining?

 
At 09:04, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Finally, links:

The first one said this about condoms:

To be most effective, condoms should be used with a spermicide. Used correctly, the typical failure rate of latex condoms is about 3%. However, application problems and breakage can occur with condoms. When used incorrectly, the failure rate for condom use rises to 12%. Latex condoms also protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and HIV.

As for your second link, further down in the article it said this:

The conclusions do not mean that every tenth condom is defective, but rather that something has gone wrong in about 10 percent of their use. In many cases, specialists said, human error is the source of the failure, resulting in condoms slipping off, breaking, or not being put on early enough. The report also said that the failure rate to protect against HIV was probably the same in preventing pregnancies.

I STILL wonder where you got 20% from, but at least you looked around a little.

 
At 09:17, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Dorsano-

These people REALLY don't care about what happens to marriage. They are worried about their status and place in society. Why else would you get a silly analogy of pop singers becoming knighted? Because they don't think pop singers are worthy of being knighted even if the knighthood has long been a dead institution even to them, it doesn't matter. The point is, someone on the outside of their special world is not good enough to be among their ranks.

I gave a long explanation about this phenomenon on another site (www.knowthyneighbor.org), but the basic principle is that social norms are constructed and maintained through patriarchial, heteronormative codes. Anything that challenges the domination and power of the patriarchy and the heterosexual norm is deemed dangerous: the "other." Women, who don't need men for their social and emotional survival, are the main threat to these norms. Men are a threat too, but not so much because men, even if they are in intimate relationships together, still have power. Women together usurp power and claim it as their own.

This is absolutely unacceptable within the codes of power and domination in a heteronormative culture.

So, this isn't about religion or even right and wrong sexuality. I think deep down they probably don't care who we sleep with, but they care that we want to be on an equal playing field with them.

It's an interesting concept that puts the argument into a totally different light.

 
At 12:09, Blogger dorsano said...

Is this some personal God of your own imagining? Is this some personal God of your own imagining?

It's the God that created Gays and Lesbians and all human beings in His own image.

 
At 12:28, Blogger dorsano said...

Marriage is a human institution.

Where there is love, there is God and He blesses the committment and union of a same-sex couple whether their fellow human beings treat them as human and recognize their union or not.

God has plenty of things to hold me accountable for someday - but what I believe on this matter is not one of them.

In that certainty, I offer my soul to God.

 
At 12:42, Blogger dorsano said...

polygamy, group marriage, or what have you

First you bring up AIDS and now this - At least you didn't mention bestiality - I suppose that's an improvement

We're talking about same-sex couples - one doesn't lead to or require the rest.

If two young women or two young men in love committing to each other for better or worse until death isn't human enough for you - fine

But judge that case alone.

 
At 14:11, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Dorsano-

{{{MWAH!!!}}} You deserve a BIG kiss for that one!!! If there are special places in Heaven for good people, I'm sure there's a reservation being held in your name. ;)

 
At 20:23, Blogger dorsano said...

You deserve a BIG kiss for that one

That works for me, Callie. :)

Take care - and godspeed to you and your partner in all you do.

 
At 21:44, Blogger dorsano said...

Oh, by the way, here are some places of worship.

We can't begin to list all the congregations in Minnesota that welcome GLBT folks and their families. Isn't that a great problem to have! Here a few suggestions.

A friend of mine, Dennis Sanders, is the Pastor at Community of Grace Christian Church.

Dennis is an African-American and Gay. He's also a Republican and active in the Minnesota Republican Party.

TV, newspapers and blogsphere are a distorted reflection of reality - thank God for that.

 
At 06:31, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Dorsano-
Interesting that you would mention that. On that "Knowthyneighbor" site, which was started by a gay couple in MA to publicize the names of the petition signers to undo their marriages, I've learned that several of the gay posters (and I think one of the site creators) are Republican as well.

Some gay Repubs seem to enjoy being hated. Obviously, there are those that don't. It looks like there are certain parts of the country where party affiliation doesn't necessarily mean you have to hate someone.

I think I'd be so confused up there. At least here I know Repubs hate me (and most Dems but that's a whole other story). :)

 
At 19:49, Blogger dorsano said...

Some gay Repubs seem to enjoy being hated.

No - they don't especially enjoy that from what I can gather. :)

It looks like there are certain parts of the country where party affiliation doesn't necessarily mean you have to hate someone.

It's important to differentiate between the rank and file and the leadership.

Since caucus and primary turnouts are so low, organized groups can stack the caucuses and skew the endorsement process.

The same thing happens in the Democratic party only there, it's usually about institutional loyalty - someone has "earned" the right to run because they've worked in the party for x number of years - it produces some stinker candidates sometimes.

I'm working right now in MN to get an amendment on the ballot to change the process for races up to an including city council. It's the first step in changing the process for statewide races and eventually nationwide races.

 
At 20:01, Blogger dorsano said...

Party loyalty dies hard - everyone thinks the party will produce better candidates the next time around.

I spoke at a High School (in a Republican district) on behalf of the Democratic Party along side someone speaking for the GOP.

The kids were pretty tough on the guy - I sorta felt sorry for him. These are kids who think of themselves as Republicans and they asked the GOP spokesperson how the crediblity of the presidency, the credibility of the country and the credibility of the GOP could be restored after this president.

His answer basically was - we'll offer better candidates next time and they will fix it when they get elected.

What people don't understand is - it won't get fixed if you leave it to someone else to fix and don't get your butt to a caucus or primary.

 
At 06:24, Blogger RedStateExile said...

I'm working right now in MN to get an amendment on the ballot to change the process for races up to an including city council. It's the first step in changing the process for statewide races and eventually nationwide races.

That sounds like a good plan. It has to start somewhere. We can't keep going on with the same ol', same ol'.

We're following the definition of insanity if we don't make change.

People don't change on their on, esp. when they get rewarded for crap.

That's why I have a hard time holding my nose and just voting anyway because I know I just rewarded bad behavior. How can I expect change from someone if I keep acting the same way towards them? It's like a misbehaving kid. If they're kicking and screaming to get a cookie and you give 'em a cookie, they're going to keep on kicking and screaming to get more cookies. It's human nature.

Okay, I think I'm getting to the point of philosophizing. I will stop now. :)

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home