What rights are the gays missing?

[Sunni Man]

We had a child custody dispute here in Idaho a number of years ago and the ruling was if he lived with his partner (of MANY years) he would NOT be granted custody or even VISTITATION of HIS children. His partner had to get a trailer home a few hundred feet away for his partner to get to see his children. WHAT FREAKING HYPOCRICY!!! I believe that some Conservatives would RATHER have kids raised in an ABUSIVE Hetro home than a LOVING homo home. FREAKING INSANE!!

They would. I've seen many state that institutionalizing kids is better than putting them in a loving home with gay parents.

Homos adopting children is the ultimate form of child abuse

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Yeah nothing like being cared for and LOVED to screw up a kid.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I love it when the right tries to bring up some "biological" reason, yet they don't believe in "evolution.

LOL... Do ya? I wonder if you love it as much I love it when Leftist try to project that evolution somehow challenges Creation...

Evolution doesn't challenge Creation. Creation challenges reason.

Does it? Now you've come thrice now to proclaim that your opposition fails the intellectual means test because, you claim that your opposition is incapable of advancing sound argument; that they're limited to blind assertion...

Yet throughout each of your screeds, your only apparent means to respond is to advance these vacuous little platitudes.

Now how exactly does creation challenge reason?

Clearly... but then there's a biological reason for syphilis... and we all seem to recognize that there being a reason, is not a sound basis for encouraging more of it.

Syphilis is evolved. There most certainly is a biological reason. It wants to survive. I think of the right as a kind of deranged syphilis. A disease that at the same time, kills it's host (in this case, our country), but also wants to spread.

Mercy.... So Syphilis wants to live? Now... that is wonderful... Syphilis is thus cognizant... Living in little colonies, where it seeks a host and once identifies one; gathers the war ministers and plots a course towards invasive victory, thus suvival?

Oh you are a sharpy...

Now to be honest I must confess to having strong reservations which tend against acceptance of your thesis regarding syphilis. And we should point out that the issue is homosexuality; and specifically the poser: 'what rights do fags not have...'

But since ya swerved into this one... let's tease it a little and see if we can't make something of it.

So you recognize that syphilis represents life; which is true... but demonstrate your further belief that this virus possesses intellectual means; and this through your declaration wherein you claim for syphilis, a 'want'... a cognitive desire... thus intelligence.

That being the case... that you represent syphilis as being self aware... I wonder if you also believe that this intelligent virus has plotted it's survival? By this I mean, do you believe that syphilis realizes that the best place for it to be to sustain itself, is where human beings g in illicit, wholesale sexual behavior?

Because, its an interesting phenomenon that syphilis seems to be taking advantage of something which religion tends to warn against; as do so many other viruses and bacteria...

Also... does this intelligence which you assign to this virus; given your anti-theist 'feelings', wherein you reject the notion of a Deity; thus assign Rights as being necessary to sustain intelligent life; and the power to grant rights thus lies within the domain the intelligent... do you 'feel' that Syphilis is rightfully entitled to pursue the fulfillment of it's life?

If so, why; if not, why not?

That's odd because in my experience; I've noticed precisely the opposite. having never heard a Leftist speak to anything which one could consider 'intellectually deep' except where they are crafting some juicy rationalization to undermine a cultural standard... to excuse some negative behavior or otherwise enable decadence.

Because you are simply unable to understand "deep". You speak "simple". The language is referred to as "simpleton".

LOL... Anyone else get that?

Oh, how I adore sweet irony...

Yes... exactly. And I'd be remiss to not point out that this little screed fo yours is a first class demonstration of just that; blind assertions, absent a scintilla of argument delving into examples of such and argument which specifically refutes those simple and specific examples.



What's it been kids? Maybe an hour since the last idiot felt it necessary to project that no evidence has been advanced to sustain the assertion that God exists... which would be 55 minutes since the last time someone, in this case myself... posted evidence of just that?

There is no evidence of a God. It doesn't exist. Any evidence is an illusion, uh, no, it's a "delusion".

Actually there is vast expanse of evidence that God exists...

Humanity exists... humanity did not create itself; thus something other than Humanity created Humanity... whatever that something is, is God.

