Do gays choose to be gay? How can we refuse equal rights?

[thanatos144]

I know quite a few happy gay people. Guess we cancel each other out.

You know happy happy people? Gay means Happy it does not mean homosexual. Oh and a rainbow is a rainbow not a bath house.

I beg to differ, as "gay" - in modern society (ie the time period in which you and I live) - is now a synonym for "homosexual". Words change over time.

Society determines that, not you.

No. Gay means happy it doesn't mean homosexual whether you agree or not is immaterial. Time people took back the language instead of allowing others to indoctrinate with it.

 

[KevinWestern]

No. Gay means happy it doesn't mean homosexual whether you agree or not is immaterial. Time people took back the language instead of allowing others to indoctrinate with it.

Do you realize there are thousands of words in the English language that have adapted new meanings over the course of the past 200-300 years? The word "guy" - for instance - used to mean someone who had a grotesque appearance.

Do you want to revert back to the original meaning for all of those words (to stay consistent), or do you want to only change back the words pertaining to gay people (and tie yourself up in a double standard)?

.

 

[thanatos144]

No. Gay means happy it doesn't mean homosexual whether you agree or not is immaterial. Time people took back the language instead of allowing others to indoctrinate with it.

Do you realize there are thousands of words in the English language that have adapted new meanings over the course of the past 200-300 years? The word "guy" - for instance - used to mean someone who had a grotesque appearance.

Do you want to revert back to the original meaning for all of those words (to stay consistent), or do you want to only change back the words pertaining to gay people (and tie yourself up in a double standard)?

.

So? Gay means happy not homosexual. Thats a fact.

 

[bodecea]

Shuddup liar.

Wait....is that all you've got? You can't answer the question, can you?

recognizing sexual orientation as a protected civil rights minority classification,

Thats not equal...thats special

Equality is how one is treated by the government. By allowing one group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens the protections and benefits afforded by a marriage license but NOT allowing another group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens the same rights is discrimination. BTW...this is a gender discrimination issue. This discrimination is based on the gender of who you wish to get a marriage license with.

 

[KevinWestern]

So? Gay means happy not homosexual. Thats a fact.

You are incorrect, Thanatos, and I'm pretty sure you're aware of this.

Society dictates how a word is used and adapted over time. Anyways, wasting time here..

 

[bodecea]

I dont like to use the word Gay to describe homosexuals.... Why? Because Gay means happy and not one I have met is happy. I also despise the fact that they take a completely innocent word and twist it to be something else.

The first part of that phrase answers the second part.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wait....is that all you've got? You can't answer the question, can you?

recognizing sexual orientation as a protected civil rights minority classification,

Thats not equal...thats special

Equality is how one is treated by the government. By allowing one group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens the protections and benefits afforded by a marriage license but NOT allowing another group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens the same rights is discrimination. BTW...this is a gender discrimination issue. This discrimination is based on the gender of who you wish to get a marriage license with.

Which group is not being allowed benefits of a marriage license?

 

[bodecea]

recognizing sexual orientation as a protected civil rights minority classification,

Thats not equal...thats special

Equality is how one is treated by the government. By allowing one group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens the protections and benefits afforded by a marriage license but NOT allowing another group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens the same rights is discrimination. BTW...this is a gender discrimination issue. This discrimination is based on the gender of who you wish to get a marriage license with.

Which group is not being allowed benefits of a marriage license?

People who are planning on marrying those of the same gender are not afforded a legal marriage license in an ever-decreasing number of states.

 

[The Rabbi]

Equality is how one is treated by the government. By allowing one group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens the protections and benefits afforded by a marriage license but NOT allowing another group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens the same rights is discrimination. BTW...this is a gender discrimination issue. This discrimination is based on the gender of who you wish to get a marriage license with.

Which group is not being allowed benefits of a marriage license?

People who are planning on marrying those of the same gender are not afforded a legal marriage license in an ever-decreasing number of states.

True. Whether they are gay or straight. Similarly people who are planning on marrying those already married, people who are planning on marrying underage persons, and people who are planning on marrying close relatives are also not afforded a legal marriage license.

I fail to see any discrimination. Unless you think we should just issue marriage licenses to anyone who asks for it.

 

[bodecea]

Which group is not being allowed benefits of a marriage license?

People who are planning on marrying those of the same gender are not afforded a legal marriage license in an ever-decreasing number of states.

True. Whether they are gay or straight. Similarly people who are planning on marrying those already married, people who are planning on marrying underage persons, and people who are planning on marrying close relatives are also not afforded a legal marriage license.

I fail to see any discrimination. Unless you think we should just issue marriage licenses to anyone who asks for it.

So...you accept gender discrimination.

 

[KevinWestern]

Which group is not being allowed benefits of a marriage license?

Are you implying that gays are asking for a special set of rights?

 

[bodecea]

Are you implying that gays are asking for a special set of rights?

If he is...maybe he can answer the question Bootlicker avoids. What IS that special set of rights?

 

[Edgetho]

People who are planning on marrying those of the same gender are not afforded a legal marriage license in an ever-decreasing number of states.

True. Whether they are gay or straight. Similarly people who are planning on marrying those already married, people who are planning on marrying underage persons, and people who are planning on marrying close relatives are also not afforded a legal marriage license.

I fail to see any discrimination. Unless you think we should just issue marriage licenses to anyone who asks for it.

So...you accept gender discrimination.

And you're completely non-discriminatory?

Good. Then invite that homeless guy home to spend a few nights with you.

Make sure and pick up that seedy-looking hitchhiker on your way home from work.

And just because that long lost friend has no visible means of support, make sure you lend him that $5,000 he's asking you for.

idiot

P.S.
Make sure your friends (if you have any you can count on) check on you every now and then. I really don't want you to get hurt.


