What rights are the gays missing?

[Coyote]

A person should be allowed to "marry" the consenting person of their choice.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Gays aren't missing any rights at all. Civil unions are are the exact same thing as marriage and are allowed in many states.

Where "marriage" comes in is this. Since marriage is associated with religion and there is a separation of church and state, the gay community which is vehemently anti-religion wants this specific term "marriage" to replace the term "civil union" in their bid to further their anti-religion stance.

They already have common law protection in many States and civil union laws. I think there should be a civil union law in every state. As far as marriage...that should remain as it is...a union between man and woman.

they gay community is not vehemently anti-religion....in the sense they do not want to eliminate it.....how do see them as anti religon....

I'm very anti religion. It's the religious right that took over the Republican Party, and as well know conservative, Kathleen Parker said, "They turned it into the party of Ooga Booga".

The right is against science, against education, against women's rights, against the middle class, against gay rights, racist, pro war, pro big business and pro torture. I believe it comes from their "religious base".

Sure, you can find some that aren't, but not many. Not in the Republican Party.

Sure they are manu...the church specifically outlaws homosexuality...was it always this way? Maybe...maybe not. I do know specific references in the Old Testament and New Testament that reference homosexuality and describe it as a sin. Many religious gays take offense at this and push back with an anti religious agenda along with the anti religious ACLU. It's all tied together.

rdean...you have every right to be anti-religious. Your reasons may be a little distorted but I support your right to that freedom. That being said if you violate anothers right to practice their religion or discuss their views in public you are in fact, violating their civil rights.

 

[alan1]

You either believe the government grants us rights or you believe we have a right to do whatever we want unless there is a compelling reason against our actions.

You fall into the former camp, I fall into the latter.

As long as you believe the government grants us rights you will always believe the government can regulate marriage, and therefore you will be able to justify refusing gays the ability to marry.

But you don't really care, of course, you just think big government is okay in this case.

You have no clue, do you?
If you look hard enough, you will find posts on this board, made by me, that say the government has no business in marriage whatsoever. Regardless of sexual orientation.
Now, tell me, what rights are homosexuals not getting that heterosexuals are getting?

Actually, I have a clue. You are okay with big government as long as it supports your moral values. None of us miss your point.

You are projecting again.
You are avoiding the question asked in the OP.
I call bullshit on you, you have no intellectual honesty.

 

[alan1]

A person should be allowed to "marry" the consenting person of their choice.

You didn't answer the question in the OP.
You probably skipped ahead and then inserted your opinion.

 

[rightwinger]

You have no clue, do you?
If you look hard enough, you will find posts on this board, made by me, that say the government has no business in marriage whatsoever. Regardless of sexual orientation.
Now, tell me, what rights are homosexuals not getting that heterosexuals are getting?

Actually, I have a clue. You are okay with big government as long as it supports your moral values. None of us miss your point.

You are projecting again.
You are avoiding the question asked in the OP.
I call bullshit on you, you have no intellectual honesty.

The question has been asked and answered repeatedly. The 14th Amendment provides all citizens equal rights. Denying the right to marry or the right to serve your country violates the 14th Amendment

 

[Coyote]

A person should be allowed to "marry" the consenting person of their choice.

You didn't answer the question in the OP.
You probably skipped ahead and then inserted your opinion.

Yup. You know we too well

 

[alan1]

A person should be allowed to "marry" the consenting person of their choice.

You didn't answer the question in the OP.
You probably skipped ahead and then inserted your opinion.

Yup. You know we too well

Got a mouse in your pocket?

 

[Ravi]

You have no clue, do you?
If you look hard enough, you will find posts on this board, made by me, that say the government has no business in marriage whatsoever. Regardless of sexual orientation.
Now, tell me, what rights are homosexuals not getting that heterosexuals are getting?

Actually, I have a clue. You are okay with big government as long as it supports your moral values. None of us miss your point.

You are projecting again.
You are avoiding the question asked in the OP.
I call bullshit on you, you have no intellectual honesty.

lol...I answered your questions. You are uncomfortable or don't agree that we all have every right unless the government presents a compelling argument to take it away...and you call yourself a conservative, right. You sure as hell aren't a libertarian or a liberal. And you ain't no conservative. You're a "social conservative"...in other words a big government supporter.

 

[Coyote]

You didn't answer the question in the OP.
You probably skipped ahead and then inserted your opinion.

Yup. You know we too well

Got a mouse in your pocket?

Lotsa them...damn rodents.....

16 pages on this thread...geezum...just let the poor guys get married...






