When will we put LGBTQ issues behind us.?

[ChrisL]

My apologies. I wasn't avoiding it - I misread. BTW, what are you presuming as "obvious reasons". Do you still think I have anti-gay agenda?

Apology accepted. I don't know if you have an anti gay agenda but you do not seem very concerned about gay rights and adapt a narrow reading of the constitution that justifies allowing discrimination to continue.

Of course he has an anti-gay agenda. Why spend so much time arguing about it if not?

I'm not arguing about gay rights. I'm arguing about bad laws. I happen to be a supporter of gays, and gay rights. I support gay marriage, for example. I think gays can make fine parents and shouldn't be blocked from doing so. You can look, but you won't find, any anti-gay agenda in my posts. This is the mainstream libertarian position. It's the official party platform.

You're pegging me with a stereotype that you apply to anyone who disagrees with you on this issue. You know, like bigots do.

It's a perfectly fine law that protects people against discrimination. Like I said, if there weren't ignorant asses in the world, we wouldn't need such laws, but obviously that is NOT reality.

And what about when the law decides you're the ignorant ass? It doesn't sound like you're the type of person who thinks much about the principles or general precedents established by laws, but I do. And the idea that the law can be used to tell us who we associate with, who we work with, who we collaborate with, etc, etc.. set's a really bad precedent.

Essentially it takes away our right to shun people we disapprove of. And, while that might sometimes be used in ways you don't like, it's a very important moderating force in society. It's essentially the core of political correctness, something I actually support. It's how we keep each other inline without resort to laws for every single thing we do.

These laws have already been challenged by people such as yourself back when they were first decided upon when people refused to serve black people, or anyone else who was different from themselves, and your side LOST then and you are losing now. So you need to buck up and stop crying.

 

[dblack]

Apology accepted. I don't know if you have an anti gay agenda but you do not seem very concerned about gay rights and adapt a narrow reading of the constitution that justifies allowing discrimination to continue.

Of course he has an anti-gay agenda. Why spend so much time arguing about it if not?

I'm not arguing about gay rights. I'm arguing about bad laws. I happen to be a supporter of gays, and gay rights. I support gay marriage, for example. I think gays can make fine parents and shouldn't be blocked from doing so. You can look, but you won't find, any anti-gay agenda in my posts. This is the mainstream libertarian position. It's the official party platform.

You're pegging me with a stereotype that you apply to anyone who disagrees with you on this issue. You know, like bigots do.

It's a perfectly fine law that protects people against discrimination. Like I said, if there weren't ignorant asses in the world, we wouldn't need such laws, but obviously that is NOT reality.

And what about when the law decides you're the ignorant ass? It doesn't sound like you're the type of person who thinks much about the principles or general precedents established by laws, but I do. And the idea that the law can be used to tell us who we associate with, who we work with, who we collaborate with, etc, etc.. set's a really bad precedent.

Essentially it takes away our right to shun people we disapprove of. And, while that might sometimes be used in ways you don't like, it's a very important moderating force in society. It's essentially the core of political correctness, something I actually support. It's how we keep each other inline without resort to laws for every single thing we do.

These laws have already been challenged by people such as yourself back when they were first decided upon when people refused to serve black people, or anyone else who was different from themselves, and your side LOST then and you are losing now. So you need to buck up and stop crying.

You inner reactionary is getting the better of you. If you don't like the debate, don't participate.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Not at all. It's fundamental to the discussion, and to a broader conception of what rights mean in the first place. It's the same discussion that comes up in every effort to establish a "right" to someone else's service. It's the same discussion that comes up with the so-called "right" to healthcare. If not having a cake baked for you is harming you, who is guilty of inflicting that harm? Everyone who didn't bake you a cake that day?

The issue on the tables was about harm to children when parents are not able to marry and adopt them. You are avoiding that for obvious reasons.

My apologies. I wasn't avoiding it - I misread. BTW, what are you presuming as "obvious reasons". Do you still think I have anti-gay agenda?

