Do gays choose to be gay? How can we refuse equal rights?

[g5000]

Gays should accept that marriage is not a institution applicable to their situation. Accept civil unions with equal rights that marriage provides. You get your rights ...we get to keep the sanctity of marriage.

"Separate but equal". You guys just keep regressing further and further.

Gay unions still do not receive the same cash and prizes straight unions do. When will that ever sink into your head and the heads of your fellow klansmen?

To quote the Hokey-Pokey... "that's what it's all about"

They are NOT the same as us, but they want the same results as us...???

Trying to make that argument is like me saying "I'm not the same as Lawrence Taylor, but I should get paid the same as Lawrence Taylor, I should get EQUAL playing time as Lawrence Taylor, and I should go into the Hall of Fame like Lawrence Taylor".

You are no Lawrence Taylor. You are more like the Boy in the Plastic Bubble of intellectual debate.

 

[P@triot]

Tell me again what rights gay people are denied?

Is it something Obabble thought up to get your vote?

The 1000 + rights, privileges and benefits that are afforded straight people by just one civil marriage license. Denied based on gender discrimination.

Gender is something you can't control. Who you marry is...

Can you be honest for 10 seconds? You're disingenuous bullshit is not endearing anyone to your cause. You're doing more to set back the gay cause by being a lying ass than anything a gay-basher could have done in 10 years.

There was - and NEVER has been - "gender discrimination". It was about who you CHOSE to marry, not what gender you were born with.

 

[g5000]

Tell me again what rights gay people are denied?

Is it something Obabble thought up to get your vote?

The 1000 + rights, privileges and benefits that are afforded straight people by just one civil marriage license. Denied based on gender discrimination.

Gender is something you can't control. Who you marry is...

Can you be honest for 10 seconds? You're disingenuous bullshit is not endearing anyone to your cause. You're doing more to set back the gay cause by being a lying ass than anything a gay-basher could have done in 10 years.

There was - and NEVER has been - "gender discrimination". It was about who you CHOSE to marry, not what gender you were born with.

Yeah. Them white wimmin don't need be marryin no ****** men. They can marry white men. This is about who you CHOSE to marry.

Now if you will scuse me, I need be lighten this here cross.

 

[deltex1]

Tell me again what rights gay people are denied?

Is it something Obabble thought up to get your vote?

The 1000 + rights, privileges and benefits that are afforded straight people by just one civil marriage license. Denied based on gender discrimination.

I've been married since 1960...I missed the rights privileges and benefits thingy. More like duties, responsibilities and infinite patience.

 

[g5000]

Tell me again what rights gay people are denied?

Is it something Obabble thought up to get your vote?

The 1000 + rights, privileges and benefits that are afforded straight people by just one civil marriage license. Denied based on gender discrimination.

I've been married since 1960...I missed the rights privileges and benefits thingy. More like duties, responsibilities and infinite patience.

I would bet real money you have dipped into the government cash and prizes pool for married folk several times.

Click here to learn some of the legal and practical ways that getting married changes your life.

 

[NLT]

Tell me again what rights gay people are denied?

Is it something Obabble thought up to get your vote?

The 1000 + rights, privileges and benefits that are afforded straight people by just one civil marriage license. Denied based on gender discrimination.

I've been married since 1960...I missed the rights privileges and benefits thingy. More like duties, responsibilities and infinite patience.

WTF are you like 80?

 

[P@triot]

The 1000 + rights, privileges and benefits that are afforded straight people by just one civil marriage license. Denied based on gender discrimination.

Gender is something you can't control. Who you marry is...

Can you be honest for 10 seconds? You're disingenuous bullshit is not endearing anyone to your cause. You're doing more to set back the gay cause by being a lying ass than anything a gay-basher could have done in 10 years.

There was - and NEVER has been - "gender discrimination". It was about who you CHOSE to marry, not what gender you were born with.

Yeah. Them white wimmin don't need be marryin no ****** men. They can marry white men. This is about who you CHOSE to marry.

