What rights are the gays missing?

[alan1]

Fifty years ago, no American would have ever dreamed that there would be legal sodomite marriage, homos in the military, or faggot couples allowed to adopt children.

So it's not hard to imagine 50 years from now; legal pedophilia and legal beastuality.

No smoking laws started by creating smoke free sections in airplanes, now there are entire cities where it is illegal to smoke other than inside your own house.
Your argument is not far-fetched because the tactics being used are the same.

 

[chanel]

They want the right to re-write the dictionary. A marriage is between a man and a woman. Now they want the word re-defined. From that point forward the word "pussy" will be a synonym for "cock".

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Gee....if you look hard enough it is in there somewhere

Lets try the 14th Amendment

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So, right now we have laws which prohibit homosexuals from marrying the person of their choice. We also have laws prohibiting them from serving their country.

Good one.
I will give you the laws about serving as members of the armed forces.
I won't give you the one about marrying the person of their choice, because a non-homosexual can't marry a person of the same sex either if they choose to do so. That law applies equally to all sexual orientations.

It's not a 'good one'...

Homosexuals are prohibited from service in the US Military, based upon the standards of service FOR the US military...

There is a LONG list of traits which prohibit such service; and all revolve around abnomalities of one kind or another; homosexuality is but one of those abnormalities.

 

[alan1]

So you are saying that a non-homosexual would be prohibited from marrying someone of their same sex?

Yes, that law applies equally.

Is that kind of like where a homosexual is currently prohibited from marrying someone of the opposite sex?

Homosexuals aren't prohibited from marrying somebody of the opposite sex. If they are, cite the law that says so. Good luck finding it, that law doesn't exist.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Fifty years ago, no American would have ever dreamed that there would be legal sodomite marriage, homos in the military, or faggot couples allowed to adopt children.

So it's not hard to imagine 50 years from now; legal pedophilia and legal beastuality.

50 years ago a black person could not marry a white person in many parts of the United States

Yes and a black man can still not marry a white person if the white person is a white man...

Although a black MAN can marry a whie WOMAN... and vice versa...

 

[Sunni Man]

The words "vagina" and "anus" in the dictionary, will be merged into something like "vaganus" to meet the new homo PC standards.

 

[alan1]

Fifty years ago, no American would have ever dreamed that there would be legal sodomite marriage, homos in the military, or faggot couples allowed to adopt children.

So it's not hard to imagine 50 years from now; legal pedophilia and legal beastuality.

50 years ago a black person could not marry a white person in many parts of the United States

50 years ago, you couldn't argue on the internet. Got anymore fallacious arguments?

 

[rightwinger]

Thus pedophiles are normal, beastiality is normal... bank robbery is normal... autotheft is normal... public masterbation is normal... anything that some dumbass conjures which suits their cravings, thus fills their needs... thus compels them to engage in such; must be considered normal.

Is someone who engages in oral or anal sex with their spouse "normal"?? There used to be laws against that too.
Bank Robbery, auto theft are both crimes....not the same
Public masterbation is also a crime........Homosexuality is not

That it violates the rights of another... too fucking bad for them.

That is why we have courts. To protect the rights of people from those who say "too fucking bad for them"

"What Rights do consensual Homosexuals violate?" The right to establish sound, sustainable cultural standards... which defend the culture from the calamitous effects which such behavior must inevitably manifest. The Right to hold to sound standards of behavior, which is rooted in the RESPONSIBILITY TO BEHAVE WITHIN THOSE SOUND STANDARDS.

I will have to put the burden of proof on you. Show where it says in the Constitution"The right to establish sound sustainable cultural standards" or "The right to hold sound standards of behavior"???

 

[Oscar Wao]

Fifty years ago, no American would have ever dreamed that there would be legal sodomite marriage, homos in the military, or faggot couples allowed to adopt children.

So it's not hard to imagine 50 years from now; legal pedophilia and legal beastuality.

50 years ago a black person could not marry a white person in many parts of the United States

Uh, don't worry about that poster. His religion doesn't permit him to leave the 7th century in respect to ways of thinking. Trying to debate with him is like talking to a wall.

 

[rightwinger]

Fifty years ago, no American would have ever dreamed that there would be legal sodomite marriage, homos in the military, or faggot couples allowed to adopt children.

So it's not hard to imagine 50 years from now; legal pedophilia and legal beastuality.

No smoking laws started by creating smoke free sections in airplanes, now there are entire cities where it is illegal to smoke other than inside your own house.
Your argument is not far-fetched because the tactics being used are the same.

50 years ago I had to breathe your noxious smoke if I wanted to go out in public. Now, you have to breathe my clean air if you want to go out in public

Sounds fair

 

[rightwinger]

Fifty years ago, no American would have ever dreamed that there would be legal sodomite marriage, homos in the military, or faggot couples allowed to adopt children.

So it's not hard to imagine 50 years from now; legal pedophilia and legal beastuality.