Apology accepted. I don't know if you have an anti gay agenda but you do not seem very concerned about gay rights and adapt a narrow reading of the constitution that justifies allowing discrimination to continue.

Of course he has an anti-gay agenda. Why spend so much time arguing about it if not?

I'm not arguing about gay rights. I'm arguing about bad laws. I happen to be a supporter of gays, and gay rights. I support gay marriage, for example. I think gays can make fine parents and shouldn't be blocked from doing so. You can look, but you won't find, any anti-gay agenda in my posts. This is the mainstream libertarian position. It's the official party platform.

You're pegging me with a stereotype that you apply to anyone who disagrees with you on this issue. You know, like bigots do.

You claim to be for gay rights and against "bad laws" but you are not in the least bit believable. You have adopted an interpretation of the Constitution that suborns discrimination. You ignore the well established principles of equal protection under the law and due process. You ignore the fact that the government must articulate-at minimum a rational basis- and more likely a compelling interest in establishing laws that discriminate- which the states that had laws and amendments against gay marriage woefully failed to do.

 

[dblack]

You claim to be for gay rights and against "bad laws" but you are not in the least bit believable. You have adopted an interpretation of the Constitution that suborns discrimination.

I believe gays should have the same rights as the rest of us. And I believe the right to discriminate is fundamental to human liberty, even human sanity. It's not the contradiction you assume.

You ignore the well established principles of equal protection under the law and due process.

That's patently untrue. Equal protection is undermined by the 'protected classes' principle. It's part of why I oppose modern civil rights legislation.

You ignore the fact that the government must articulate-at minimum a rational basis- and more likely a compelling interest in establishing laws that discriminate- which the states that had laws and amendments against gay marriage woefully failed to do.

I'm not sure what that means. I'm radically opposed to laws that discriminate. Individuals should have the freedom to discriminate, for any reason. Government should not.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You claim to be for gay rights and against "bad laws" but you are not in the least bit believable. You have adopted an interpretation of the Constitution that suborns discrimination.

I believe gays should have the same rights as the rest of us. And I believe the right to discriminate is fundamental to human liberty, even human sanity. It's not the contradiction you assume.

Sorry, not buying it. You are contradicting your self? Gays should have the same rights but others have the right to discriminate??!! That does not make sense! Should the government be able to discriminate if the people say that it should through a referendum of their elected officials and the legislative process? What the hell are you talking about?

You ignore the well established principles of equal protection under the law and due process.

That's patently untrue. Equal protection is undermined by the 'protected classes' principle. It's part of why I oppose modern civil rights legislation.

Thank you for confirming that you are against civil right which is in direct contradiction to your disingenuous assertion that you support gay rights. You are unbelievable!

You ignore the fact that the government must articulate-at minimum a rational basis- and more likely a compelling interest in establishing laws that discriminate- which the states that had laws and amendments against gay marriage woefully failed to do.

I'm not sure what that means. I'm radically opposed to laws that discriminate. Individuals should have the freedom to discriminate, for any reason. Government should not.

What!!? You just said that you oppose civil rights laws !! At the same time, you oppose the use of the constitution to overturn those laws ! WTF!! You make NO sense at all!!

 

[dblack]

Sorry, not buying it. You are contradicting your self? Gays should have the same rights but others have the right to discriminate??!! That does not make sense!

What part doesn't make sense to you?

Should the government be able to discriminate if the people say that it should through a referendum of their elected officials and the legislative process?

Of course not. This is what PA laws do, it's exactly what I'm most opposed to. Protected classes and PA laws take away the right of individuals to discriminate by imposing quite discriminatory government.

Thank you for confirming that you are against civil right which is in direct contradiction to your disingenuous assertion that you support gay rights. You are unbelievable!

My views may be inconceivable, to you, but it doesn't sound like you really understand them. I'm opposed to modern civil rights legislation, particularly the laws that establish protected classes and attempt to ban unpopular biases. It's overreach of government to tell us who we must associate with.