No, no, no, don't pass me over No, no, no, don't pass me by
See I can see good things for you and I
Yeah, good things for you
Give I can give love and attention
Give I can give all time away
Only to one heart I can give today

 

[alan1]

Actually, I have a clue. You are okay with big government as long as it supports your moral values. None of us miss your point.

You are projecting again.
You are avoiding the question asked in the OP.
I call bullshit on you, you have no intellectual honesty.

lol...I answered your questions. You are uncomfortable or don't agree that we all have every right unless the government presents a compelling argument to take it away...and you call yourself a conservative, right. You sure as hell aren't a libertarian or a liberal. And you ain't no conservative. You're a "social conservative"...in other words a big government supporter.

Perhaps I missed your reply where you proved that gays are missing rights that hetero's have, what post number was it?

There is no need for you to get nasty and call me a big government supporter.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Actually, I have a clue. You are okay with big government as long as it supports your moral values. None of us miss your point.

You are projecting again.
You are avoiding the question asked in the OP.
I call bullshit on you, you have no intellectual honesty.

The question has been asked and answered repeatedly. The 14th Amendment provides all citizens equal rights. Denying the right to marry or the right to serve your country violates the 14th Amendment

They are NOT denied the right to cohabitate which is common law marriage after a certain period of time and are granted civil unions in many states. They are also allowed to serve their country and in fact ARE serving as we speak but they must follow Armed Forces guidelines as stated in the UCMJ and Regulations for the good of the services in general.

I wish you liberals would stop this me me me me me me me I want I want I want I want I want I want attitude with respect to gays serving in the Armed Forces. You are NOT and individual and you are NOT covered by the same rights as a civilian. Armed Forces members come under the UCMJ which in many respects provides MORE RIGHTS to the person than the Constitution.

 

[veritas]

Actually sexuality is the basis of hetero marriage...

Marriage is the JOINING of two individuals as one... which is a metaphor for sexual intercourse... vaginal intercourse... the precursor to conception...

 

[Setarcos]

is your assertion that not one person on the right has intellectual ability greater than yours......

No, I exaggerated. There are a few on the right that can think. Less than 6% of scientists are Republican so that proves a few do exist. A very few.

ok....got a link to your scientist claim.....is your assertion now that only scientist have intellect.....are you a scientist?

Right-wingers attract the religious


Higher IQ-->less religion


coincidence?

 

[Setarcos]

Civil unions are are the exact same thing as marriage

wow... you really need to learn about the issue at hand

Where "marriage" comes in is this. Since marriage is associated with religion and there is a separation of church and state, the gay community which is vehemently anti-religion

Except, you know, for the gay xtians

wants this specific term "marriage" to replace the term "civil union" in their bid to further their anti-religion stance.

Actually, that idea is a concession to the nutters who would rather kill every non-christian in the world that use the word 'marriage' for a relationship other than their own

BTW, it doesn't matter what the states do- civil unions aren't recognized by the Fed

 

[Setarcos]

What you all want to have is AMERICAN RIGHT WING VALUES mrriage wg=hich has virtually NOTHING to do with "Traditional" marriage. Remind me what thw DIVORCE RATE is in our country of "TRADITIONAL marriage.

What I want is for somebody to tell me what rights the homosexuals don't have that the heterosexuals do have.
That was my question in the OP and so far, only military service has been proven to be one of those elusive rights.

Nobody cares what a racist who supports Jim Crow thinks about civil rights and liberties- and you're not a member of the Klan, you're forwarding the very arguments they used when the blacks demanded equality under the law

 

[rdean]

they gay community is not vehemently anti-religion....in the sense they do not want to eliminate it.....how do see them as anti religon....

I'm very anti religion. It's the religious right that took over the Republican Party, and as well know conservative, Kathleen Parker said, "They turned it into the party of Ooga Booga".

The right is against science, against education, against women's rights, against the middle class, against gay rights, racist, pro war, pro big business and pro torture. I believe it comes from their "religious base".

Sure, you can find some that aren't, but not many. Not in the Republican Party.

Sure they are manu...the church specifically outlaws homosexuality...was it always this way? Maybe...maybe not. I do know specific references in the Old Testament and New Testament that reference homosexuality and describe it as a sin. Many religious gays take offense at this and push back with an anti religious agenda along with the anti religious ACLU. It's all tied together.

rdean...you have every right to be anti-religious. Your reasons may be a little distorted but I support your right to that freedom. That being said if you violate anothers right to practice their religion or discuss their views in public you are in fact, violating their civil rights.

My reasons for being anti religion are not distored. It's religion that's distorted. Distorted and stultifying and just dumb. No one would buy a car based on "faith" but they will kill other people based on "faith". Now THAT'S distorted.

