Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Obama, Gay Marriage, Original Sin, Founding Fathers, Catholics, and Pearls

Obama, Gay Marriage, Original Sin, Founding Fathers, Catholics, and Pearls (Page 7)
Thread Tools
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 06:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Semantics. The bad kind.

If you really think the fact the government had to catch you is a hair worth splitting then we'll have to agree to disagree.
Isn't that what marriage is? Otherwise, it speaks to my earlier point that gender and race are more clearly genetic and immutable than homosexuality, scientifically and otherwise; the primary reason homosexuals have not endured nearly the same degree of discrimination as have those of varying races and gender.
ebuddy
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 06:31 PM
 
As I said when you first mentioned the mutability, this causes its own issues. Specifically if you're interested in a non-platonic relationship.

Most people are interested in these, and as I've mentioned before, non-platonic relationships are an important part of asking a teenager to potentially die for their country as a full-time job.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Valley of the Sun
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 06:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I want to add little Afghani girls who get acid thrown in their face for going to school to the list of people who have suffered more than gays.
That would be any woman living in an Islamic culture They are property of their families and can be killed for a slight to the family honor.

You can also add Mexicans. We also had to deal with anti-Catholic bias. The Irish had their share as well.

Kind of hard to hide that brogue during an interview.
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 06:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
As I said when you first mentioned the mutability, this causes its own issues. Specifically if you're interested in a non-platonic relationship.
That may be a soldier's interest, but the military imposes a host of challenges to personal freedoms of all sorts due exclusively to their own interests.

Most people are interested in these, and as I've mentioned before, non-platonic relationships are an important part of asking a teenager to potentially die for their country as a full-time job.
We're not a conscripted military subego. Sure, the government asks and for now you can say "no". In times of real need, should it mandate your service, it won't care if you wear panties on your head... seriously. Although, I'm not sure they'll be any more interested in whether or not their soldiers are celebrating diversity or properly expressing their individuality.
ebuddy
     
cgc
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 07:57 PM
 
Homosexuals deserve equal protection, not equal rights. I find it ironic how Christianity has been essentially banned in public but homosexuality is lauded.
( Last edited by cgc; Jun 3, 2012 at 08:08 PM. )
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 08:13 PM
 
People who are resistant to change will resist change; they have in the past and they will in the future. In the end it'll just happen, as people realize that all the counter-arguments were just a bunch of FUD and that they aren't harmed in any way by same-sex marriages and it'll be difficult to remember why they were so afraid of it.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 11:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
People who are resistant to change will resist change; they have in the past and they will in the future. In the end it'll just happen, as people realize that all the counter-arguments were just a bunch of FUD and that they aren't harmed in any way by same-sex marriages and it'll be difficult to remember why they were so afraid of it.
There you go again, bringing reality into this discussion.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 11:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
That may be a soldier's interest, but the military imposes a host of challenges to personal freedoms of all sorts due exclusively to their own interests.
Happy soldiers perform better.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
We're not a conscripted military subego.
Turn of the phrase.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 3, 2012, 11:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by cgc View Post
I find it ironic how Christianity has been essentially banned in public...
What does this even mean?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 12:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Semantics. The bad kind.

If you really think the fact the government had to catch you is a hair worth splitting then we'll have to agree to disagree.
So are you trying to say gay people where banned from the military? Gay people served in the military the dont ask dont tell didn't stop gay people from being in the military. Now if the military limited gay people to being only cooks, non combat roles and other discriminatory positions then you might have something.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 12:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
What does this even mean?
Holiday Tree, Holiday Dinner, Holiday Card, Holiday Gift Given...

Happy Holidays, Holiday Shopping....

I'm about as anti religious as you get but for Christ sake call it for what it is, Christmas Tree, Christmas Dinner, Christmas Card, Merry Christmas, and so forth

It pains me that new immigrants from CHINA have more CHRISTMAS spirit in there stores then any of the P.C big box stores. I go to the Chinese corner store a block away, I see Christmas all over it. Go to Sears, everything is done to hide it.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 12:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
So are you trying to say gay people where banned from the military? Gay people served in the military the dont ask dont tell didn't stop gay people from being in the military. Now if the military limited gay people to being only cooks, non combat roles and other discriminatory positions then you might have something.
I didn't say they were banned, I said the government had the legal right to fire you for it.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 12:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
It pains me that new immigrants from CHINA have more CHRISTMAS spirit in there stores then any of the P.C big box stores. I go to the Chinese corner store a block away, I see Christmas all over it. Go to Sears, everything is done to hide it.
What do we want?