When I say I support gay rights, I mean they should have the same rights as the rest of us. That includes the right to marry, the right to be parents, etc... It doesn't include the "right" to have a cake baked for you, or to force anyone to do business with us against their will. None of us have that "right", because it isn't a right to begin with.

What!!? You just said that you oppose civil rights laws !! At the same time, you oppose the use of the constitution to overturn those laws ! WTF!! You make NO sense at all!!

??? Where did I say I oppose the use of the Constitution to overturn those laws? I think the reason I seem to make no sense is that your reading stuff into what I'm saying that isn't there. Seriously, which part of my post led you to believe that I oppose the use of the Constitution to overturn civil rights laws?

 

[dblack]

ProgressivePatriot - I flubbed up the quotes on the previous post (yes again). I think I have them straight now. Please re-read when you have time.

 

[Papageorgio]

That's probably where we disagree. I believe that there are legitimate biological/psychological transgenders. They are probably minority of the "self-declared" ones. And that's a MEDICAL issue -- not a political/religious/moral one.

I don't agree.

Wit the exception of some extremely rare genetic and hormonal disorders, every human being is unambiguously male or female. It's a matter of genetics and physiological dimorphism. If you have XY chromosomes, and were born with “boy parts”, then you're male. If you have XX chromosomes and were born with “girl parts”, then you're female. It's not a matter of how one “feels” or “identifies”; it's a matter of unalterable and undeniable biological reality.

Transgenderism is purely a psychiatric issue, a matter of someone denying what any sane person can observe to be an obvious reality.

You seem to be confusing it with those rare genetic and hormonal defects—collectively known as “intersex”—which result in human beings who genuinely do not fit the criteria of being purely male or purely female. That's a completely different issue, unrelated to transgenderism.

You are ignorantly confusing two separate although related issues- Transsexuality and intersexuality- and presenting your misguide opinion as informed fact which cant be farther from reality

Intersexuality: Intersex Society of North America | A world free of shame, secrecy, and unwanted genital surgery

Transsexuality: Theories of the Causes of Transsexualism

Please educate yourself before continuing to bloviate about something that you know little about. You're just showing your ignorance and embarrassing yourself.

I like to read various views however these viewpoints are no more valid than the idea of mental illness being a factor. In fact the opposite is quite true.

 

[ChrisL]

You claim to be for gay rights and against "bad laws" but you are not in the least bit believable. You have adopted an interpretation of the Constitution that suborns discrimination.

I believe gays should have the same rights as the rest of us. And I believe the right to discriminate is fundamental to human liberty, even human sanity. It's not the contradiction you assume.

Sorry, not buying it. You are contradicting your self? Gays should have the same rights but others have the right to discriminate??!! That does not make sense! Should the government be able to discriminate if the people say that it should through a referendum of their elected officials and the legislative process? What the hell are you talking about?

You ignore the well established principles of equal protection under the law and due process.

That's patently untrue. Equal protection is undermined by the 'protected classes' principle. It's part of why I oppose modern civil rights legislation.

Thank you for confirming that you are against civil right which is in direct contradiction to your disingenuous assertion that you support gay rights. You are unbelievable!

You ignore the fact that the government must articulate-at minimum a rational basis- and more likely a compelling interest in establishing laws that discriminate- which the states that had laws and amendments against gay marriage woefully failed to do.

I'm not sure what that means. I'm radically opposed to laws that discriminate. Individuals should have the freedom to discriminate, for any reason. Government should not.

What!!? You just said that you oppose civil rights laws !! At the same time, you oppose the use of the constitution to overturn those laws ! WTF!! You make NO sense at all!!

Exactly. Like most conservatives. Loopy.

 

[dblack]

ProgressivePatriot - I've been thinking about this more, trying to understand what makes my views inconceivable to you. And I think it's because you're assuming that there is a basic human right to not be discriminated against. I'm not making that assumption. In fact, it makes no sense to me. In my view, part of living in a tolerant, pluralistic society is accepting that not everyone is going to like you, not everyone is going to want to work with you or do business with you - and often for completely irrational reasons. And, as peaceful, civilized people, we have to deal with that without resorting to violence.

