Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

Gay Marriage

Page: (1)2 3

15:24 / 13.08.03

On one of the other boards I frequent, I found this discussion really fascinating.

Put simply, it's about an old Catholic rite for a same-sex marriage, based on the relationship between St. Serge (or Sergius or Sarkis) and St. Bacchus (or Bakhos or, possibly, Maron).
They *appear* to be for-real saints, have churches named after them, have novenas in their honor. The exact nature of their relationship is... unclear. But, according to one Yale researcher, they were called upon to bless unions between men in the 1200s. And, according to some other folks, as late as the 1700s.

Which puts a whole new wrinkle on the gay marriage debate.

Anyone else heard anything about this?

Any other discussion of gay marriage welcome as well. (See abstract.)

17:03 / 13.08.03

Verrrry interesting, grant! There’s some detail about St Sergius and St Bacchus (and a host of other juicy queer ecclesiastical items here and
this article from the Irish Times by one Jim Duffy gives an informative run down in brief (that’s also quoted by Cross_+_Flame on the other board).

A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St. Catherine's monastery on Mt. Sinai. It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman pronubus (best man) overseeing what in a standard Roman icon would be the wedding of a husband and wife. In the icon, Christ is the pronubus. Only one thing is unusual. The "husband and wife" [St. Serge and St. Bacchus, two Roman soldiers who became Christian martyrs] are in fact two men…

Severus of Antioch in the sixth century explained that "we should not separate in speech [Serge and Bacchus] who were joined in life"…

… after a twelve year search of Catholic and Orthodox church archives Yale history professor John Boswell has discovered that a type of Christian homosexual "marriage" did exist as late as the 18th century.

Professor Boswell discovered that in addition to heterosexual marriage ceremonies in ancient church liturgical documents (and clearly separate from other types of non-marital blessings of adopted children or land) were ceremonies called, among other titles, the "Office of Same Sex Union" (10th and 11th century Greek) or the "Order for Uniting Two Men" (11th and 12th century).

…Such homosexual unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12th / early 13th century, as the chronicler Gerald of Wales (Geraldus Cambrensis) has recorded.

Won't convince the diehards who believe that God's obssessed with what us mortals get up to in bed and is up there cocking a snook at us homosexualist propagandists. It is consonant with all the historical evidence elsewhere that public attitudes to homosexuality have undergone great waves of change throughout history.

14:51 / 06.02.04

Just reviving this thread because two separate people have just told me that gay marriage is now legal in the UK. My consumption of news is erratic at best, so I have no idea what they are talking about: anybody know?

I am going to be so pissed off if I have to get married in order to prove that I am in a relationship Akin To Marriage.

Foust is SO authentic

20:36 / 06.02.04

I am going to be so pissed off if I have to get married in order to prove that I am in a relationship Akin To Marriage.

What kind of relationship is it, Deva? I've got some thoughts, but they might be moot if I'm misunderstanding your post.

21:05 / 06.02.04

As a general update, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled in favour of it earlier this week...

See here, although there seems to be a fight brewing over the ruling...

22:09 / 06.02.04

Same-sex, international. She's a writer, so she can move to Britain without having to prove we're in a relationship Akin To Marriage, but when it's my turn to move to Australia it might be harder to get in on the grounds that we are Akin To Marriage if it's legal to get married in the UK and we haven't done it. With any luck, I will get a job in Australia and the point will be moot, though.

23:52 / 06.02.04

And the homophobes come out blasting like Yosemite Sam

"First and foremost, this is not a law of intolerance," Taft said. "I do not endorse, nor does this law provide for, discrimination against any Ohio citizen."

[Insert laugh track here]

08:39 / 07.02.04

More information on the UK situation here. Not sure exactly how these "civil partnerships" will compare with the rights-and-responsibilities bundled in heterosexual marriage as it currently exists, but they look pretty good.

02:01 / 28.02.04

Not pertinent to the anti-gay marriage amendment topic exactly, here's an essay by Orson Scott Card, the (Mormon) author of the Ender's Game books.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court has not yet declared that "day" shall now be construed to include that which was formerly known as "night," but it might as well.

By declaring that homosexual couples are denied their constitutional rights by being forbidden to "marry," it is treading on the same ground.

Do you want to know whose constitutional rights are being violated? Everybody's. Because no constitution in the United States has ever granted the courts the right to make vast, sweeping changes in the law to reform society.

...We will once again be performing a potentially devastating social experiment on ourselves without any attempt to predict the consequences and find out if the American people actually want them.

But anyone who has any understanding of how America -- or any civilization -- works, of the forces already at play, will realize that this new diktat of the courts will not have any of the intended effects, while the unintended effects are likely to be devastating.

It only gets hairier after those.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

10:26 / 28.02.04

The Massachusetts Supreme Court has not yet declared that "day" shall now be construed to include that which was formerly known as "night," but it might as well.

Is Orson Scott Card the queerterophobic Dave Sim it's alright to slap?