The Christ back in retail!

When do we want it?

Starting right after Halloween!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 07:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Happy soldiers perform better.
I'm certain they'd be more happy with breakfast in bed or expressing their individuality by choosing whatever color and style of clothes they want to wear, but I have to assume their happiness is weighed against what the military feels is best for the military.

Turn of the phrase.
When I say we're not a conscripted military, I'm saying that approximately 40 years ago, we became an all-volunteer military. i.e. no longer conscripted. How is that a turn of the phrase if it hasn't turned in 40 years?
ebuddy
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 07:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
So are you trying to say gay people where banned from the military? Gay people served in the military the dont ask dont tell didn't stop gay people from being in the military. Now if the military limited gay people to being only cooks, non combat roles and other discriminatory positions then you might have something.
The intent was the same; keep gays out of the military. That's the reality of the situation. One can split hairs all they want, but it doesn't change the basic idea.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 09:09 AM
 
Is there any recent post worth reading in this thread? I stopped caring a long time ago.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 09:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by cgc View Post
I find it ironic how Christianity has been essentially banned in public but homosexuality is lauded.
I find it odd that you would compare the two like this. Unless you think homosexuality is a religion? Or that Christianity is a sexual preference?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 10:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I'm certain they'd be more happy with breakfast in bed or expressing their individuality by choosing whatever color and style of clothes they want to wear, but I have to assume their happiness is weighed against what the military feels is best for the military.
What's best for the military is soldiers who get to bang. Been that way since time immemorial.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
When I say we're not a conscripted military, I'm saying that approximately 40 years ago, we became an all-volunteer military. i.e. no longer conscripted. How is that a turn of the phrase if it hasn't turned in 40 years?
Not that kind of turn.

If one volunteers for the military, they are volunteering for a job which asks you to potentially put your life in danger.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 01:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
The intent was the same; keep gays out of the military. That's the reality of the situation. One can split hairs all they want, but it doesn't change the basic idea.
Don't tell don't ask didn't keep gays out of the military.. I don't see how it would keep gays out of the military except for flammers who love to broadcast out to the world HEY LOOK AT ME IM A GAYSEXUAL.

Keeping gays out of the military is as simple as saying NO GAY PEOPLE ALLOWED. The don't ask don't tell was more of a protection system to prevent problems with in the military from homophobs and gay people working together in life risking situations. Woman where totally banned from combat service until the early 90's because of the effect of seeing woman split open on the field affected solders. Woman where actually banned from combat service, gays where just asked to keep there dicks in there pants and not say anything.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 01:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Show me where Gays suffered as much as Blacks and woman in the United States of America.
So their rights don't matter as much because they were persecuted elsewhere, or, they didn't suffer nearly as much as women and blacks in the United States, so it's OK to not change the laws to give them the same rights as straights?

If the KKK knew you were gay, they would have lynched you just like any black man or woman. The only point I agree with is that it is easier to hide the fact that you're gay than to change the color of your skin or hide your birth certificate. Perhaps that's why it wasn't as prevalent as any other persecution.

By the way, it wasn't "just" 15,000 people murdered. It could have only been 1, and that was bad enough.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 01:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
So their rights don't matter as much because they were persecuted elsewhere, or, they didn't suffer nearly as much as women and blacks in the United States, so it's OK to not change the laws to give them the same rights as straights?

If the KKK knew you were gay, they would have lynched you just like any black man or woman. The only point I agree with is that it is easier to hide the fact that you're gay than to change the color of your skin or hide your birth certificate. Perhaps that's why it wasn't as prevalent as any other persecution.

By the way, it wasn't "just" 15,000 people murdered. It could have only been 1, and that was bad enough.
Who said anything about the rights not mattering as much... Some one made a comment that Gays have been discriminated against as badly as Blacks and Woman. It simply is not true. To insinuate anything from that makes you look retarded. I never said anything about it being ok to be persecuted or anything else for that matter. I just don't think its fair to belittle what woman and blacks have suffered to make gay people feel more important.