 

[Papageorgio]

ProgressivePatriot - I've been thinking about this more, trying to understand what makes my views inconceivable to you. And I think it's because you're assuming that there is a basic human right to not be discriminated against. I'm not making that assumption. In fact, it makes no sense to me. In my view, part of living in a tolerant, pluralistic society is accepting that not everyone is going to like you, not everyone is going to want to work with you or do business with you - and often for completely irrational reasons. And, as peaceful, civilized people, we have to deal with that without resorting to violence.

That I can understand, not everyone eats at the same restaurants, not everyone likes the same movies, not everyone likes the same people. We all discriminate, who we like, what foods we like, where we shop, what we shop for, our vehicles. Whether we are attracted to blondes, brunettes, redheads, blacks, whites, orientals, men, women, skinny, fat, What religion we believe and on and on. I don't understand some people and behaviors and I'm sure people don't like me for various reasons. We all discriminate and we are all subject to discrimination. Whether we realize it or not, we are being discriminated all the time.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Your religious beliefs have no place when conducting business. If you cannot separate the two, then just don't open up a public accommodation business or you will get in trouble for discrimination. End of story.

Just as prophesied in Revelation 13:17. Bow down to the Beast, accept his mark, or else be prohibited from buying and selling.

It's plain enough on which side you stand.

It's not about "feelings." It's about discrimination. We don't allow that in today's world here in America. You seem confused.

Do you not realize that it is your position that is discriminatory? You would discriminate against anyone who holds decent moral standards, and who is unwilling to violate them, by denying any such person the right to engage in basic commerce.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Now, who is it that keeps trying to pin the “bigot” tag on those with whom she disagrees? I think the true bigotry in this conversation is showing through more and more clearly, now.

Liberalism hates religion, and it hates moral standards. And rather than even try to understand why people value these things, ultimately, those who adhere to this degenerate ideology resort to mindless hatred and bigotry against any such people.

What more proof is needed, that modern liberalism is an insane and evil ideology?

If your "morals" dictate that you be an asshole, that's fine. Just don't open a business. Keep your crappy morals to yourself. We care about "equality" in today's world, not your outdated and obsolete "morals." Lol.

This is just one of many reasons to rebuke religion. It's a terrible regressive thing.

I can't even talk to you anymore. You make me sick.

Sorry, you are nothing but disgusting and rotten people in my eyes.

 

[ChrisL]

Good grief. Obviously we will not ever put it behind us because there are way too many whiny asses around. I wonder if they know how stupid they are?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Sorry, not buying it. You are contradicting your self? Gays should have the same rights but others have the right to discriminate??!! That does not make sense!

What part doesn't make sense to you?

Should the government be able to discriminate if the people say that it should through a referendum of their elected officials and the legislative process?

Of course not. This is what PA laws do, it's exactly what I'm most opposed to. Protected classes and PA laws take away the right of individuals to discriminate by imposing quite discriminatory government.

Thank you for confirming that you are against civil right which is in direct contradiction to your disingenuous assertion that you support gay rights. You are unbelievable!

My views may be inconceivable, to you, but it doesn't sound like you really understand them. I'm opposed to modern civil rights legislation, particularly the laws that establish protected classes and attempt to ban unpopular biases. It's overreach of government to tell us who we must associate with.

When I say I support gay rights, I mean they should have the same rights as the rest of us. That includes the right to marry, the right to be parents, etc... It doesn't include the "right" to have a cake baked for you, or to force anyone to do business with us against their will. None of us have that "right", because it isn't a right to begin with.

What!!? You just said that you oppose civil rights laws !! At the same time, you oppose the use of the constitution to overturn those laws ! WTF!! You make NO sense at all!!

??? Where did I say I oppose the use of the Constitution to overturn those laws? I think the reason I seem to make no sense is that your reading stuff into what I'm saying that isn't there. Seriously, which part of my post led you to believe that I oppose the use of the Constitution to overturn civil rights laws?