Now if you will scuse me, I need be lighten this here cross.

What does the Democrats long history of racism have to do with this issue?

 

[bodecea]

Why stop there?
Who has more freedom? Adult A who can murder anyone who wants, or Adult B who can't?

Obviously, we are not going to allow freedoms that result in substantial personal harm to other individuals within the society. This is why things like stealing, rape, etc are illegal (and why we're not considering those).

Are you being intentionally ignorant? Thought you were brighter than that Rabbi - really..

Have you noticed that the difference is NOT so obvious to the posters who want to keep running a comparison? That's pretty scary.

 

[bodecea]

Tell me again what rights gay people are denied?

Is it something Obabble thought up to get your vote?

The 1000 + rights, privileges and benefits that are afforded straight people by just one civil marriage license. Denied based on gender discrimination.

Gender is something you can't control. Who you marry is...

Can you be honest for 10 seconds? You're disingenuous bullshit is not endearing anyone to your cause. You're doing more to set back the gay cause by being a lying ass than anything a gay-basher could have done in 10 years.

There was - and NEVER has been - "gender discrimination". It was about who you CHOSE to marry, not what gender you were born with.

So you are supportive of gender discrimination when it comes to whether a tax-paying, law-abiding citizen gets a marriage license or not.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why stop there?
Who has more freedom? Adult A who can murder anyone who wants, or Adult B who can't?

Obviously, we are not going to allow freedoms that result in substantial personal harm to other individuals within the society. This is why things like stealing, rape, etc are illegal (and why we're not considering those).

Are you being intentionally ignorant? Thought you were brighter than that Rabbi - really..

Oh you mean because society has an interest in seeing that it is well ordered? Yeah, just the argument I've made.
Thanks.

 

[bodecea]

Why stop there?
Who has more freedom? Adult A who can murder anyone who wants, or Adult B who can't?

Obviously, we are not going to allow freedoms that result in substantial personal harm to other individuals within the society. This is why things like stealing, rape, etc are illegal (and why we're not considering those).

Are you being intentionally ignorant? Thought you were brighter than that Rabbi - really..

Oh you mean because society has an interest in seeing that it is well ordered? Yeah, just the argument I've made.
Thanks.

Well ordered? Or not hurting others or their rights? There a difference.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obviously, we are not going to allow freedoms that result in substantial personal harm to other individuals within the society. This is why things like stealing, rape, etc are illegal (and why we're not considering those).

Are you being intentionally ignorant? Thought you were brighter than that Rabbi - really..

Oh you mean because society has an interest in seeing that it is well ordered? Yeah, just the argument I've made.
Thanks.

Well ordered? Or not hurting others or their rights? There a difference.

"Provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare" sticks in my mind.

 

[KevinWestern]

Why stop there?
Who has more freedom? Adult A who can murder anyone who wants, or Adult B who can't?

Obviously, we are not going to allow freedoms that result in substantial personal harm to other individuals within the society. This is why things like stealing, rape, etc are illegal (and why we're not considering those).

Are you being intentionally ignorant? Thought you were brighter than that Rabbi - really..

Oh you mean because society has an interest in seeing that it is well ordered? Yeah, just the argument I've made.
Thanks.

You're example was allowing someone a freedom that infringes on the freedoms of another individual (ie right to live).

My example was allowing someone a freedom that does not infringe on the freedoms of other individuals, and therefore aught to be allowed.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obviously, we are not going to allow freedoms that result in substantial personal harm to other individuals within the society. This is why things like stealing, rape, etc are illegal (and why we're not considering those).

Are you being intentionally ignorant? Thought you were brighter than that Rabbi - really..

Oh you mean because society has an interest in seeing that it is well ordered? Yeah, just the argument I've made.
Thanks.

You're example was allowing someone a freedom that infringes on the freedoms of another individual (ie right to live).