Now that is prima facie evidence that God exists. You want to assert that such evidence does not stand to rise to the level of proof. Which is fine... I for one do not require your assent to my beliefs; I have no desire, let a lone a need for anything from you; and validation of my knowledge, understanding or beliefs, is the absolute least of that.

But what is now an established FACT: is that you've now been presented with EVIDENCE of God's existence... which precludes you from ever advancing the assertion 'that you've never seen such...' again. And where you posit such, you simply demonstrate yourself as a liar of the first order.

Ahhh, well there ya go... So to you, real things are limited to those things which ya can see and touch... thus gravity is necessarily deemed, unreal... a myth. Sub-atomic particles... can't see or touch those... so naturally, they're out... LOL…

Drop something over your head and tell me you can't feel the effects of gravity. Sub-atomic? Actually, things are happening:

Ahh... so you're open to the notion of empirical evidence of gravity, through demonstrating it's effects... but you're closed to the same for the existence of God.

Ain't that fascinatin'...

Well the truth is that homosexuality is the means by which nature culls the species of damaged genetic lines. Where populations strain resources, the weaker links in the genetic chain succumb to their weaknesses and thus ends that lineage. As a general rule, wisdom precludes the encouragement of suicide, where the goal is preservation; thus where suicide is a reality, it is the discriminating individual who works to avoid those who advocate for such.

Wow, how, well, "scientific". Not a bit of supporting data. The "science" of the right.

Well, the reasoning is self evident... homosexuality precludes conception, thus progeny... absent progeny... the genetic lineage of that individual is kaput; stopping at that point.

But beside that, there are numerous population studies which demonstrate that population induced spacial stress, induces homosexuality in the weaker members of the population... who it can't be overlooked, become FOOD when the prevailing stress inevitably turns towards staple resources.

You're encouraged to appeal to ignorance again, by demanding that no such studies exist... as you again return to lament the intellectual means of your opposition.

LOL...






Leftists...

Now, the hysterical part here kids, is how this idiot laid this entire premise on the intellectual prowess of Left-think; while demonstrating severe intellectual limitations...

Funny stuff...

 

[Setarcos]

You have no clue, do you?
If you look hard enough, you will find posts on this board, made by me, that say the government has no business in marriage whatsoever. Regardless of sexual orientation.
Now, tell me, what rights are homosexuals not getting that heterosexuals are getting?

As if anyone on the right even cares. How many times do you have to go over it? Even worse, they come up with the most lame and stupid arguments.

One more time.

Since someone else mentioned the military. What do you get from the military.
Guaranteed student loan
Guaranteed home loan
VA benefits
burial benefits
benefits to children

First, there are only a handful of states that allow civil unions. Civil unions are generally NOT recognized by other states as opposed to marriage.

Some benefits if marriage:

Joint parental rights of children
Joint adoption
Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
Crime victims recovery benefits
Domestic violence protection orders
Judicial protections and immunity
Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
Public safety officers death benefits
Spousal veterans benefits
Social Security
Medicare
Joint filing of tax returns
Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
Child support
Joint Insurance Plans
Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
Estate and gift tax benefits
Welfare and public assistance
Joint housing for elderly
Credit protection
Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans

And those are only "SOME".

I'm tired of stupid, dumbass right wingers saying "name a right gays don't get".

Everything you just named applies to heterosexual people if they choose to marry a person of the same sex.
Again, the law is applied equally, it doesn't specifically say anything about being homosexual.

They also applied to any black person who married someone of their own race. SCOTUS already ruled such laws unconstitutional in Loving V. Virginia

 

[Setarcos]

Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the convictions in a unanimous decision, dismissing the Commonwealth of Virginia's argument that a law forbidding both white and black persons from marrying persons of another race, and providing identical penalties to white and black violators, could not be construed as racially discriminatory. The court ruled that Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute violated both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In its decision, the court wrote:

“ Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State. ”

The Supreme Court concluded that anti-miscegenation laws were racist and had been enacted to perpetuate white supremacy:


The exact same reasoning and argument apply here.

 

[Setarcos]

There may be laws that state one cannot marry a person of the same sex, but those apply to bother hetero and homosexuals.
Equal treatment under the law.

there may have been laws saying one cannot marry someone of a different race, but those laws apply to blacks as whites.
Equal treatment under the law.


