Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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, 03:51 PM
 
672 posts, read 784,341 times
Reputation: 1989

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Some aren't. If marriage was defined as uniting two people of the same sex, then people who wanted that changed because they are not attracted to the same sex, would also be seeking special treatment under the law. The reason they are seeking special treatment is that they are a group of people that want existing laws changed based on their personal sexual preference, not based on anything else.

In Loving v. Virginia, the basis of that case was that a black man was forbidden to marry a white woman, but a white man was not forbidden to marry a white woman. The only reason the black man was prohibited from marrying a white woman was the color of his skin. He was not seeking special treatment under the law, he was seeking to be treated just like a white man, to be able to marry a white woman.

Your argument is not that you want to be treated the same way another man/woman is treated under the law, because you already are treated equally. You want the law changed specifically because of your sexual preference - you are not seeking equal treatment, you are seeking special treatment because your request is not to be treated the same, but to be treated differently than everyone else, because of your sexual attraction.
You are assuming that being gay is about sexual attraction. It isn't. You are narrowly defining marriage as a union between two people of different genders. It doesn't need to be that narrow.

What you and your ilk are continually missing is that gays don't want to change your marriage, they just want to broaden your legal definition of marriage. What they want is the same rights to buy and own property, to pay taxes as a married couple, to get the same legal benefits as heterosexual married couples. They want to know that they don't need to go through all sorts of legal gyrations so that they are ensured that they or their partner has a legal right to visitation and medical decisions should they become ill, they want to know that they or their partner has a legal right to property should something happen, to custody of children, should there be any, to the same benefits that any spouse would have by the simple act of getting married. None of this would have any effect on you, it would not have any effect on your rights, it doesn't infringe on anything except for your tender sensibilities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2015, 03:52 PM
 
10,068 posts, read 5,680,534 times
Reputation: 2879
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoopLV View Post
I have already made it quite clear that my opinion of homophobes is the same as my opinion about holocaust deniers, moan landing hoaxers, and supply-side economists. I will add the Ku Klux Klan to that list. There are other groups I would add, at the risk of proving Godwin right.

These groups all share one basic trait -- this country would be far better off without them. I'm not in favor of rounding them all up and pushing them into a caldera, because I am not like them. But it's safe to say that this country would be better off without such groups. They drag us down. They are ballast. We would do well to jettison this ballast.

So I really could not care less if their feelings are hurt when they are called out on their blind stupidity.


Right wing Christian people simply want to be left alone and preserve traditional American morals. OTOH, it is your side that comes off extremely intolerant, angry and venomous. Your comment about jettison this ballast sounds awful like forcing people to believe like you or executing them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 03:52 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,261 posts, read 14,110,687 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Some aren't. If marriage was defined as uniting two people of the same sex, then people who wanted that changed because they are not attracted to the same sex, would also be seeking special treatment under the law. The reason they are seeking special treatment is that they are a group of people that want existing laws changed based on their personal sexual preference, not based on anything else.

In Loving v. Virginia, the basis of that case was that a black man was forbidden to marry a white woman, but a white man was not forbidden to marry a white woman. The only reason the black man was prohibited from marrying a white woman was the color of his skin. He was not seeking special treatment under the law, he was seeking to be treated just like a white man, to be able to marry a white woman.

Your argument is not that you want to be treated the same way another man/woman is treated under the law, because you already are treated equally. You want the law changed specifically because of your sexual preference - you are not seeking equal treatment, you are seeking special treatment because your request is not to be treated the same, but to be treated differently than everyone else, because of your sexual attraction.
No they would be seeking EQUAL treatment. Our laws can not discriminate based on the sex of the person. Has nothing to do with who you are attracted to, who you have sex with, how you have sex, or if you have sex. The government does not ask one person getting married about their attractions, how they have sex or if they plan on having sex. All they ask for is the sex of the two people getting married.

And the loving example works for sex too.
A man can marry a woman, but a woman is prohibited from marrying a woman.
A woman can marry a man, but a man is prohibited from marrying a man.
I am not seeking special treatment either I am asking to marry a woman, just like a man can.

