George Takei Marries Gay Lover

Hmmmm....

I don't know about "the rest of California", I'm not there. However, if I were, I'd likely be in the Bay Area (that's were I was born). Regardless of geographic location, I'm proud to be counted among the "wackies".

 

From what little I've known about him, I've always liked George Takei.

He's a good actor (I still remember his lead performance in Frank Chin's televised play, The Year of the Dragon, which is available on DVD), a survivor (he and his family were interned in the concentration camps during WWII), and he seems like a decent enough fellow (his political involvements).

George Takei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

To me, a peculiar view on a good and entertaining show. But like all opinions, we are indeed entitled to our own. You did watch the show.....right?

FWIW. Although I watched the Star Trek series when it originally aired, Next Gen was my favorite of the franchise.

 

It's all a matter of perspective, Dave. To those not keen on denying basic human rights to people because of their sexual orientation, it's your view that's 'wacky'.

 

Daniel

Nope, I'm *very* happily single.

However, it seems that many of my friends and co-workers have gone through nasty separations, divorces, etc. Nothing like a married couple having an hour long screaming match over *toaster* settings!

Since George and his partner have lived together around two decades, they should be fine married. I personally have never understood the big deal about marriage, but whatever works

I also don't understand the big deal about gay marriage. Hell, if two consenting adults like each other, more power to them. Despite all the doom and gloom directed at Canada when the Civil Marriage Act was introduced to allow gay marriage, nothing appears to have happened at all. Life goes on

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=3293341&file=4

Actually, the best condo neighbors I ever had were two gay men living down the hall from me. Polite beyond reproach, always a friendly greeting, and very respectful of their neighbors. I was invited to their wedding and the ratio of straight-to-gay couples was perhaps 3:1. No tensions whatsoever

It's really too bad the US is still a holdout in this matter

jay

 

Starfleet Academy does not exist. Therefore it is not possible for me or anyone else ever to have been rejected. I wonder about the sanity of people who are unaware of this.

You are oppose to human rights?

My aunt once wrote a book (never published) titled something like 101 questions to ask before getting married. Basically, all the little things that make it hard for two people to live together. Things like the thermostat setting.

But I can't help but think that two people who have an hour long screaming match over toaster settings probably have deeper issues and no longer love each other -- or maybe never did. If it was me, and I enjoyed the lady's company, I'd accept a less-than-optimum toaster setting.

 

You probably do not believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny either. Who picked up those baby teeth of yours and left something under your pillow? Your parents? I don't think so -- I do believe in faeries - I do - I do.....

 

I used to watch the program whenever it was on. I thought George Takei had a great character and played it well. I've met him a few times and think he is a too full of himself. Gays being married? I vote "NO":boom:

 

LOL!​

Wildkow ound:

 

cheers! i saw photos and it's truly all about happiness and balance for all. not just the conventional way of thinking.

 

:bounce:

Another opponent of basic human rights. While I question the sanity of people who believe in Star Trek, I question the humanity of people who deny basic human rights to others.

 

I cannot imagine why you think you should have an opinion on the matter, let alone a vote.

Talk about full of oneself. It is *so* pass time that the anti-discrimination laws of the US include gays.

 

I'm sorry I and many others do not agree with you. I believe it is my right to disagree. I also question the humanity of people, that's why I do not rely on it.

 

I feel so sorry for you, shame to go through life like that.

 

I'm enjoying the fact that the big controversy in this thread is whether the tone of Star Trek was good or bad. I'm disappointed in a few people for even bothering to come in here to inform us all of their hate and intolerance though.

I watched ST-TOS at an young impressionable (non-cynical) age and I can testify to the fact that it stoked my excitement about space, exploration, science. It also seemed to me that it wasn't pushing a message of violence, but simply stating the reality that the universe (i.e. the world) is a dangerous place. Even the human race wasn't perfect, but I always got the point that perfection was the goal. ST-TNG took that theme and really ran with it to much better effect.

As for my "engage" joke, I wasn't talking about getting "engaged," I was talking about... well... use your imagination.

 

Well, all blessings to the happy couple, and to all the other happy couples that are now able to marry.

August 30th, I performed a wedding for a lovely couple of brides... unfortunately, here in Washington state, it is not a legal marriage, but for them, it was the happiest day of their lives, and they intend to spend the rest of their lives together, whether they are ever able to legalize it or not.

Oh, and Daniel... sorry, dude. You missed the entire boat (ship) on Star Trek.

 

Do you think they played the "Sulu Dance" at the reception?

http://www.youtube.com/v/Hp1bICcvw8Q

Full disclosure: Takei is obviously well aware of the song and thinks it's hysterical.

 

There's a significant attitude issue there: If your first principle is that "the world is a dangerous place" the logical next step is to focus on how to arm yourself to fight it. For example, in another thread, when I posted some general rules for being safe in bear country, Wildkow jumped in, insisting that it was necessary to carry a gun, or several. If the predominant fact about bears is that they are dangerous, then you fear them and want to go armed. But if the predominant fact about them is that they are large and strong inhabitants of the forest who really try to avoid people, then you want to learn about their behavior patterns and travel mindfully. If you perceive the world as predominantly a dangerous place, then you will be preoccupied with arming yourself against it, and you will go through life with an itchy trigger finger, prepared and willing to kill whoever you feel theatened by. But if your view of the world is that it's full of people who mainly want to live their lives, then you try to learn about other cultures so that you can avoid conflict.

My quarrel with Star Trek (though it was much less the case when Patrick Stewart played the captain) was that the attitude was one of fear and threat. The Romulans and the Klingons were totally evil and could be dealt with only by killing them, and the credible threat of killing them. And it was so transparently obvious that the Romulans were meant to represent the Russians, and the Klingons were the Chinese, that the show was one big political advertisement for hostility against the two nations that our warmongering leaders regarded as our enemies.

By the time of Stewart's appearance as captain, U.S. relations with China and the USSR had improved, and the show was less hostile towards them.

Is your perception that the world is a dangerous place filled with monsters, and that only the guy with the most guns can ever be safe? Or is your perception that the world is a beautiful place that has some risks that we must be mindful of? Star Trek promoted the former attitude. And that's why I never liked it. I had friends who were big fans of it, though, so I saw a number of episodes while visiting them.