This argument was rejected by SCOTUS in Loving V. Virginia.

 

[Setarcos]

Of course...

Studies of stressed populations show consistantly that given sufficient strains on space homosexuality becomes rampant; with the weaker males turning queer; and where food resources are sufficiently stressed, those same queer males become FOOD.

You're insane. But I do see why you are so afraid of gays...you're a weaker male.

That would also explain why he feels to constant need to let everyone know that females- and those he demotes to female status- are inferior to him.

 

[rdean]

First, there are only a handful of states that allow civil unions. Civil unions are generally NOT recognized by other states as opposed to marriage.

The number isn't what's important. The fact that States passed the laws is!

The Gay and Lesbian community is going about this all wrong. They should push for civil union laws IN ALL STATES first and then after it's established go for the semantic of a word change on a document. It's as simple as that.

Because one state has "civil unions" and another state has "civil unions", doesn't mean they recognize each others "civil unions". I know it doesn't make sense, but it's the law.

Marriages has to recognized by all states.

It's as simple as that!

 

[Setarcos]

First, there are only a handful of states that allow civil unions. Civil unions are generally NOT recognized by other states as opposed to marriage.

The number isn't what's important. The fact that States passed the laws is!

The Gay and Lesbian community is going about this all wrong. They should push for civil union laws IN ALL STATES first and then after it's established go for the semantic of a word change on a document. It's as simple as that.

Because one state has "civil unions" and another state has "civil unions", doesn't mean they recognize each others "civil unions". I know it doesn't make sense, but it's the law.

Marriages has to recognized by all states.

-and the Fed

 

[rdean]

Indeed, in your opinion and mine, it is distorted.....and to a very pious Muslim Qutbist your views are distorted because you lack faith....but here in America niether can infringe upon the rights of the other in the name of their beliefs.

BS. The American right wing infringe on my rights all the time because of their "magical" beliefs. My right not to be exposed to it. So sick of that nonsense.

Name one right of yours that has been infringed upon.

The right attempted to teach "magical creation" at the school my children attended. Because of the cost of the lawsuit, they not only didn't teach "magical creation", but also stopped teaching any part of biology, physiology and botany that may have touched on evolution. The same is true in many schools across the nation. Schools just don't have the money to fight religious right wing wackos so they stop teaching anything controversial.

That's one.

My nephew couldn't join the military because he is most definitely gay. The anti gay thing is based, not on medicine, not on reason, but entirely on "occult beliefs".

That's two.

My nephew can't get married.

That's three.

People come to my front door and try to spread that crappy "supernatural" nonsense. I found them talking to my kids. I was furious. That stuff is crap. It's not real.

That's four.

Believe me, you asked for one, but I'll stop at four.

 

[Qball]

You either believe the government grants us rights or you believe we have a right to do whatever we want unless there is a compelling reason against our actions.

You fall into the former camp, I fall into the latter.

As long as you believe the government grants us rights you will always believe the government can regulate marriage, and therefore you will be able to justify refusing gays the ability to marry.

But you don't really care, of course, you just think big government is okay in this case.

You have no clue, do you?
If you look hard enough, you will find posts on this board, made by me, that say the government has no business in marriage whatsoever. Regardless of sexual orientation.
Now, tell me, what rights are homosexuals not getting that heterosexuals are getting?

As if anyone on the right even cares. How many times do you have to go over it? Even worse, they come up with the most lame and stupid arguments.

One more time.

Since someone else mentioned the military. What do you get from the military.
Guaranteed student loan
Guaranteed home loan
VA benefits
burial benefits
benefits to children

First, there are only a handful of states that allow civil unions. Civil unions are generally NOT recognized by other states as opposed to marriage.

Some benefits if marriage:

Joint parental rights of children
Joint adoption
Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
Crime victims recovery benefits
Domestic violence protection orders
Judicial protections and immunity
Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
Public safety officers death benefits
Spousal veterans benefits
Social Security
Medicare
Joint filing of tax returns
Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
Child support
Joint Insurance Plans
Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
Estate and gift tax benefits
Welfare and public assistance
Joint housing for elderly
Credit protection
Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans

And those are only "SOME".

I'm tired of stupid, dumbass right wingers saying "name a right gays don't get".