Do you think it is at all disrespectful to say to Jews that Gays have suffered as much as Jews in Nazi Germany. All 15 000 of us that died equal in scope to the 6 million + Jews that died. We suffered equally... No its not.
( Last edited by Athens; Jun 4, 2012 at 03:27 PM. Reason: Bolded important part to avoid confusion.)
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 01:46 PM
 
Pardon me, as I haven't read the last few pages or so, but when did suffering and persecution become some kind of dick measuring contest with the Jews and the Holocaust? Talk about having high standards.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 01:58 PM
 
EDIT: I don't really know what's going on in this thread so I'm bowing out. My apologies if I misread Athens' post.
( Last edited by Big Mac; Jun 4, 2012 at 02:26 PM. )

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 02:05 PM
 
OK fine I give, gays are persecuted as much as Blacks and Woman and suffered as much as Jews and every one else. Where do I go to collect my victimization awards and compensation. I would like to cash in on this. I'll go downtown later today to start chanting free my people free my people... see if I can get my brothers and sisters locked of for being gay freedom.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 08:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Pardon me, as I haven't read the last few pages or so, but when did suffering and persecution become some kind of dick measuring contest with the Jews and the Holocaust? Talk about having high standards.
I don't know about "Jews and the Holocaust" in this thread, but I took issue with the repeated practice of using the historic plight of blacks and women in arguments for gay rights.
ebuddy
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 4, 2012, 09:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I don't know about "Jews and the Holocaust" in this thread, but I took issue with the repeated practice of using the historic plight of blacks and women in arguments for gay rights.
Why not Jews?

Anti-Semite.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 06:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Why not Jews?
I've not seen where they've been invoked in the gay rights arguments or at least, not in this thread.

Anti-Semite.
Heterophobe.
ebuddy
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 07:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I find it odd that you would compare the two like this. Unless you think homosexuality is a religion? Or that Christianity is a sexual preference?
They both result in potential lifestyle choices based on how we feel inside about ourselves.

We define ourselves to others by either immutable characteristics which are obvious and not controllable, or how we decide to present ourselves to others, based on how we feel about ourselves.

For instance, being born homely is often times an immutable characteristic that is used to discriminate - people can't help if they are physically unattractive. Most people don't like to look at ugly people as well. However, as it's been explained, things like homosexuality are clearly situations where if you chose not to allow that to define you, you can. Being black? Not so much.

Religion is not normally immutable, though in this country our founding fathers paid it clear that this was one choice that would be specifically protected from discrimination by the government. Most other mutable characteristics aren't protected, and I think it's a bad "slippery slope" to start picking and choosing ones over others due to personal moral beliefs, for special protective rights.
( Last edited by stupendousman; Jun 5, 2012 at 07:12 AM. )
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 11:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Heterophobe.
Sad but true.

If I see a straight person, I cross to the other side of the street.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 11:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I don't know about "Jews and the Holocaust" in this thread, but I took issue with the repeated practice of using the historic plight of blacks and women in arguments for gay rights.
I think I already pointed out that the parallels don't have to be exact for the comparison to be valid. Most of the comparisons to black discrimination I've seen deal with interracial marriage and that states rights. Seems ok to me.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 12:23 PM
 
@stupendousman

Did you just say being gay is a choice?
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Valley of the Sun
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 12:26 PM
 
It was for Anne Heche.
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 12:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
It was for Anne Heche.
Therefore it is for all!

Or are you just sniping?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 01:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
@stupendousman

Did you just say being gay is a choice?
No. I doubt it is.

However, we do choose who we have sex with, or if we choose to have sex at all. To some it's a matter of taste or desire. To others it's a moral question. All choices we can make.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 02:35 PM
 
Maybe it's just me, but I'm not seeing the solution of hiding you're gay as much of a solution.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 04:56 PM
 
The funny thing is for most gay people, the amount of discrimination they suffer the most from are from other gay people. And a UK study found a lot of gay bashing comes from closet cases.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 05:05 PM
 
Very true. I wouldn't be surprised that being bi, you've gotten flack for not being gay enough.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 05:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Sorry this took so long. I wanted to get a look at a paper on the subject, and had to hit up a friend at a university to get it.
Looks like I've been even more delayed than you were. I'd be interested to know what the book you found said.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 05:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Very true. I wouldn't be surprised that being bi, you've gotten flack for not being gay enough.
Ya its worse for the bisexuals, get it from both sides.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 12:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
Looks like I've been even more delayed than you were. I'd be interested to know what the book you found said.
I made a report in the post you quoted.

