But there is a difference in taking the other side. If homosexuals are denied the right to marry, they are missing out on something. They are discriminated against. If others feel imposed on by gay marriage they aren't missing out on anything, and they aren't being discriminated against, they are just made uncomfortable. Being made uncomfortable isn't a reason to create a constitutional amendment. Again there is no argument it other than it makes people uncomfortable. Sane's argument about being imposed on because some kids might have to go school with children of homosexuals doesn't even make sense. The children aren't gay, just their parents. Why does it matter if straight children of straight parents, are in a class with straight children of gay parents? The children don't have any control over their parents sexual orientation, why should they be segregated. Also it doesn't make sense because there already are children that belong to gay parents. They are in schools with children of straight parents. Except for the possible discrimination against the children and intolerance against them, how are the other children harmed? I'm a religious Christian heterosexual, who supports gay marriage. I won't argue about whether sexual orientation is chosen or not that's for a different thread. People were/are uncomfortable with interracial marriages, being in school with children of other races, etc. Thank goodness those people's discomfort didn't allow a constitutional amendment to be passed banning interracial marriage. Just like with homosexual marriage if people don't like the idea then they don't have to participate. If the fact that OTHER PEOPLE do participate makes them uncomfortable I wish there was something I could do about that but there isn't. The fact that a segment of the population is often not allowed the rights that I have makes me uncomfortable.
1. your signature rocks. any poster that can appreciate smarty jones is a friend of mine!!! 2. i don't doubt it's become less taboo. i don't doubt that at all. i still don't know if it's being embraced in such a way that we could say heterosexuality is a thing of the past...or it's being displaced. 3. i also read your thoughts that the current generation is abandoning concepts traditionally associated with faith. i'd say this is definitely not true, partiuclarly compared to their parents. i've seen some stats, and i wish i could link you to them, that indicate a far greater church attendance and interest in faith among this current crop of teenagers and young adults than what we saw with their parents and even the generation between them and their parents. 4. gay marriage is a non-issue with me. i don't care what you call it. i just don't care about it, period.
FB, I didn't think we were talking about a constitutional amendment here; I know I wasn't. I thought this was more of a fer it/agin it sort of discussion. Anyway, please don't tell me particularly -- after I spent 45 minutes writing an argument against that had nothing at all to do with discomfort -- that discomfort is the only reason anyone opposes. It's not true. And, I wrote a long-ass post to show that. As for Sane's argument, I see that it has differences, though I'd quibble about who is being discriminated against. I was just afraid the irony would be lost. I'm not defending his position, which I don't agree with. He'll have to manage that.
I'm sorry about the amendment thing. I guess my whole world is colored by the politics lately. Since Kerry is against gay marriage, and Bush is against gay marriage, but Bush is also in favor of a constitutional amendment, then I was using that as the dividing point. Sorry if I misrepresented what you were arguing for. I don't like it when that happens to me, and I didn't mean to do it to you. I read your post and there were some arguments that didn't have to do with discomfort, but those arguments don't apply to just homosexual marriage. They were based in family. Religion, is another reason you mentioned, but that comes to comfort and freedom as well. I too am religious, but that is something for me personally to deal with, and I wouldn't dare to tell anyone else they should live by my beliefs. I can share my beliefs, and hope they find some agreement but the choice is theirs, and I support that choice.
Well, I'm very set in my ways, so some of the things Is ay may be very offensive to homosexual people. If you can't stomach it, I suggest you don't read the rest of my posts. If you plan on name-calling, then let's not have this conversation altogether. My reason: I think gay people are just victims of some occurence in their life. I don't think anyone is biologically gay and I don't think anyone is meant to be gay. Now, don't try to change my mind on this point unless you're planning on somehow removing the credibility of my religion from me. If you can do that, then you have taken the first step in convincing me. As far as I'm concerned, religion has told me homosexuality is a sin, and not a minor sin either like drinking or stealing some food to eat. So you could see why I wouldn't want my children to go to school or the playground or whatever with children raised by gay parents. I don't want my children to think it's ok to be gay. I mean, that's fine for you I guess, but it's not ok by me. I respect your opinion, but I don't want it included in my children's lives. What would stop children from gay couples going to private schools? I'm private schooled, and plan on the same for my children. How about you homeschool your children. Take your pick of my reasons: 1) Majority rules. 2) We were here first. 3) Kids shouldn't be exposed to homosexuality at an early age.