50 years ago a black person could not marry a white person in many parts of the United States

Uh, don't worry about that poster. His religion doesn't permit him to leave the 7th century in respect to ways of thinking. Trying to debate with him is like talking to a wall.

In the 7th century, homosexuals were burned at the stake.

Sounds like you are the one who can't leave the 7th century

 

[Sunni Man]

Rightwinger, your argument is getting weaker and more lame each time you post

 

[Oscar Wao]

50 years ago a black person could not marry a white person in many parts of the United States

Uh, don't worry about that poster. His religion doesn't permit him to leave the 7th century in respect to ways of thinking. Trying to debate with him is like talking to a wall.

In the 7th century, homosexuals were burned at the stake.

Sounds like you are the one who can't leave the 7th century

No, I'm warning you about trying to debate with Sunni Man. You'll never get your point across with him.

His religion, IsLAME, would make even Fred Phelps blush.

I'm on your side on this one, just trying to warn you about the futility of discussing ANYTHING with that poster

 

[seth1492]

Gee....if you look hard enough it is in there somewhere

Lets try the 14th Amendment

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So, right now we have laws which prohibit homosexuals from marrying the person of their choice. We also have laws prohibiting them from serving their country.

We also have laws prohibiting heterosexuals from marrying the person of their choice. What if the person I want to marry is already married? A minor child? Dead? The right to marriage has never been for "whomever you choose". It also has never been reserved solely for heterosexuals, as evidenced by the fact that even a gay man could legally marry a woman, but a straight man couldn't legally marry another man.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell prohibits them from serving openly, even though there are plenty of stories of gay soldiers who have come out to their comrades and said nobody had a problem with it. However, there's no "right" to serve in the military. They can deny you entry for a host of reasons, and can kick you out for any host of reasons, too.

Amen.... Homosexuals are not missing any rights, anymore than anyone else. Marriage is just a civil union for straight people, so gays need to calm down, its what "marriage" is defined as... so go make up your own word and try to make it legally binding. Its just not "marriage".

 

[alan1]

Fifty years ago, no American would have ever dreamed that there would be legal sodomite marriage, homos in the military, or faggot couples allowed to adopt children.

So it's not hard to imagine 50 years from now; legal pedophilia and legal beastuality.

No smoking laws started by creating smoke free sections in airplanes, now there are entire cities where it is illegal to smoke other than inside your own house.
Your argument is not far-fetched because the tactics being used are the same.

50 years ago I had to breathe your noxious smoke if I wanted to go out in public. Now, you have to breathe my clean air if you want to go out in public

Sounds fair

That has to do with gays not having rights how?
Oh, I get it, aside from serving in the military, the rights of gays and straights are exactly the same. Therefore, the gay community thinks Mr Obama isn't acting quick enough to extend gay rights (see OP if you don't understand).

 

[rightwinger]

Rightwinger, your argument is getting weaker and more lame each time you post

A concession of defeat on your part. You have nothing

 

[alan1]

50 years ago a black person could not marry a white person in many parts of the United States

Uh, don't worry about that poster. His religion doesn't permit him to leave the 7th century in respect to ways of thinking. Trying to debate with him is like talking to a wall.

In the 7th century, homosexuals were burned at the stake.

Sounds like you are the one who can't leave the 7th century

Holy fucking crap, something happened 13 centuries ago so therefore we need to make it part of our argument about current circumstances. Nevermind that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Bill of Rights.

 

[rightwinger]

Uh, don't worry about that poster. His religion doesn't permit him to leave the 7th century in respect to ways of thinking. Trying to debate with him is like talking to a wall.

In the 7th century, homosexuals were burned at the stake.

Sounds like you are the one who can't leave the 7th century

No, I'm warning you about trying to debate with Sunni Man. You'll never get your point across with him.

His religion, IsLAME, would make even Fred Phelps blush.

I'm on your side on this one, just trying to warn you about the futility of discussing ANYTHING with that poster

My bad

Apology offered

 

[Qball]

Here's a trick question for everyone: what's the difference between building policy based on religious doctrine and building policy based on constitutional fabrications?

Give up?

The answer: Nothing.

"Equal Protection" never was a promise of "equal treatment". It's only promised protection under existing laws and existing rights; it doesn't entitle you to shit that doesn't exist. The fact that no individual or gay couple risks losing their life, freedom, or property in a court of law under marriage amendments that define marriage in heterosexual monogamous terms means they don't infringe on your 14th Amendment rights.

 

[alan1]

Uh, don't worry about that poster. His religion doesn't permit him to leave the 7th century in respect to ways of thinking. Trying to debate with him is like talking to a wall.

In the 7th century, homosexuals were burned at the stake.

Sounds like you are the one who can't leave the 7th century

No, I'm warning you about trying to debate with Sunni Man. You'll never get your point across with him.

His religion, IsLAME, would make even Fred Phelps blush.

I'm on your side on this one, just trying to warn you about the futility of discussing ANYTHING with that poster

Care to address the subject matter, or do you just want to assault a personality?