You would get things mixed up, wouldn't you? When people ask that question, they're referring to "rights" in the civil and individual sense, since many gay rights advocates will quickly tell you the gay political agenda is something of a civil rights movement. Listing benefits gay couples don't receive actually doesn't answer their question. If they really meant, "name regulated benefits gay couples don't get", then shoot, I'd be in the same boat as a straight, single male, and not only that, but there are plenty of benefits I don't get that I might want.

Let's try this again: there is no "right" to be in a government-subsidized romantic relationship. The government doesn't "owe" you its blessing, and no, saying that it does doesn't make it so.

 

[rdean]

You have no clue, do you?
If you look hard enough, you will find posts on this board, made by me, that say the government has no business in marriage whatsoever. Regardless of sexual orientation.
Now, tell me, what rights are homosexuals not getting that heterosexuals are getting?

As if anyone on the right even cares. How many times do you have to go over it? Even worse, they come up with the most lame and stupid arguments.

One more time.

Since someone else mentioned the military. What do you get from the military.
Guaranteed student loan
Guaranteed home loan
VA benefits
burial benefits
benefits to children

First, there are only a handful of states that allow civil unions. Civil unions are generally NOT recognized by other states as opposed to marriage.

Some benefits if marriage:

Joint parental rights of children
Joint adoption
Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
Crime victims recovery benefits
Domestic violence protection orders
Judicial protections and immunity
Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
Public safety officers death benefits
Spousal veterans benefits
Social Security
Medicare
Joint filing of tax returns
Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
Child support
Joint Insurance Plans
Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
Estate and gift tax benefits
Welfare and public assistance
Joint housing for elderly
Credit protection
Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans

And those are only "SOME".

I'm tired of stupid, dumbass right wingers saying "name a right gays don't get".

Everything you just named applies to heterosexual people if they choose to marry a person of the same sex.
Again, the law is applied equally, it doesn't specifically say anything about being homosexual.

Sure, gays could marry straights for "benefits". The benefit could include social acceptance or social status. Ask Larry Craig or Ted Haggard.

The question is, would you want your sister or daughter to marry a gay? Or a man who was straight and could give her the kind of love, that you as a caring parent would want your child to have?

You see, logically, your argument seems to make sense. But when you include human emotion, empathy and love, it becomes as stupid as dirt.

 

[mal]

Frank says D.C. gay rights march misses mark - Yahoo! News

snip,

Many gay rights advocates have criticized President Barack Obama for not moving faster to keep his campaign promises to extend gay rights, and Congress has also drawn flak for not doing more.

I just re-read The Bill of Rights, I'm curious, which rights outlined in that document do not apply to gays?

Are you saying that the Bill of Rights lists all rights afforded American citizens?

Nope... But you aren't Denied Marriage... You are Denied the Special Priviledge of Redifining Marriage in Law to Include only your Deviation Exclusively to others that are being Denied.

Marriage is what it is... Have a Civil Union and be Happy the Religion of Peace and Love isn't the Law of THIS Land, Missy...



peace...

 

[rdean]

But if you CAN'T get married that is quite a list if things you can't get. If the Republicans continue to harp on this issue you will CONTINUE to turn off moderates. And for WHAT to keep a word for yourselves and ONLY yourselves?

Perhaps you can site the law (any law) that states that if one is homosexual they can't get married. There may be laws that state one cannot marry a person of the same sex, but those apply to bother hetero and homosexuals.
Equal treatment under the law.

Like I said, as a caring parent or brother, would you want your sister or daughter to marry a gay a la Larry Craig or Ted Haggard? Oh, but it's "equal" under the law!

A "normal" parent would want their children to be happy and marry someone who found them attractive on many levels - including the physical.

Isn't it so obvious that you don't need to say it? Seriously?

 

[Qball]

You see, logically, your argument seems to make sense. But when you include human emotion, empathy and love, it becomes as stupid as dirt.

I'm thisclose to making this my sig. Hilarious!

 

[rdean]

Everything you just named applies to heterosexual people if they choose to marry a person of the same sex.
Again, the law is applied equally, it doesn't specifically say anything about being homosexual.

Why do you continue this asinine argument?

The facts are these people love each other, they care for each other, they trust each other with their lives. They are being denied rights and privleges available to other Americans.