12:54 / 28.02.04

I love the desperate grasping for scriptural reasons for homophobia by bigoted christians opposing gay marriage. It's all bollocks, even the most quoted Leviticus passage is never contextualised properly.

I recently stumbled upon this fantastic tool for arguing with the aforementioned bigots.

Apparently you could argue that Ruth (as in, from the Book of Ruth in the bible) and Naomi were married.

Here's the interpretation from the MCC Church-

"The Book of Ruth is a romantic novel but not about romance between Ruth and Boaz. Naomi is actually the central character, and Ruth is the "redeemer/hero." Boaz' relationship with Ruth, far from being romantic, is a matter of family duty and property.

This story contains the most moving promise of relational fidelity between two persons in all of the bible: "And Ruth said, 'Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whether thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God". (Ruth 1:16)

Although used in heterosexual marriage ceremonies for years, this is a vow between two women! When their husbands die in battle, Ruth makes this vow to Naomi, her mother-in-law. Ruth marries Boaz, a close relative, and redeems Naomi's place in her own family, also bearing a child for Naomi. Did Ruth and Naomi have a lesbian relationship? There's no way to know, but it is clear the two women had a lifelong, passionate, committed relationship celebrated in Scripture"

13:10 / 28.02.04

the unintended effects are likely to be devastating.

You see, I actually agree with this, like I agree with the people who say that legalizing gay marriage is potentially a step towards legalizing polygamy, bestiality and paedophilia* - but in general I think the "devastation" is likely to be a good thing. The point of marriage as it is currently defined in the UK and the US is to privilege a particular organization of sexuality, financial interdependence and co-parenting, and to bundle all those things together as if they were 'naturally' related. Legalizing gay marriage potentially blows apart the 'natural' relations between all the elements that currently define 'marriage', and could indeed have devastating effects as a consequence.

But I think those effects are likely to be good ones - painful and possibly violent, but potentially progressive - opening up further grounds of critiquing marriage. I think marriage is a terrible institution, and the only thing I like about the legalization of gay marriage (beyond the obvious pragmatic benefits to those same-sex couples who fit into the other criteria of marriage) is the possibility of devastating unintentional effects. One of the things I always thought was stupid about Babylon 5 was the idea that the legalization of same-sex marriage wouldn't change human society at all (as far as you can tell from what appears on screen, Earth is just as rigidly heterocentric and sex is just as dimorphic as ever, with masculine men and feminine women all over the shop).

*at least two of which are, depending on your definition, already legal in the US - can't you get married at twelve in Arkansas, and isn't polygamy legal in Utah?

*

14:30 / 28.02.04

Is Orson Scott Card the queerterophobic Dave Sim it's alright to slap?

Damn it. And he was so nice to my friends. Who would have thought?

16:19 / 28.02.04

isn't polygamy legal in Utah?
Nope. It's a rather sticky point between the modern LDS Church and a number of breakoffs which hold that it should still be practiced.

Card (Scott Card?) is, coincidentally enough, an LDS adherent, which informs many of his opinions regarding homosexuality.

Bard: One-Man Humaton Hoedown

18:07 / 28.02.04

...err? I don't remember anything about same-sex marriage, or homosexuality at all, on B-5 beyond Ivanova's one line "I think I might have loved Talia", or something to that effect (well...that and the semi-implied relationship between Ivanova and Talia, but that was more of the "best friends" sort).

20:21 / 28.02.04

It's the last series with Ivanova in. Marcus and - um, Garibaldi? - are going to Mars to fight with the Resistance there, IIRC, and their cover story is as a married male-male couple. Just the one reference, which is what makes it so implausible and stupid (particularly given the overwrought and under-explicit nature of the Winters/Ivanova romance).

22:52 / 02.03.04

Quite possibly the greatest thing I've ever read on the general subject:

Dr. Paul Cameron, founder of the Family Research Institute and ISIS, the institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality:

"Untrammeled homosexuality can take over and destroy a social system," says Cameron. "If you isolate sexuality as something solely for one's own personal amusement, and all you want is the most satisfying orgasm you can get- and that is what homosexuality seems to be-then homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men and women on women, if all you are looking for is orgasm." So powerful is the allure of gays, Cameron believes, that if society approves that gay people, more and more heterosexuals will be inexorably drawn into homosexuality. "I'm convinced that lesbians are particularly good seducers," says Cameron. "People in homosexuality are incredibly evangelical," he adds, sounding evangelical himself. "It's pure sexuality. It's almost like pure heroin. It's such a rush. They are committed in almost a religious way. And they'll take enormous risks, do anything." He says that for married men and women, gay sex would be irresistible. "Martial sex tends toward the boring end," he points out. "Generally, it doesn't deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does" So, Cameron believes, within a few generations homosexuality would be come the dominant form of sexual behavior.

(Posted yesterday on Tbogg. Bit of background on this Cameron creature here.)

23:14 / 02.03.04

...please tell me that's a joke... it IS really funny...

