Wed Rock (feat. Rollins, Mould, Bernhardt, etc.)

[bearman🐻]

Press release here: http://idisk.mac.com/granarymusic/Public/wedrockpr.pdf
 
 Should be an interesting show. Sandra will apparently be with full band and there might be some other surprises lined up. Kind of cool that Rollins is doing this as well, good for him. It will also be fun see Rich Morel perform...I hope that he'll have his band there.

[kosmo vinyl]

for Mr. Chutney...
 
 General admission tickets are $40. VIP tickets are available for purchase at $100, giving
 the ticket-holder exclusive balcony access, complimentary cocktails courtesy of Svedka
 Vodka and entry to an after-show �??meet-and-greet�?� with several of the evening�??s
 performers.

[jkeisenh]

AAAARRRRGH!  Freedom to marry.  Bleh.
 
 How about this?  How about Freedom NOT to marry?  How about what the hell is the government doing in the business of marriage anyway?  How about marriage laws all discriminate against single people?  How about THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE SANCTIONING MARRIAGE!
 
 Let's do away with marriage licenses.  Wanna get married?  Do it between yourself, your partner, and your loved ones.  Why should the general public need to be involved?
 
 (end angry feminist rant)

[markie]

Originally posted by chimbly sweep:
    How about Freedom NOT to marry?  

Have you been living in a cultural vacuum? The benefit is to allow homosexuals to marry.

[Random Citizen]

Even Rhett will have a reason to attend:
 

Seattle�??s premiere gay alt-country darlins Purty Mouth

[Bombay Chutney]

thanks kosmo.

[jkeisenh]

Originally posted by mark e smith:
   

Originally posted by chimbly sweep:
    How about Freedom NOT to marry?  

Have you been living in a cultural vacuum? The benefit is to allow homosexuals to marry. [/b]

Yeah, but turn the argument on its head.  Why add to a flawed system?  Government intervention in marriage is useless.  Let's scrap the civic portion of marriage and let people get married to whomever they want but on their own, without a public function.

[Bombay Chutney]

Originally posted by chimbly sweep:
  Yeah, but turn the argument on its head.  Why add to a flawed system?  Government intervention in marriage is useless.  Let's scrap the civic portion of marriage and let people get married to whomever they want but on their own, without a public function.

What "public function" are you talking about?

[Bags]

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
   

Originally posted by chimbly sweep:
  Yeah, but turn the argument on its head.  Why add to a flawed system?  Government intervention in marriage is useless.  Let's scrap the civic portion of marriage and let people get married to whomever they want but on their own, without a public function.

What "public function" are you talking about? [/b]

The public function of tax breaks, partner benefits, etc., etc...

[chaz]

Originally posted by Bags:
   

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
   

Originally posted by chimbly sweep:
  Yeah, but turn the argument on its head.  Why add to a flawed system?  Government intervention in marriage is useless.  Let's scrap the civic portion of marriage and let people get married to whomever they want but on their own, without a public function.

What "public function" are you talking about? [/b]

The public function of tax breaks, partner benefits, etc., etc... [/b]

That's productive...then millions of stay at home moms and dads will be without health coverage.  The idea is to extend health coverage to more people, not less.

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

I don't see that marriage is a flawd system. Despite my grumpiness on the board, marriage has generally made me a happier person. How is that a flaw?

[Bags]

Originally posted by chaz:
   

Originally posted by Bags:
   

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
     

Originally posted by chimbly sweep:
  Yeah, but turn the argument on its head.  Why add to a flawed system?  Government intervention in marriage is useless.  Let's scrap the civic portion of marriage and let people get married to whomever they want but on their own, without a public function.

What "public function" are you talking about? [/b]

The public function of tax breaks, partner benefits, etc., etc... [/b]

That's productive...then millions of stay at home moms and dads will be without health coverage.  The idea is to extend health coverage to more people, not less. [/b]

You read a lot in to partner benefits.  I never said take health care away.  But don't get me started on health care.  It should be FAR easier to get/deal with.  I should probably live in Canada.

[Bags]

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
  How is that a flaw?

Right now, cuz you're allowed to do it and others aren't.

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

It's not a flaw for me.
 
 I'm all for gay marriage, straight marraige, whatever.
 
 

Originally posted by Bags:
   

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
  How is that a flaw?

Right now, cuz you're allowed to do it and others aren't. [/b]

[chaz]

Originally posted by Bags:
   

Originally posted by chaz:
     

Originally posted by Bags:
     

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
       

Originally posted by chimbly sweep:
  Yeah, but turn the argument on its head.  Why add to a flawed system?  Government intervention in marriage is useless.  Let's scrap the civic portion of marriage and let people get married to whomever they want but on their own, without a public function.

What "public function" are you talking about? [/b]

The public function of tax breaks, partner benefits, etc., etc... [/b]

That's productive...then millions of stay at home moms and dads will be without health coverage.  The idea is to extend health coverage to more people, not less. [/b]

You read a lot in to partner benefits.  I never said take health care away.  But don't get me started on health care.  It should be FAR easier to get/deal with.  I should probably live in Canada. [/b]

Yeah I figured...I just tend to be more of a realist than an idealist about these things, and the institution of marriage, for better or worse, isn't going anywhere.
 
 *edit* sorry for the quote inside of a quote inside of a quote inside of a quote...