Swing and a miss
Banning gay marriage is inherently bigoted, B.... it is organized discrimination against a minority group.... in fact, it's not even a "seperate but equal" situation (which would be bad enough) as civil unions come with a shorter list of rights than marriages!
Personally, I think the solution is to ascribe the same amount of rights that married couples currently hold to civil unions, then basically officially recognize all eligible couples as civil unions, tbh....
segregation... women's voting... all bigoted, all "mainstream" at some point in time...
I'm sure they'll be just fine.
There's also something to be said about the cowards that try to hide their phobia behind some deity.
If they "sin" and won't "repent", then god already has them on his hitlist, no matter if you eat at Chick fil A or not...
These kind of comparisons diminish real civil rights issues. Again, I think gays should be allowed to marry.
If gay marriage isn't a "real" civil rights issue, what is?
If we think along these lines, then we need to desegregate bathrooms -- they obviously are discrinatory against people with gender iden y issues.
There's actually valid reasons to have men's and women's bathrooms that are more substantial then "the imaginary sky fairy said so in his book of fairy tales".... it isn't hurting anybody or infringing on anyone's liberty, property, or ability to thrive as productive members of society...
Classic slippery slope fallacy, B...
They are.
How do they "diminish real civil rights" when civil rights are exactly what's being denied to them?
Hey, when is Jane Fonda Appreciation Day? Didn't you guys hate all the vitriol she got for expressing her beliefs?
No doubt there will be gays living next door to you in your heavenly gated community.
fwiw, God hates the non believer.
I'll ask this again because you dodged the question the first time...
Are gays denied these rights?Rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, the 13th and 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments to the Cons ution. Civil rights include civil liberties (such as the freedom of speech, press, assembly, and religion), as well as due process, the right to vote, equal and fair treatment by law enforcement and the courts, and the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of a democratic society, such as equal access to public schools, recreation, transportation, public facilities, and housing.
Think its just about hating on the gays?
They're denied equal and fair treatment under the law by not being allowed to marry, and they're denied many of the benefits that come with marriage, including joint tax returns, emergency medical decisions, sponsorship of spouses and family members for immigration, and federal protection....
What if they were able to have all that without redefining the word?
What we're legally protecting the meaning of words now? Who are we, France??
I've already stated that the solution is to equalize civil unions and marriage, and then drop the formal distinction altogether and just call everything a civil union.... if a church wants to decide what can and can't be defined as a marriage, fine, but it's not the government's role to be the word police...
redefining what word?
Fine by me. Seems practical.
the new "proposal" -
"darling, will you civil union me?"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