23:29 / 02.03.04

Despite the fact that I couldn't have written a parody nearly that funny, Cameron is quite serious. He's associated with these nutters: Family Research Institute

01:37 / 03.03.04

Well, the mayor of New Paltz, NY has been charged with 19 criminal counts for marrying gay couples.

Previous chunks of the story here.

McDonalds phasing out supersizing got more attention on CNN.com, but it seemed relevant here.

07:40 / 03.03.04

Cameron is quite right.

11:42 / 03.03.04

Cameron is notorious for a) having been excluded from all credible scientific institutions for gross methodological dodginess in pursuit of a specific agenda, and b) his own 'issues'.

Check out this old CBBS thread (no, really): the posts by 'Kal the Rebel' pretty much summarise Cameron's background, with handy linkage.

14:13 / 03.03.04

Reading that quote, I find it hard to believe he's anti-gay. He seems to really enjoy gay sex, or at least believes that it's so good, 'it's like heroin.' What an odd fellow.

15:25 / 03.03.04

Years ago, Cameron penned a now-notorious guide aimed at Christian youth, Sexual Gradualism, A Christian Sex Guide For Teens. It advocated instruction and "responsible" practice in "levels" of sexual intimacy, urging youths to experiment but to avoid actual intercourse, which he describes as "Level 8," the ultimate level of intimacy.

Kissing, for example, was "Level 3" in Cameron's list of sexual intimacies, mutual masturbation was "Level 5" and oral sex ("Level 7").

He also stated that "the anus is potentially 'sexy'" and described the technique of "pressing on and around" the anus to evoke sexual pleasure. In fact, he wrote, "one could consider anal sex an even deeper sexual intimacy," (although he couldn't quite decide where to rank it).

"Personally," he wrote, "I believe anal intercourse is too close to the 'real thing' and is to be left as 'Level 9.' I could see making a case for it, however, but only after Level 7...Perhaps I am being too 'square.' Anal intercourse is employed in many cultures as a substitute for Level 8."

The teaching of "gradualism," he believed, was suitable for children as young as eight; by the age of thirteen, such advice would be too late. The guide encouraged heterosexual sexual behavior as a way of ensuring that children wouldn't find homosexual activity appealing.

(With apologies to Nikitona on Cross+Flame for stealing her quote...)

Fundamentally (ho ho), he wants it up the arse. Hard.

15:41 / 03.03.04

he wants it up the arse. Hard.

he can't help himself. it's like heroin. he's addicted to the deep-dicking. save yourselves if you still can!

The Tower Always Falls

03:19 / 06.03.04

Not much to add except that I am quite pleased and proud to see my good friend join the good fight.

You go girls.

08:09 / 06.03.04

Eeevil seductresses both...

*starts foaming at the mouth*

The Tower Always Falls

22:28 / 06.03.04

*cracks whip*

Back Paul Cameron, BACK I SAY!

What? No, I said BACK! crack BACK GOD DAMMIT! STOP! DON'T...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I am Invisible now

00:02 / 08.03.04

Being gay myself, I always avoided that topic like a bad rash....for me, I dont know if Id ever want to marry another...but...in light of recent events....
I honestly dont see the harm in 2 people getting married, whatever the sexual preference/gender is. It angers me that people support the fight against it....
It angers me even more when I hear they are trying to "preserve the sanctity of marriage". Especially when we have shows like "the bachellor, the bachelorette, my big fat obnoxious fiance" and such...seem to just put a price on love if not marriage. Where is the sanctity in those tv shows?
I just wish..these so called educated people we have in office, would have the common sense to look back through history.....women fought so hard for equal rights, and still today. Once upon a time, it was unthinkable a woman could vote, much less work. It was also unthinkable a minority could hold a job, or any rights as others. In time, i hope these views towards gay marriage will change as well, all in good time. Yes people will get hurt. Yes people will get arrested. But...given the course of the past...it will happen. I only hope I will be alive to see it.
I hope this didnt offend anyone, it is a topic that has come up often at work, and I am beginning to feepassionate about it.
Cheers!

12:56 / 08.03.04

Seattle Mayor to Recognise Gay Marriages

Seattle's mayor said Sunday the city will begin recognizing the marriages of gay employees who tie the knot elsewhere, although it will not conduct its own same-sex weddings. Mayor Greg Nickels was to sign an executive order Monday giving same-sex spouses of city employees all the benefits of heterosexual spouses, including health insurance. He also planned to send a proposal to the City Council that would extend that recognition to employees of city contractors and protect the rights of all same-sex married couples in Seattle.

13:21 / 08.03.04

I'm sorry, I can no longer follow this thread as I can't stop laughing over the Dr. Cameron quotations.

14:55 / 08.03.04

Then he has already won!

18:18 / 08.03.04

gay marriages are stupid

20:17 / 08.03.04

Care to unpack that statement a little, bcj?

If not, then why don't you head off to the playroom for punch and cookies--the grown-ups are talking.

I am Invisible now

01:41 / 09.03.04

Indeed bcj...enlighten us further with what appears to me to be your bigotry.....
tell us what you really think

Page: (1)2 3