My example was allowing someone a freedom that does not infringe on the freedoms of other individuals, and therefore aught to be allowed.

It certainly does infringe, rendering their marital state a mockery.

 

[KevinWestern]

Oh you mean because society has an interest in seeing that it is well ordered? Yeah, just the argument I've made.
Thanks.

You're example was allowing someone a freedom that infringes on the freedoms of another individual (ie right to live).

My example was allowing someone a freedom that does not infringe on the freedoms of other individuals, and therefore aught to be allowed.

It certainly does infringe, rendering their marital state a mockery.

Infringe on what?

 

[bodecea]

Oh you mean because society has an interest in seeing that it is well ordered? Yeah, just the argument I've made.
Thanks.

You're example was allowing someone a freedom that infringes on the freedoms of another individual (ie right to live).

My example was allowing someone a freedom that does not infringe on the freedoms of other individuals, and therefore aught to be allowed.

It certainly does infringe, rendering their marital state a mockery.

Theirs? Or yours?

 

[gallantwarrior]

It doesn't matter if people choose to be gay or not.

No adult should be barred from entering a property contract which is all marriage is.

My partner and I have several "contracts" involving property. No marriage license needed. But there is paperwork involved.

I found that statement to be revealing (no pun intended). Is it really about marriage for homosexuals? Or is it all about the attainment of wealth? Is marriage just a tool for them? A path to material satisfaction?

Interesting proposition is it not?

I'm sure that for some it really is about recognizing and solemnizing their partnership in a "traditional" way. In most ways, they really are not that much different from other humans. Marriage has always been a way of formalizing a partnership between people. It also evolved into a way of protecting a family unit that includes a breeding pair of adults and their offspring.
For a large majority, though, I think it has everything to do with acquiring the same legal access to benefits and perks that the government provides to sanctioned, legally recognized couples.
What I find abhorrent is the fact that, rather than lobby for some alternative means of legally recognizing their partnerships (civil unions), they prefer to trample on the long-held concept of marriage, i.e. one male, one female and their offspring. Of course, some factions in the LGTB crowd are fully aware how offensive their insistence on subverting marriage to their purpose is to people with religious convictions. What's even more interesting is that they insist that they are "breeding pairs" simply because they managed to acquire offspring.

 

[bodecea]

Oh you mean because society has an interest in seeing that it is well ordered? Yeah, just the argument I've made.
Thanks.

Well ordered? Or not hurting others or their rights? There a difference.

"Provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare" sticks in my mind.

Yep....that's fine. So...encouraging stable married relationships is bad.....how?

 

[bodecea]

My partner and I have several "contracts" involving property. No marriage license needed. But there is paperwork involved.

I found that statement to be revealing (no pun intended). Is it really about marriage for homosexuals? Or is it all about the attainment of wealth? Is marriage just a tool for them? A path to material satisfaction?

Interesting proposition is it not?

I'm sure that for some it really is about recognizing and solemnizing their partnership in a "traditional" way. In most ways, they really are not that much different from other humans. Marriage has always been a way of formalizing a partnership between people. It also evolved into a way of protecting a family unit that includes a breeding pair of adults and their offspring.
For a large majority, though, I think it has everything to do with acquiring the same legal access to benefits and perks that the government provides to sanctioned, legally recognized couples.
What I find abhorrent is the fact that, rather than lobby for some alternative means of legally recognizing their partnerships (civil unions), they prefer to trample on the long-held concept of marriage, i.e. one male, one female and their offspring. Of course, some factions in the LGTB crowd are fully aware how offensive their insistence on subverting marriage to their purpose is to people with religious convictions. What's even more interesting is that they insist that they are "breeding pairs" simply because they managed to acquire offspring.

You make it sound like only religion has ownership of the term "marriage". That is simply not true or else you people would have been up at arms for years and years about those getting simply secular marriages.

 

[buckeye45_73]

OMG...hate and bigotry aren't logical.

Correct which explains why liberals dont get logic