You're quite right in saying that I do not understand. Your writings are a bundle of contradictions and fallacies. You claim that government should not be to discriminate and that you believe in equal rights for gays, but you are perfectly willing and in fact support having the government stand ideally by and allow individuals to discriminate against gays (or anyone else?). I fail to grasp how that is not grossly disingenuous when any thinking person should readily see what the end result would be. It’s apparent that you are not really committed to equality but want to take the onus off of yourself by claiming that PA and civil rights laws are government overreach.

Then you go on to say “

I support gay rights, I mean they should have the same rights as the rest of us" and That includes the right to marry, the right to be parents, etc... It doesn't include the "right" to have a cake baked for you, or to force anyone to do business with us against their will.”

Well, YOU can walk into a bakery and expect to be served with curtesy and not rejected, humiliated and inconvenienced, right.? So your claim of supporting equality again falls short of being believable. I fail to see why the concocted religious beliefs of a shop owner should be allowed to trump the right of anyone who walks through the door to not be demeaned for who they are. I don’t suppose that we will ever agree on that.

As for my statement that you oppose the use of the constitution to overturn civil rights laws …to which you vehemently objected….it was a misstatement on my part. Of course you oppose using the constitution to do so.! That fits perfectly with the inconsistency of your claim of supporting gay rights by not government enforcement of rights. Typical libertarian nonsense. Social Darwinism sucks.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Now, who is it that keeps trying to pin the “bigot” tag on those with whom she disagrees? I think the true bigotry in this conversation is showing through more and more clearly, now.

Liberalism hates religion, and it hates moral standards. And rather than even try to understand why people value these things, ultimately, those who adhere to this degenerate ideology resort to mindless hatred and bigotry against any such people.

What more proof is needed, that modern liberalism is an insane and evil ideology?

If your "morals" dictate that you be an asshole, that's fine. Just don't open a business. Keep your crappy morals to yourself. We care about "equality" in today's world, not your outdated and obsolete "morals." Lol.

This is just one of many reasons to rebuke religion. It's a terrible regressive thing.

I can't even talk to you anymore. You make me sick.

Sorry, you are nothing but disgusting and rotten people in my eyes.

Liberalism hates religion and moral standards?? What a load of bovine excrement! First of all, liberals respect religious rights much more that you people on the right. Conservatives seem to think that religious freedom only applies to Christians and that the first amendment only applies to Christianity. But who is more likely to oppose the building of a Mosque in there town, a conservative or a liberal?

As far as moral standards go, to say that liberals hate moral standards is even more stupid. You think that YOUR moral standards are the ONLY standards and anyone who does not adhere to them has NO moral standards. The other idiotic thing about your statement is that it ties moral standards to religion. I for one do not need a higher power to know what is right or wrong. There is a universal morality that prevails among all members of human society. To believe that to be “moral” we, as a species, must be manipulated like puppets on the stage that is earth-by some unseen and most likely nonexistent sky father is to sell us way short as human beings. Ask yourself this…..given the current political climate, who is it-liberals or conservatives- who advocate the caring for the sick, feeding the hungry, housing the homeless? Answer honestly please because that is the essence of moral standards. Condemning and marginalizing those who you disapprove of based on the ancient mythological teaching of uneducated, superstitious and delusional goat herders, and then heavily edited by crusty old clergymen who only purpose was to cling to power my controlling the masses with fear of damnation is not morality.

 

[dannyboys]

Now, who is it that keeps trying to pin the “bigot” tag on those with whom she disagrees? I think the true bigotry in this conversation is showing through more and more clearly, now.

Liberalism hates religion, and it hates moral standards. And rather than even try to understand why people value these things, ultimately, those who adhere to this degenerate ideology resort to mindless hatred and bigotry against any such people.

What more proof is needed, that modern liberalism is an insane and evil ideology?