one person said, "I've yet to see one rational argument against gay marriage." I would like to see one rational argument to allow gay marriage. There are two levels to marriage; Spiritual/Religion,ect... and legality. As far as the spiritial/religion aspect, I suppose if you find the right priest or whatever the equivalence, you could marry anything you want. Marrying for "love" would fall under this catagory, as you do not need anything legal to show that you love anyone. The legal end of course, branches off into government/work/ect.. rights. Its hard to really discuss this, as there are tons of exceptions, in which people like Outlaw will no doubt list everyone possible. Ive found most gay people would not marry if the opportunity was given to them. I feel the few gays that claim to really love eachother is more of a puppy dog love thing, just like a good portion of marriages today. I believe gay marriages would fill up our courts with even more stupid divorces ... we have enough as there are already. I went up to couple gay people I personally know. My first question: 1) Do you support gay marriage answer: Yes 2) Would you ever marry (a gay person) answer: hell no
Speaking for myself, I don't need the government to validate my relationship other than certain legal concerns.. I only need God to validate my relationship. The only reason I sign that piece of paper that's legally binding is because it says somewhere in my religion that I should do it in case **** happens. I don't need sheets of paper to commit to anyone, I don't need to be legally married to prove that I love someone. I, btw, do need to be married to have/raise kids because I live in the Middle East. Like I said, just little legal issues.
I'm not uncomfortable with it. Homosexuals are so quick to slap the "homophobic" tag on anyone that disagrees with them (not reffering to you). As for your reasons, that's perfectly fine, and I respect that. Me and you disagree in that I think God wants us to procreate and you don't think that's a must, but I definitely respect your views/opinion. Like I said, I don't have a problem with it, it's just something Id on't fully agree with because of a difference in beliefs.
Likewise. I think this board/world is big enough for differing opinions, and I don't mind people who believe differently than I do.
So Sane, if one of your children grows up and "decides" to be gay, will you disown them or something?
those are the same reasons people used for segregation in public schools based on race. i wouldn't have a problem with my kids being around kids from traditional families, even though those kids might tease, bully or harrass mine. you're the one who has the problem so you should be the one to go elsewhere.
Sane, I can take a difference of opinion. Personally, I think the Church has too many self-contradicitions to take very seriously, but I understand that a majority of the United States has managed to reconcile most of those differences. If you think homosexuality is a sin... fine. But there's one thing you say that I feel I must ask you about: You say that you "don't want your kids exposed to gays" and yet say that you are "not homophobic" (or at least you suggest this by saying that "Homosexuals are so quick to slap the "homophobic" tag on anyone that disagrees with them"). If you're not scared of them, why are you afraid of exposing your kids? First of all, if your kids so young and innocent, they won't notice, and if they did, they wouldn't understand. So here's what you do: when they hit puberty, you explain that gay people are misguided, sinful, evil... whatever you think they are. Or... you could even have some faith that your kids will discover what's right without shielding them from every aspect of the world that you don't agree with. I had a good friend of mine pulled out of school because one of the priests at my private, Catholic high school was teaching evolution and the creation of the universe. And you know what? When that kid left, he wasn't any more convinced that the Creation stories were true... but he was a hell of a lot lonlier. Your religion tells you that gays are sinners... fine. Jesus also told us to love our neighbors, and gave us a warning: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Learn to live with gays... they're not going away.
Brutal Hate Crime Shocks Austin By Brent Brumley It’s Friday night in the middle of a hot Texas summer. A casual weekend unbound from responsibility brings a welcome respite from the usual routine. For many, time for a drink at a favorite watering hole. Maybe join some old friends or even better meet a new one. We’ve all been there without giving it so much as a second thought. A few cocktails, a good time, and the possibility of a chance encounter are all that is expected. That’s exactly how Friday, July 16, began for a 30-something-year-old artist living in Austin. While enjoying a night out in the warehouse district at a popular gay establishment, an unexpected introduction over a casual drink quickly evolved into a life-altering nightmare that has stunned the local community and prompted police detectives to search for answers. Around 1:30 a.m. on Saturday, the victim of what is being described as the most vicious hate crime in recent history in the capital city was approached by one of four suspects posing as a gay man. A friend of the young man describes what happened. “He had gone out by himself to have a few drinks. One of the men passed by, pinched his nipple, and said ‘you’re cute.’ Then the others came and approached him all acting as if they were gay.” The friend explains the conversation eventually turned to discussing where the group could go after the bar closed. “You are in your safe place and in your bar so he felt comfortable.” The victim invited the first suspect to his home, and was asked if the suspect’s three friends could accompany them. Once the four suspects arrived at the victim’s residence, the assault began. The horrific ordeal that would last for two hours began when one of the suspects approached the victim from behind and broke a glass over his head. While dazed, scared and confused, the victim’s clothes were ripped from his body while he was repeatedly beaten and kicked, choked with the chord cut from his vacuum cleaner, and forced to commit degrading acts. As the suspects destroyed the victim’s home, they screamed, “We’ve done this before and we’ll do it again. This is what we do to AIDS-ridden fags.” Eventually, the suspects left, the police were summoned and the victim was taken by ambulance to a local hospital. “The next day, I went in and saw the blood all over the wall. It was a horrific sight,” said the friend. “Something has to be done about this type of behavior. This is a horrific crime and I’m appalled that people shrug this type of behavior off. He’s a dear friend to me and he’s afraid to be outside now which is unacceptable.” The crime is being investigated by the Austin Police Department which issued a composite sketch of the lead suspect this week and is seeking help from members of the community. The Lesbian/Gay Rights Lobby of Texas has issued a warning to Austin’s GLBT Community and is urging vigilance. Randall Ellis, Executive Director of LGRL says the public should be aware this type of attack is still possible. “We want the entire LGBT Community to be aware that this happened and to be extremely vigilant. Last week we informed the bars of the incident. Now that APD has released one composite, we are asking local bars and businesses to post the sketch and descriptions of the suspects. We hope the police are able to catch these men quickly and that they are brought to justice. We will continue to post additional information as it is made available to LGRL by the Austin Police Department.” All four suspects are described as white males between the ages of 20 and 23. The suspects are described as: Suspect #1 – (See Composite Sketch) • 5’8” to 5’10” tall • 165 pounds • Short dark blond/brown hair • Hazel eyes • Stocky “jock” build • Last seen wearing dark colored short-sleeved shirt and blue jeans. Suspect #2 • 5’8” to 5’9” tall • 165-170 pounds • Short dark hair • Dark eyes • Chin scruff • Stocky “jock” build • Last seen wearing dark blue short-sleeved shirt with white letters and blue jeans. Suspect #3 • 5’11” to 6’0” tall • 170 pounds • Sandy blond “spiky” hair • Hazel or blue eyes • Stocky “jock” build • Last seen wearing orange UT shirt and blue jeans. Suspect #4 • 130 pounds • Thin build • Medium to dark blond hair, pimples on face • Last seen wearing baggy cargo shorts and blue canvas tennis shoes. The suspect vehicle is described as a 1987-89 Chevrolet Blazer with gray interior. The color of the vehicle is light and dark gray. Detectives are asking anyone with information about the suspects to contact the APD Sex Crimes tip line at 512-974-5095 or CrimeStoppers at 512-472-8477. As community leaders join police in the search for the suspects, some worry this type of attack is the product of a culture of discrimination. “This was a vicious and meticulously planned attack,” said Ellis. “I’m deeply disturbed by the nature of this violent act of hate and the circumstances surrounding it. As the victim was beat and tortured, the perpetrators quoted from the Bible and actually referred to the issue of gay marriage. We can’t overlook the fact that this assault came on the heels of highly publicized and intense debate over same-sex marriage. Prejudice and intolerance have a price that we as a society pay. During the debate on same-sex marriage, lawmakers in Texas and across this country sent a message that gay Americans are second-class citizens, unworthy of full protection under the law. This kind of political rhetoric paves the way for words and acts of aggression against gays and lesbians.” Hate crimes are committed to cause fear and panic within a community. Such crimes are intended to send a message that an individual and their kind will not be tolerated. “I call on all fair-minded Texans to speak out against this heinous act of aggression,” stated Ellis. “We must send a clear message that this form of aggression is unacceptable. It is un-Texan and un-American.” In 2001 the Texas Legislature passed the James Byrd Hates Crimes Act, which calls for enhanced penalties in crimes motivated by prejudice. LGRL believes with this act, Texas has sent a clear message that hate based crimes will not be tolerated in the Lone Star state. Currently, proposed legislation exists at the federal level which would expand federal jurisdiction to reach serious, violent hate crimes based on “the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender or disability” of the victims.
It's not a sin to be from a different race. How you want to raise your kids is your business, and how comfortable you are with them mingling with other families is your own business as well. At this point, I'd have to say more people are on my side. I'm not the one with the problem, you are the one with the problem. You want to compare this to race? It's not the same at all. Because people are born with their race and they're not doing anything wrong or going against anyone's morals by being born that way. No one can TURN into a certain race either, it's 100% biological.
You need not worry about being caught off guard by having a child out of wedlock my friend. I do. You don't need to worry about being charged with having pre-marital sex, which is an offense where I live. What legal protection do YOU need?
