In response to:

Gay Marriage Advocates Lose By Winning

gwlaw Wrote: Feb 20, 2013 1:23 PM
It is curious how conservatives try to diminish gay rights by claiming that being gay is a choice. Soon, conservatives will no longer say this once they figure out that they are revealing too much about their own sexual orientation. Specifically, "heterosexuals" who claim that sexual orientation is a choice apparently assert so from their own personal experience. Apparently, they themselves can choose to be sexually attracted to the same sex (they have a "choice" regarding their sexuality). Interesting, no? Perhaps they think that "heterosexual" means "can be sexually attracted to both men and women."
Groundzero Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 7:43 PM
NOTHING 2 do with anything you said! It's about the MEANING OF TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE! It's not about you being gay! You were give Civil Unions rights- so where were those people saying it's a choice? NO it was the gays SAYING they want to take over the meaning of TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE Keep you spin/lie it's really getting OLD! As far as the Civil Union you have nearly all the same rights as traditional marraige that is a spin & lie also! As far as other rights get a pre nuptial & a living will as any one else who is not satisfied with their rights under that specific law! This is about the GAYS TRYING TO TAKE THE MEANING OF TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE AWAY! First you need to be truthful about the reason before you solve it!
du2 Wrote: Feb 23, 2013 11:37 AM
"nearly all the same rights".
If you wouldnt' accept 'nearly', then why should anyone else?
Equal treatment under the law, means equal treatment under the law. Gay people are compelled to be equally law abiding, equally responsible and even more when it comes to being tax payers. Equally required to work and contribute to the general welfare. Nearly the same rights, wouldn't be fair for being FULLY responsible. THAT is the truth of the matter. Just because you can't handle that truth, doesn't mean gay citizens should suffer for it.
Larry1764 Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 3:59 PM
You make a very good point, gw. The claim should not be that sexual orientation is a choice, but that anyone who chooses to go along with his/her orientation - if that orientation is wrong - is doing so voluntarily. That is the same argument we have against adultery or fornication: our sexual orientation is toward "desiring to have sex", but if it is with someone I am not married to, I have to resist my orientation. The Bible nowhere condemns orientation, only practice. And, of course, the Bible condemns all cruelty toward anyone, and demands love for all. The sad fact that many religious people used the Bible (incorrectly) to defend slavery should be seen in contrast to the abolitionists - mainly religious people - who fought against
Larry1764 Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 4:03 PM
slavery. I hope that an increasing number of Christians will - while standing ground on the Bible's prohibition of homosexual activity - vibrantly condemn harrassment or other cruelties toward any who practice it, and seek to find ways to show love and concern and respect for those individuals (not always easy because such is often rejected by the individual, but that's another topic).
Larry1764 Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 4:03 PM
slavery. I hope that an increasing number of Christians will - while standing ground on the Bible's prohibition of homosexual activity - vibrantly condemn harrassment or other cruelties toward any who practice it, and seek to find ways to show love and concern and respect for those individuals (not always easy because such is often rejected by the individual, but that's another topic).
Larry1764 Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 4:03 PM
slavery. I hope that an increasing number of Christians will - while standing ground on the Bible's prohibition of homosexual activity - vibrantly condemn harrassment or other cruelties toward any who practice it, and seek to find ways to show love and concern and respect for those individuals (not always easy because such is often rejected by the individual, but that's another topic).
Groundzero Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 7:46 PM
The MEANEST people I've ever met are when you oppose a Gay! Where is that show love & concern toward others when they disagree with you! I'm VERY SERIOUS on this THESE GAYS ARE NASTY when you disagree with them! Never in my life have I meet such nasty people
du2 Wrote: Feb 23, 2013 11:19 AM
Larry, that is so intellectually dishonest and disingenuous. One's sexual orientation ISN'T wrong. Especially because there are no victims, there is corresponding mutual attraction. And it's ONLY gender based. Since when is gender a matter of wrongful morality? Gay people, encouraged to channel their sexuality into monogamy, marriage and responsibility, do society just as much good because they are happier people for loving and being loved. It was ever thus for any human being. Making excuses to justify lifelong celibacy for gay people isn't healthy for THEM. Sexual repression never is.
du2 Wrote: Feb 23, 2013 11:22 AM
con't: Biblical cultures aren't exactly the best example of social justice, scientific, technical, medical and psychological advances. Relegating gay people by force of govt', into something that is strictly religious OPINION, no other citizen is subject to, is what is wrong. Just because gay people are a minority more vulnerable to such cruelty, doesn't make it right and never will.
du2 Wrote: Feb 23, 2013 11:30 AM
Disagreeing? This is hardly about disagreeing with gay people. Gay people are trying to overcome decades of dehumanization, exclusion from their families, denial of their talents in the workplace and discrimination, casual violence anywhere that threatens their lives and systemic bigotry where even getting a cake baked for a celebration turns into a nasty lesson in religious prejudice. The cruelty against gay people is deep, and unpredictable. You REALLY think gay people shouldn't be upset about it?
Especially when you call such unprovoked, insane viciousness against them 'disagreement'?
du2 Wrote: Feb 23, 2013 11:34 AM
Larry, I don't think there is anything more cruel you could do to gay people than to gorge ourselves on the benefits of marriage and family, waste a lot of it, and then force gay people to STARVE for it and be forced to watch hetero people enjoy themselves at the expense of what's honest and true about the ethical treatment of others in it.
Hypocrisy is vicious and teaches nothing but dishonesty and wrongfulness. It's wrong to get fat, and starve someone for something that literally is unlimited bounty for everyone. Sharing marriage with gay people, doesn't hurt anyone at all.

Homosexual activists achieved historic gains in the November 2012 election in the states of Washington, Maine and Maryland. These three notoriously liberal states passed laws extending marriage benefits to homosexual relationships by four to six percentage points. But will these legal victories ultimately deny them the sweeping Supreme Court decision they long for?

Judge Robert Jones of a federal court in Nevada has laid the groundwork for such a conclusion. In his ruling on a lawsuit which sought to overturn Nevada’s ban on gay marriage, Jones wrote that the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) lobby’s success in advancing its...