effective gay rights technique that's not used...

[powerboy]

Just because someone is working for a company that is immoral, does not make that person immoral. What if that person is a single parent. Why should they quit and take the chance of not finding another job for months, just because someone thinks that they are immoral?

Lets see, give up a job? Or keep the job and keep paying bills and feeding the family. Hmmmmm. One thing that you have to remember, is that not everyone can pull out the perfect job out of their ass's.

[Boozy]

I also disagree with the war in Iraq (though I did approve of Afghanistan), but I have the utmost respect for our soldiers...

So you'll give the clerks in governmental offices shit because you don't like certain laws, but you fully support troops who are fighting what you believe is an unjust war?

Your position doesn't make any sense.

You're essentially calling anyone with a job in government immoral. Why are you not saying the same about the members of your armed forces?

[Slytovhand]

but so far in history only one person has been a perfectly moral individual)

Actually, I think you'll find that Buddha did a few things in his youth that may have been considered 'immoral' before he went on his trek to find enlightenment. After all, he was a prince.

We need a 'Morals, Ethics ... and pragmatism' thread....

Smiley, I know you're angry about the whole thing, but attacking every government worker, merely because they have a government job, isn't going to help matters. Nor is it fair (after all, there are LOTS of different branches of government.. hell, I was a public servant for 4 years!). As you said, only 1 person was 'perfect' (well, depending on your definitions of the word... to me, everyone is perfect at being themselves.. which includes being a perfect asshole )

ETA: Wait a minute.. Smiley, you said on another forum about just how bad your government is... yet you're still there paying your taxes to them (not even being a conscientious objector... I think there is something in your Federal laws that allows for that)... how does this work??

Btw - you doing your sit-in? Or trying to organise one??

[BlaqueKatt]

Why don't we now then see gay couples doing similar at marriage license locations... go in and demand to be allowed to apply and refuse to leave or allow the clerk to assist anyone else until physically removed from the building?

actually the last time I voted for city clerk in my city the person I voted for had in his flyers that he would start issuing marriage licensees to same-sex couples as soon as he took office as our state had no law against it at the time-that was the only reason I voted for him-sadly he did not win....

[smileyeagle1021]

So you'll give the clerks in governmental offices shit because you don't like certain laws, but you fully support troops who are fighting what you believe is an unjust war?

Your position doesn't make any sense.

You're essentially calling anyone with a job in government immoral. Why are you not saying the same about the members of your armed forces?

I know I said I wouldn't respond unless there was something new, but this counts as something I should clarify. Not all government employees are immoral, just those enforcing bad laws, that's first. Second, if you read my post further up on the page about how morals are conditional and a persons morals must be judged for each action. The soldiers I've dealt with have all been vets and have done good things while I've known them... and when they were doing things I consider immoral, they were at least willing to accept the consequences of those immoral actions (namely, they were willing to risk their lives), so even though I think what they are doing is wrong, I have to respect their willingness to accept the potential consequences. In this case, dealing with protesters is one potential consequence of the job.

And slyt, I'm not planning on doing this myself, I don't have anyone I could do it with, just pointing out that it is an effective way for those who are in a committed relationship to protest. And before anyone asks, if I was in a serious relationship I'd have no problem every week/month/whatever time period going in and filling out the paperwork, waiting in line and asking the same pesky questions, l like why the hell can't you grant me the same contract you just granted the dozens of people in front of me.

And to all, I'd be interested to find out how my proposal treats the government clerk any differently than the white waitress in the 60s/70s who has to deal with blacks sitting in the whites only section?

[blas87]

I personally think you'd be better off "sitting in" in your governor's office or somewhere someone who can actually DO something about it will be affected by you and your friends.

There is nothing more a clerk can do to change the law than you and your friends can do. So why take it out on them when you can take it out on someone who has the power? I'd rather bully the hell out of the person with the power and the means than the person lowest on the totem pole.

[Slytovhand]

Good call Blas!!

Smiley, it could be argued that the protests that have happened in the last century or so addressing human rights (particularly now with media and TV and the likes), means that it is different because (in theory) people know better, and can't really claim ignorance (as a 'legitimate' reason). So, in theory, you're absolutely right... in practice... meh... it's a little more debatable (well, I can see it )