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.
I'm increasingly noticing a double-standard between the yes/no on Proposition 8 groups. Yes on Prop 8 groups quickly point out that it's within their rights to propose amendments through the democratic process. Yet they simultaneously condemn perfectly legal acts, like boycotts and signs strung from balconies.
Why the double standard? It's (apparently) within one's legal rights to vote against the rights of a minority. It's also within one's legal rights to hang a nasty sign that reads "**** Mormons" and threaten boycotts.
If you supported an amendment to the California Constitution that exists for the sole purpose of harming a minority, how are you in a position to complain if people do everything they can legally do to destroy you personally? Why the double standard?
Minority?
If I refuse to shop at Walmart, I may be in the minority, but that doesn't make me so special that the government has to change department stores to accommodate my choice. And what about people who do like Walmart? Should my preference be forced on them just because I like a different line of merchandise that is available at Walmart?
See, a black person is obviously black and doesn't have to tell anyone he or she is black for everyone who comes into contact with him or her to realize that fact. Allegedly some blacks have been disproportionately mistreated by other races. We have laws that are intended to protect blacks from this alleged treatment. Gays on the other hand can be gay without telling people. By the way, gays have higher incomes than non-gays. I personally believe that gay sex is a crime against nature and you can't change the definition of marriage to include gays without changing its significance and meaning for strait couples.
Please stop trying to force your gay values down our collective throats.
Again, ridiculous arguments. I have a genetic disorder, so I'm not biologically correct. Does that mean I shouldn't be able to marry or reproduce? I'm definitely not 'normal' by most peoples standards. Regarding the age thing... Here, after many years of deliberation it has been decided that the legal age of consent is 18. You are a minor until then which means you cannot sign a contract. i.e. no marriage. These are TWO CONSENTING ADULTS that simply want to get married. Most are already living together, some have children. You're simply denying them a piece of paper to have legal rights. That seems silly to me.
Let me be the first to affirm your right to marry a member of the opposite sex. That is, assuming you're at least 18 yrs old.
I personally believe that gay sex is a crime against nature and you can't change the definition of marriage to include gays without changing its significance and meaning for strait couples.
Oh please, like straights have really given "marriage" a meaning. Its the straights that have totally disregarded the so called "sanctity of marriage". IMO they (some, not all) have made a mockery of the term "marriage".
Oh, I don't agree with most of the tactics being used. I don't think boycotting Utah or forcing people to resign is good, but my point is that if you supported Prop 8, you're in no position to criticize the lawful tactics used against you, even if they're not fair.
It's wrong to boycott a corporation because its employees supported Prop 8. It's also wrong to support 8. I'm just pointing out the double standard of Prop 8 supporters, which is, "We want to do everything legally possible to single people out and personally destroy them. But please, don't do that against us."
It has nothing to do with vandalism or threats of violence. I'm talking about things that are wrong, but lawful, like blacklisting supporters.
"We want to do everything legally possible to single people out and personally destroy them."
Not allowing people who have unnatural perverted sex with each other to alter the definition of marriage for the rest of us is equivalent to doing everything legally possible to destroy them?
If I refuse to shop at Walmart, I may be in the minority, but that doesn't make me so special that the government has to change department stores to accommodate my choice. And what about people who do like Walmart? Should my preference be forced on them just because I like a different line of merchandise that is available at Walmart?
So you think people can choose their sexual orientation just like you can choose a department store?
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
See, a black person is obviously black and doesn't have to tell anyone he or she is black for everyone who comes into contact with him or her to realize that fact. Allegedly some blacks have been disproportionately mistreated by other races. We have laws that are intended to protect blacks from this alleged treatment.
Alleged???
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Gays on the other hand can be gay without telling people.
So gays should never mention anything about their lives or partners to friends or co-workers or anyone else? Hard to do without lying or appearing really rude when someone asks me about my husband or boyfriend (and my partner is female) which happens to me on an almost daily basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
By the way, gays have higher incomes than non-gays. I personally believe that gay sex is a crime against nature and you can't change the definition of marriage to include gays without changing its significance and meaning for strait couples.
Please stop trying to force your gay values down our collective throats.
I'm not sure what you mean by "gay values". You seem to lump all gay people together as if we are all the same.
My values are about treating others how I would like to be treated, respecting and accepting difference but disliking ignorance intolerance and bigotry, helping others whenever I can, remaining open to learning new things and having a thirst for knowledge, being honest, being compassionate and empathetic, being the best parent I can be, being a loving daughter, being a loving committed partner, being a good friend, respecting the law, etc etc. What do you feel is "wrong" about my values? What are your values?
You appear to believe that your personal beliefs are the only beliefs that our society should follow.
"We want to do everything legally possible to single people out and personally destroy them."
Not allowing people who have unnatural perverted sex with each other to alter the definition of marriage for the rest of us is equivalent to doing everything legally possible to destroy them?
Gay sex isn't "unnatural". As it DOES occur in nature. Not to mention, if you want to go religiously, there is no one set definition for marriage. As, my religion has no problems with homosexual couples getting married. Nor is it "perverted".
See, a black person is obviously black and doesn't have to tell anyone he or she is black for everyone who comes into contact with him or her to realize that fact. Allegedly some blacks have been disproportionately mistreated by other races. We have laws that are intended to protect blacks from this alleged treatment. Gays on the other hand can be gay without telling people.
We have protections for religious beliefs too. You certainly don't have to tell anyone what your religion is when you go to Wal-Mart or apply for a job.
Quote:
By the way, gays have higher incomes than non-gays.
There are also studies showing that gays make less than non-gays, so your statement is not a fact.
Quote:
I personally believe that gay sex is a crime against nature.
Would you be willing to play out a cop scene with me where you arrest me for being gay? I think I could enjoy that.
Also, the mormons claim to have voted legally, but the california mormon voters got their "callings" from the out-of-state headquarters on how to vote. Is it legal to control out-of-state voters in order to sway the vote on another state's issue? Probably.. but is it right?
Also, the mormons claim to have voted legally, but the california mormon voters got their "callings" from the out-of-state headquarters on how to vote. Is it legal to control out-of-state voters in order to sway the vote on another state's issue? Probably.. but is it right?
Is it "legal" to have Michelle Obama and Howard Dean send me daily emails telling me how to vote?
Or is it "right" for the Oprah to pimp out Obama on her tv show the way she did?
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.
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.