To say, you have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as everyone else does is ridiculous.

OK, let's use your logic.
I love my brother, he loves me. We care for each other. We trust each other with our lives. We can't get married to each other, so therefore, according to you, we are denied rights and privileges available to other Americans. And we aren't even homosexuals.

How would you consummate your marriage? No details please.

 

[rdean]

Well the truth is that homosexuality is the means by which nature culls the species of damaged genetic lines. Where populations strain resources, the weaker links in the genetic chain succumb to their weaknesses and thus ends that lineage. As a general rule, wisdom precludes the encouragement of suicide, where the goal is preservation; thus where suicide is a reality, it is the discriminating individual who works to avoid those who advocate for such.

Now, the hysterical part here is how the idiot laid this entire premise on the intellectual prowess of Left-think; while demonstrating severe intellectual limitations...

Funny stuff...

Pube...

Do you have any proof of this wild assertion? Or are you just speaking out of your ass?

Of course...

Studies of stressed populations show consistantly that given sufficient strains on space homosexuality becomes rampant; with the weaker males turning queer; and where food resources are sufficiently stressed, those same queer males become FOOD.

Sorry, I couldn't find the links to that study. Is it called, "Soylent Green"?

 

[rdean]

We had a child custody dispute here in Idaho a number of years ago and the ruling was if he lived with his partner (of MANY years) he would NOT be granted custody or even VISTITATION of HIS children. His partner had to get a trailer home a few hundred feet away for his partner to get to see his children. WHAT FREAKING HYPOCRICY!!! I believe that some Conservatives would RATHER have kids raised in an ABUSIVE Hetro home than a LOVING homo home. FREAKING INSANE!!

They would. I've seen many state that institutionalizing kids is better than putting them in a loving home with gay parents.

Homos adopting children is the ultimate form of child abuse

Are you speaking from experience?

 

[midcan5]

Every citizen of the United States of America deserves the same rights, there are not two Constitutions - there is only one. Law if it is to mean anything must be applied evenly.

"Why are civil unions not enough for gay rights activists? The federal government accords 1,138 benefits and responsibilities based on marital status, not on civil union status. A few of those benefits are unpaid leave to care for an ill spouse, social security survivor benefits and spousal benefits, and the right not to testify against one’s spouse, among others."

11 Facts About Gay Rights | Do Something

Matt. 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

"The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and three hundred sixty two admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision." Lynne Lavner

"Jesus said, "Why do you not judge for yourselves what is right?" (Luke 12:57 NRSV). Such sovereign freedom strikes terror in the hearts of many Christians; they would rather be under law and be told what is right. Yet Paul himself echoes Jesus' sentiment when he says, "Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, matters pertaining to this life!" (1 Cor. 6:3 RSV). "

Homosexuality and the Bible by Walter Wink

 

[alan1]

As if anyone on the right even cares. How many times do you have to go over it? Even worse, they come up with the most lame and stupid arguments.

One more time.

Since someone else mentioned the military. What do you get from the military.
Guaranteed student loan
Guaranteed home loan
VA benefits
burial benefits
benefits to children

First, there are only a handful of states that allow civil unions. Civil unions are generally NOT recognized by other states as opposed to marriage.

Some benefits if marriage:

Joint parental rights of children
Joint adoption
Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
Crime victims recovery benefits
Domestic violence protection orders
Judicial protections and immunity
Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
Public safety officers death benefits
Spousal veterans benefits
Social Security
Medicare
Joint filing of tax returns
Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
Child support
Joint Insurance Plans
Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
Estate and gift tax benefits
Welfare and public assistance
Joint housing for elderly
Credit protection
Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans

And those are only "SOME".

I'm tired of stupid, dumbass right wingers saying "name a right gays don't get".

Everything you just named applies to heterosexual people if they choose to marry a person of the same sex.
Again, the law is applied equally, it doesn't specifically say anything about being homosexual.

They also applied to any black person who married someone of their own race. SCOTUS already ruled such laws unconstitutional in Loving V. Virginia

You don't get it, do you?
The argument you are trying to use specifically identified people based upon an identifiable and obvious characteristic (black skin). Those outdated (and now non-existent) laws specifically said "black". Where is a law that specifically says "homosexual"?