The upshot is there's good evidence those examples of incest were of Greek colonists who really didn't want to intermingle with the Egyptians, as having done so would have greatly reduced their social standing.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 12:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Ya its worse for the bisexuals, get it from both sides.
Don't tell me, but you are also agnostic and drive on both sides of the road.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 11:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Don't tell me, but you are also agnostic and drive on both sides of the road.
No and No
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 03:26 PM
 
If you don't drive on both sides of the road, how are you supposed to get home?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 03:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If you don't drive on both sides of the road, how are you supposed to get home?
If this is some kind of sexual euphemism, you've completely lost me.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 03:31 PM
 
It would have been funnier if it was, so I'm willing to pretend.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 03:54 PM
 
I thought you meant both sides of the road in the same direction... But im lost now too..
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 08:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I think I already pointed out that the parallels don't have to be exact for the comparison to be valid. Most of the comparisons to black discrimination I've seen deal with interracial marriage and that states rights. Seems ok to me.
Correta Scott King agreed. Evan Hurst Says It Matters That a Tennessee County Party Endorsed Marriage | Advocate.com

"There are those who scoff at the two being connected in any way, and there are surely gay rights supporters who perhaps inadvertently gloss over the sheer brutality of what happened in Memphis and around the country during the Civil Rights Movement, but as Dr. King’s late wife Coretta Scott King said in 2003, “I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people... but I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King, Jr. said, ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’”
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Valley of the Sun
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2012, 11:46 PM
 
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2012, 06:58 AM
 
It's good to see a man of faith stand up what is right, based on that faith. This guy is a preacher, and I can't rationalize any preacher of the word of God agreeing with the NAACP's stand. I understand that despite MLK being a "Reverend" (much like Jesse Jackson), he wasn't really all that religious and had a hard time actually following a great deal of the tenants of his faith - especially when it came to sexual morality, so it isn't a big surprise that his wife who sat around and watched him violate God's laws time and again ignore the principles of the faith her husband was supposed to be defending as a "man of God."

I get the debate in regards to religion and Government - but marriage is a societal construct - not one that was created by government, and one that has been established by "our creator" with a long history in regards to how those who believe in a "creator" define it.

During a Statehouse rally in March 2011, Ratliff said his support for traditional marriage was biblically based, adding, “This isn’t a private interpretation, a Burger King religion, and by that I mean a ‘have it your way’ religion.”
You can set up a government "contract" any way you want. However, it is irrational for government to just change the meaning of a societal construct steeped in a strong cultural tradition (where there is an inequality between the things being debated) without at least offering "the people" the right to decide for themselves. Most states that have done this have decided it was a bad idea and it's clear that the NAACP is just marching in lockstep to it's "master," the Democrat party. I wouldn't be too surprised if this was just the beginning of a huge backlash against the organization based on the fact that polls would seem to suggest that the majority of african americans don't support this stand, and likely even fewer ones "of faith" do so.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2012, 07:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I think I already pointed out that the parallels don't have to be exact for the comparison to be valid.
I saw that Dakar and I've maintained that it is their differences that appear to be valid for most to this day; race and gender being much more clearly genetic and immutable. With regard to rights, it is easier to identify and/or acknowledge an injustice against a race or gender than it is a sexual orientation.

Most of the comparisons to black discrimination I've seen deal with interracial marriage and that states rights. Seems ok to me.
This is where we'd likely disagree more as I believe this is best handled at the State level and that includes distaste for DOMA. There had also been scenarios in history where the centralized authority got in the way of States trying to pioneer new civil rights ground. If the Federal government must acknowledge marriage for purposes of managing the resources of the civil apparatus, it should be just that; a civil union between any two people who wish to contractually enter this agreement.

Still, race and gender are regarded differently than sexual orientation and I would submit the fact that interracial marriage was legalized in 1967 yet we're still discussing gay rights nearly 50 years later as evidence of this phenomena. So again, you can say the parallels don't have to be exact for a valid comparison, but I disagree.
ebuddy
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:01 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2014 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2