If your "morals" dictate that you be an asshole, that's fine. Just don't open a business. Keep your crappy morals to yourself. We care about "equality" in today's world, not your outdated and obsolete "morals." Lol.

This is just one of many reasons to rebuke religion. It's a terrible regressive thing.

I can't even talk to you anymore. You make me sick.

Sorry, you are nothing but disgusting and rotten people in my eyes.

Liberalism hates religion and moral standards?? What a load of bovine excrement! First of all, liberals respect religious rights much more that you people on the right. Conservatives seem to think that religious freedom only applies to Christians and that the first amendment only applies to Christianity. But who is more likely to oppose the building of a Mosque in there town, a conservative or a liberal?

As far as moral standards go, to say that liberals hate moral standards is even more stupid. You think that YOUR moral standards are the ONLY standards and anyone who does not adhere to them has NO moral standards. The other idiotic thing about your statement is that it ties moral standards to religion. I for one do not need a higher power to know what is right or wrong. There is a universal morality that prevails among all members of human society. To believe that to be “moral” we, as a species, must be manipulated like puppets on the stage that is earth-by some unseen and most likely nonexistent sky father is to sell us way short as human beings. Ask yourself this…..given the current political climate, who is it-liberals or conservatives- who advocate the caring for the sick, feeding the hungry, housing the homeless? Answer honestly please because that is the essence of moral standards. Condemning and marginalizing those who you disapprove of based on the ancient mythological teaching of uneducated, superstitious and delusional goat herders, and then heavily edited by crusty old clergymen who only purpose was to cling to power my controlling the masses with fear of damnation is not morality.

What happened? Your boyfriend must have just dumped you.
The amount of deep quilt for the lifestyle you have chosen is driving you fucking nuts.
I wouldn't bring up anything to do with 'mosques' pal. The first thing anyone who goes to a mosque wants to do to your 'type' is throw you off the fucking roof.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

RE: Dannyboys

To all of those on USMB -friends and foe – supporters and detractors alike- I am publicly stating that I am sick and tired of Dannyboys’ moronic flame baiting and trolling. Regardless of your political views and position on the issue, I think that you will have to agree that he contributes nothing of value and drags the quality of the discussion into the gutter on inanity. I have reported him several times and yet he persists. I am asking that others report him as well.

This is a pretty good board and there is generally a high quality of debate and discussion. We all have our own reasons for being here. For me, it is an incentive to learn and to engage in critical thinking in response to others who believe differently than I do. In order for the experience here to be at all worthwhile , there has to be an element of respect for each other. Dannyboys has absolutely no respect and obviously is here for the sole purpose in stalking and attempting to intimidate others, and as such threatens to destroy the value of this board. Please help stop this moron. Thank you!

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Liberalism hates religion and moral standards?? What a load of bovine excrement! First of all, liberals respect religious rights much more that you people on the right.

You “respect religious rights” only as far as nobody actually trying to live by them in a manner that you find disagreeable. Only to a libtard does that constitute any kind of “respect”.

As far as moral standards go, to say that liberals hate moral standards is even more stupid. You think that YOUR moral standards are the ONLY standards and anyone who does not adhere to them has NO moral standards.

Right. That's why you liberals take the side of homosexuals, transexuals, and other degenerate sexual perverts; as well as abortionists, drug abusers, and the other very lowest dregs of barely-humanity.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Liberalism hates religion and moral standards?? What a load of bovine excrement! First of all, liberals respect religious rights much more that you people on the right.

You “respect religious rights” only as far as nobody actually trying to live by them in a manner that you find disagreeable. Only to a libtard does that constitute any kind of “respect”.

As far as moral standards go, to say that liberals hate moral standards is even more stupid. You think that YOUR moral standards are the ONLY standards and anyone who does not adhere to them has NO moral standards.

Right. That's why you liberals take the side of homosexuals, transexuals, and other degenerate sexual perverts; as well as abortionists, drug abusers, and the other very lowest dregs of barely-humanity.

Yes boss, you are sure a piece of work!