U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-13-2015, 11:08 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,174 posts, read 22,544,005 times
Reputation: 10428

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Washington state has had a domestic partnership law in place since 2007. The initial law granted couples about two dozen rights, including hospital visitation and inheritance rights when there is no will. It was expanded a year later, and then again in 2009, when lawmakers completed the package with the so-called "everything but marriage" law that was ultimately upheld by voters later that year.

Gregoire to introduce gay marriage bill

Gregoire introduces the gay marriage law and the legislature passed it unilaterally, after such a measure failed 3 times when placed on the ballot.



Referendum 74

Referendum 74 (R-74 or Ref 74) was a Washington state referendum to approve or reject the February 2012 bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in the state.[SIZE=2] [/SIZE]On June 12, 2012, state officials announced that enough signatures in favor of the referendum had been submitted and scheduled the referendum to appear on the ballot in the November 6 general election. The law was upheld by voters in the November 6, 2012 election by a final margin of 7.4% (53.7% approve, 46.3% reject) and the result was certified on December 5.

I was saying that the legislature unilaterally passed legislation for gay marriage, after which a referendum was placed on the ballot to repeal the law.

You were saying?
We had a civil union prior to our full marriage. The civil union wouldn't have allowed for me to get my partner's pension if he dies before me, and it also caused us to have to pay taxes on the health insurance I received through his company. So it wasn't equal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2015, 11:08 AM
 
9,116 posts, read 4,541,200 times
Reputation: 3731
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Then he should scrap ALL EOs since they are not voted on by legislature or the voters.
Why pick and choose which ones should be scrapped and which one should be kept?

Why should his EO on employment of veterans and actually has a system for the preferential treatment for veterans be allowed?


http://ks-kansaslibrary.civicplus.co...nter/View/4172

Or is it only ok to remove EO protections for gays?
Yep, I'd support getting rid of that one too. Unless there's something in Kansas that prevents the Legislature from passing laws about state employees, I'd leave the legislating to them.

As for removing lgbt from the EO, I can follow the rationale because the law for private sector doesn't cover them. Brownback basically put the state back to the same standards as the private sector.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 11:08 AM
 
7,743 posts, read 3,431,837 times
Reputation: 1742
Quote:
Originally Posted by B87 View Post
Since when were humans not part of the animal kingdom? Last time I checked, humans were primates, which belong to the mammals, most definitely animals.

Humans also kill their young, or eat one another (or commit immoral acts because an imaginary man in the sky - a rehash of an ancient Sumerian myth - ordered them to).
Last time I checked, there was no conclusive proof that we are not created beings by God. Human beings are the only species that wrestles with moral conflicts. Animals do pretty much whatever every other member in their species does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
19,462 posts, read 9,774,745 times
Reputation: 7549
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
Last time I checked, there was no conclusive proof that we are not created beings by God. Human beings are the only species that wrestles with moral conflicts. Animals do pretty much whatever every other member in their species does.
Because humans have a more developed brain than other animals.

Great apes have more evolved emotions that ants. Dolphins have more evolved emotions that shrimp.
We are the most evolved animal on the planet.

As for the god thing, you can not prove that we were. So god id not an issue. But we do have DNA proof that all animals share at least some match with human DNA. Great apes have a 90% match.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Central Florida
2,063 posts, read 1,732,806 times
Reputation: 1901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troyfan View Post
It is the y chromosome that makes a male a male.

I can have hair planted all over me, my arms and legs shortened and that still wouldn't make me a monkey. Neither does having one b***s cut off make a man a woman. Although it does make him a very confused man.

Well I see your point that someone who has had a sex change operation to become a women will never completely and fully be a woman but they have pretty much done all they can to show they want to be the opposite sex, and have the full and complete appearance of the opposite sex enough to belong in a ladies room.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 11:30 AM
 
Location: Sunrise
10,869 posts, read 13,675,929 times
Reputation: 8987
Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Hey Scoop, I have at no point during this discussion suggested ANYONE think the way I do. I have only expressed my personal opinion. You are the one arguing that I am forcing my view on you, all while you call me repugnant, a holocaust denier (as a Jew that made me LOL) and I am sure you have used some really lovely discriptors that you wouldn't type here.

It only proves that all this anger and bitterness is not about me. I don't hate or fear you or your sexual preferences. But your hatred and anger towards me is palpable. I really feel like you project your hatred and fear of people with values and morals based on the Torah, or Bible or some other religious basis. You may be glad you don't live in my head, but I am even happier not to live in your heart.
You don't get it. But that doesn't surprise me.

Re-read my last post -- think however you'd like, just don't hinder people as they try to make their way through life.

The bigot is free to be a bigot -- but has no right to stop kids from trying to attend school. The homophobe is free to be a homophobe -- but has no right to stop couples from marrying.

And I didn't call you a holocaust denier. I said that I lump homophobes, holocaust deniers, moon-landing hoaxers and supply-side economists together. They're all part of the same tribe. These very disparate groups all display the same kind of blind, faith-based ignorance. And there's no way to "make" them see how awful and wrong they are. The best society can do is make sure that their poison doesn't hurt others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Sunrise
10,869 posts, read 13,675,929 times
Reputation: 8987
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan View Post
Ummm, I'm going to stop you right there. I have no issue with gay people, or with gays getting married, because quite frankly it isn't my business what 2 consenting adults do. However; don't try to sell us on being straight is being in the minority.
Too bad. Exclusive heterosexuals ARE in the minority. 38%, to be precise.

Most people have at least some incidental homosexuality. It is more "normal" to have at least some homosexual thoughts/urges than it is to not have any. That's why we have such rampant homophobia -- people aren't comfortable with their own sexuality. They want to be zeros on the Kinsey scale when they're actually ones or twos.

This is a self-loathing problem masquerading as a religious problem. Kind of like when a Klansman finds out that he or she is part African.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 12:03 PM
 
920 posts, read 478,224 times
Reputation: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Differing opinion is "I like this but you like that". Not "You shouldn't be allowed to have what I have and I will try to make sure you never get it".

I don't care what you like or don't like. But I would NEVER try to prohibit you from having something that I can have. I would NEVER try to use force of law to prohibit you from having all of the same legal protections I have. I would NEVER try to use force of law over something so silly as banning others the use of a legal term that I want for myself.

"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right you claim for yourself"
Robert Green Ingersoll.
I do not claim the right to marry a woman, thus I am not withholding any right I claim for myself from you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 12:06 PM
 
920 posts, read 478,224 times
Reputation: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoopLV View Post
This is a self-loathing problem masquerading as a religious problem. Kind of like when a Klansman finds out that he or she is part African.
Really? Then gays pushing for marriage is based on their need for affirmation from society that they are not engaging in mortal sins. They cannot handle the shame of their sins, so they need government to force approval on everyone else.

Isn't it fun to play armchair psychologist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 12:08 PM
 
920 posts, read 478,224 times
Reputation: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
What's the special treatment again?

The special treatment is seeking additional rights based solely on sexual attraction. Today all men and all women, regardless of their sexual attraction are free to marry anyone of the opposite sex. Gays seek to expand that right to allow them the special privilege of marrying the same sex. That is seeking to change the existing social norm to meet their personal proclivities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top