One was discrimination based on race the other is discrimination based on sex. BOTH are unconstitutional under the 14th amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 03:54 PM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,484,508 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
Right wing Christian people simply want to be left alone and preserve traditional American morals.
Is that why they actively seek to discriminate against gays? Is that why they actively seek to have laws against gay marriage? Because they want to be left alone? Uh huh, that's what I thought.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 03:56 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,261 posts, read 14,110,687 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
Right wing Christian people simply want to be left alone and preserve traditional American morals. OTOH, it is your side that comes off extremely intolerant, angry and venomous. Your comment about jettison this ballast sounds awful like forcing people to believe like you or executing them.
If you want to be left alone stop pushing for laws that deny me equal rights. If you invade my life, I have no choice but to fight back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 04:00 PM
 
46,757 posts, read 25,681,251 times
Reputation: 29277
Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Dang, jjrose, you are the most narcissistic poster I have ever run across. Why is everything about forcing YOU to live by something or forcing YOU to think a certain way.
Now, those are the words from someone of privilege. Society accommodates your norms, so anyone wishing it to change is just selfish.

Some people find it easier to muster empathy when their attitudes and action hurt specific people, rather than a broader, faceless group. jjrose perhaps felt you'd be more amenable towards looking at matters from a more compassionate viewpoint when there was an actual person making a case. Guess not.

Quote:
You are of no consequence to me...isn't that what you have been telling me all along, so why do you keep trying to insinuate yourself into my life by falsely claiming that my opinions and my values are in anyway directed towards you???
Your opinions and values, such as they are, are embodied in legislation that has a very tangible effect on people like jjrose. You don't get to say "gays shouldn't marry", then turn around and say "nothing personal" to the individual gay, as if that somehow makes it better. It doesn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 04:02 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,261 posts, read 14,110,687 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
Now, those are the words from someone of privilege. Society accommodates your norms, so anyone wishing it to change is just selfish.

Some people find it easier to muster empathy when their attitudes and action hurt specific people, rather than a broader, faceless group. jjrose perhaps felt you'd be more amenable towards looking at matters from a more compassionate viewpoint when there was an actual person making a case. Guess not.

Your opinions and values, such as they are, are embodied in legislation that has a very tangible effect on people like jjrose. You don't get to say "gays shouldn't marry", then turn around and say "nothing personal" to the individual gay, as if that somehow makes it better. It doesn't.
I am so glad I am not that posters "gay son" they claimed to have. It would be a horrible thing to know my parents disliked me for who I'm attracted to as much as that poster seems to dislike homosexuals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 04:03 PM
 
46,757 posts, read 25,681,251 times
Reputation: 29277
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
Right wing Christian people simply want to be left alone and preserve traditional American morals.
Spoken like anyone who finds the status quo to his/her advantage. If those "traditional American morals" happen to hurt people, well - sucks to be them, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 04:06 PM
 
107 posts, read 132,699 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
Right wing Christian people simply want to be left alone and preserve traditional American morals. OTOH, it is your side that comes off extremely intolerant, angry and venomous. Your comment about jettison this ballast sounds awful like forcing people to believe like you or executing them.
Then why make this a public issue by denying the right of others to also live the way they want?

What even are 'traditional American morals', and why is it fair to place all Americans into one category? Is it not unfair to assume one group's morals (which is implied here) speak for an entire country?

Dane raises a good point too. It's easy to pull the 'real American' card when institutionalised discrimination continues to put up a false image of heterosexual Christians as 'real Americans', and then when you are the beneficiary of such discrimination, claim 'oh well this is our place'. Such entitlement in a nation that already panders to your 'needs'.

If you were really just trying to be left alone, this is what would have happened:

LGBT people: "hey we want access to the same benefits as heterosexual people."
Everyone else: "hey cool this makes people happy and has no impact on our lives."
Right wing Christians: "hey cool we'll continue doing our thing."

the end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 04:54 PM
 
Location: FROM Dixie, but IN SoCal
3,484 posts, read 6,483,480 times
Reputation: 3792
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
You're directing your post at the wrong person.
So, you're saying that I'm "preaching to the choir"?
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top