P.P.S.
If you think I'm kidding about the main post, I'm not. I knew people exactly like that in the 60s. Which I lived through as an adult. Graduated High School in '65.

Danced with the Hare Krishna's in Copley Square, saw girls stoned out of their minds in Harvard square squatting against a tree muttering, "Qualudes, coke, pot, H" over and over. Barely missed the Stones at Altamont when the Angels killed that idiot.

You better learn to discriminate if you know what's good for you.

Which is doubtful.

And that is some free personal advice I recommend you listen to.

 

[bodecea]

True. Whether they are gay or straight. Similarly people who are planning on marrying those already married, people who are planning on marrying underage persons, and people who are planning on marrying close relatives are also not afforded a legal marriage license.

I fail to see any discrimination. Unless you think we should just issue marriage licenses to anyone who asks for it.

So...you accept gender discrimination.

And you're completely non-discriminatory?

Good. Then invite that homeless guy home to spend a few nights with you.

Make sure and pick up that seedy-looking hitchhiker on your way home from work.

And just because that long lost friend has no visible means of support, make sure you lend him that $5,000 he's asking you for.

idiot

P.S.
Make sure your friends (if you have any you can count on) check on you every now and then. I really don't want you to get hurt.


P.P.S.
If you think I'm kidding about the main post, I'm not. I knew people exactly like that in the 60s. Which I lived through as an adult. Graduated High School in '65.

Danced with the Hare Krishna's in Copley Square, saw girls stoned out of their minds in Harvard square squatting against a tree muttering, "Qualudes, coke, pot, H" over and over. Barely missed the Stones at Altamont when the Angels killed that idiot.

You better learn to discriminate if you know what's good for you.

Which is doubtful.

And that is some free personal advice I recommend you listen to.

I can see the 60s were very good to you.

 

[KevinWestern]

What IS that special set of rights?

I'm not sure. I feel like there's often a double standard here because I've heard many times folks say "gays have the same rights as non-gays to marry". And yes, it's true in the sense that a gay person can marry someone of the opposite gender.

So then why is gay marriage legalization a case of 'special rights'? Wouldn't all adult individuals have the option to marry a member of the same sex if they choose to do so under those conditions?

I don't think it's fair to use both arguments simultaneously.


.

 

[Seawytch]

My partner and I have several "contracts" involving property. No marriage license needed. But there is paperwork involved.

I found that statement to be revealing (no pun intended). Is it really about marriage for homosexuals? Or is it all about the attainment of wealth? Is marriage just a tool for them? A path to material satisfaction?

Interesting proposition is it not?

Its about harming the Church....Thats all. They hate the idea that people CANT be forced to approve of their lifestyle. The progressives go along cause it helps destroy the family model. Yes I know this sounds crazy but every time homo's are given the chance for civil unions that give them ALL THE SAME MONETARY RIGHTS they spit it back at the state.

The Church has nothing to do with Civil Marriage. Gays have always had equal access to "church" marriages.

 

[Seawytch]

You completely missed the point. I didn't even mention citizenship. So your argument is a non sequitur off the bat. If you marry for the sake of wealth, the commitment to your partner would be pointless. If you really married for love, then I have no doubt the commitment would be genuine. But to hear the homosexuals side of it, it's all about material wealth and acquisition of property under bonds of matrimony. It makes be doubt with every fiber of my being that gay marriage shares anything in common with the practice, I doubt the commitment as well.

Why must they make a show of it? Homosexuality is an inherent aberration in the human species. I don't discriminate against them, I don't hate them, but I do oppose their way of life.

You obviously haven't been listening to the gay and lesbian "side" of it if that's the conclusion you came to.

It's about being treated equally period. There are certain rights, benefits and protections that are associated with civil marriage. We want those same rights, benefits and protections for our families that heterosexual families have. If you wish to limit those rights, benefits and protections for everyone, go right ahead, but then it just looks like you're filling the pool so the black kids can't swim.

Yes, you do wish to discriminate against "them" if you wish to deny us marriage equality. That is, by definition, discrimination.

Actually, I have friends who are gay. One works at the University, and the other lives in Toronto. I don't let the fact that I oppose their lifestyle get in the way of me making them friends of mine. I had another friend who was a lesbian and lived in Germany, I got a real good insight into how a homosexual mind works before she got all uppity with me earlier this year. You remind me a bit of her, come to think of it.

You breed intolerance when you force yourselves on a faith that doesn't condone your way of life. When you want to get married, you must force a priest or a pastor to go against everything the Bible teaches in order to marry you. Gee, for people who are so proud of what they are doing, you seem quite insecure about yourselves.

Your faith has no dog in this fight. It's as ludicrous as saying your religion forbids gays from getting a drivers or fishing license.

 

[The Rabbi]

People who are planning on marrying those of the same gender are not afforded a legal marriage license in an ever-decreasing number of states.

True. Whether they are gay or straight. Similarly people who are planning on marrying those already married, people who are planning on marrying underage persons, and people who are planning on marrying close relatives are also not afforded a legal marriage license.

I fail to see any discrimination. Unless you think we should just issue marriage licenses to anyone who asks for it.

So...you accept gender discrimination.

Deflection fail.

 

[The Rabbi]

Are you implying that gays are asking for a special set of rights?

I'm not implying that. I've said it explicitly here many many times. And it is true. They are asking for something straight people cannot do either. That makes them special.

 

[The Rabbi]

If he is...maybe he can answer the question Bootlicker avoids. What IS that special set of rights?

There are no rights involved here. There are benefits involved. It's all about the money. No one is prohibited gays from having whatever marriage service they want.
They want benefits that are accorded to marriages between one man and one woman, benefits they themselves could have if they wanted.