 

[rdean]

not to sure what the divorce rate has to do with this issue.....traditional marriage has been between a man and a woman....why the marriage took place is a different issue.....

why should the term marriage be changed to define something other than its traditional meaning....

gays have all the same rights as straights.....the term used for gays is civil union .... the term used for straights is marriage.....

even the whacked out california supreme court stated this ..... they said no rights are being denied .....

see the gays want to take the starights word away from them ..... just as the took the rainbow from those poor little leprechans.....i guess greenpeace is too busy chasing whales to care.....

Because people being married five times shouldn't be telling gays that marriage is just too "sacred" for them.

gays have all the same rights as straights.....Sure, right.

Gays want to take the word "marriage" and replace it with the word "marriage". Now it all makes sense. It would be something completely different. It would be "marriage". Between two people as opposed to "marriage" between two people. I get it.

why is that....if one gets divorced do they then lose their rights to an opinion....how about if gays that have had more than one life partner give up the right to ask that the term marriage be applied to them......

they do have all the same rights.....read the california supreme court decision....

gays want the definition of a word changed to suit them ok......when they get that and i am pretty sure they will.....will it make more or less people accept them ....

i have long said they are making a tactical mistake which has only made the backlash against them worse and after they win ..... it will only get worse ......

and no you don't get it because you only see the argument from one side..... but that's ok ... as i learned in another thread it is probably because you are not a scientist ......

Every time someone on this site, from the right, has tried to argue science with me, they have been handed their hat. Whether it's been on evolution or the difference between 32, 64 and 128 bit parallel processing. Facts have a definite liberal bias.

The most humorous have been on evolution. What a bunch of Ostrich, only it's not sand where they have their head buried.

http://thegazz.com/gblogs/beerstoyou/files/2007/09/76-head_up_ass.jpg

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I'm very anti religion. It's the religious right that took over the Republican Party, and as well know conservative, Kathleen Parker said, "They turned it into the party of Ooga Booga".

The right is against science, against education, against women's rights, against the middle class, against gay rights, racist, pro war, pro big business and pro torture. I believe it comes from their "religious base".

Sure, you can find some that aren't, but not many. Not in the Republican Party.

Sure they are manu...the church specifically outlaws homosexuality...was it always this way? Maybe...maybe not. I do know specific references in the Old Testament and New Testament that reference homosexuality and describe it as a sin. Many religious gays take offense at this and push back with an anti religious agenda along with the anti religious ACLU. It's all tied together.

rdean...you have every right to be anti-religious. Your reasons may be a little distorted but I support your right to that freedom. That being said if you violate anothers right to practice their religion or discuss their views in public you are in fact, violating their civil rights.

My reasons for being anti religion are not distored. It's religion that's distorted. Distorted and stultifying and just dumb. No one would buy a car based on "faith" but they will kill other people based on "faith". Now THAT'S distorted.

Indeed, in your opinion and mine, it is distorted.....and to a very pious Muslim Qutbist your views are distorted because you lack faith....but here in America niether can infringe upon the rights of the other in the name of their beliefs.

 

[rdean]

Loaded question.
I expect everybody to stand up for their rights. I grow weary of people claiming their rights are violated or missing when they just happen to have the exact same rights everybody else has.

You either believe the government grants us rights or you believe we have a right to do whatever we want unless there is a compelling reason against our actions.

You fall into the former camp, I fall into the latter.

As long as you believe the government grants us rights you will always believe the government can regulate marriage, and therefore you will be able to justify refusing gays the ability to marry.

But you don't really care, of course, you just think big government is okay in this case.

You have no clue, do you?
If you look hard enough, you will find posts on this board, made by me, that say the government has no business in marriage whatsoever. Regardless of sexual orientation.
Now, tell me, what rights are homosexuals not getting that heterosexuals are getting?

As if anyone on the right even cares. How many times do you have to go over it? Even worse, they come up with the most lame and stupid arguments.

One more time.

Since someone else mentioned the military. What do you get from the military.
Guaranteed student loan
Guaranteed home loan
VA benefits
burial benefits
benefits to children

First, there are only a handful of states that allow civil unions. Civil unions are generally NOT recognized by other states as opposed to marriage.

Some benefits if marriage:

Joint parental rights of children
Joint adoption
Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
Crime victims recovery benefits
Domestic violence protection orders
Judicial protections and immunity
Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
Public safety officers death benefits
Spousal veterans benefits
Social Security
Medicare
Joint filing of tax returns
Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
Child support
Joint Insurance Plans
Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
Estate and gift tax benefits
Welfare and public assistance
Joint housing for elderly
Credit protection
Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans

And those are only "SOME".

I'm tired of stupid, dumbass right wingers saying "name a right gays don't get".

 

[Setarcos]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to rdean again

Can someone cover that for me, please?