Cali Gay Marriage Opinion to be Released Today

[DARK 0]

Quote

Quote

>Discrimination is treating one group of people different than
>another because of a trait, not because of a free-will choice.

Exactly. And homosexuality is a trait, not a free-will choice. (Unless you are going to argue that nude men turn you on just as much as nude women, and you've "made a choice" to go after women alone!)
You are correct. Homosexuality is a trait. But nobody is being targeted because they are homosexual. If I am wrong, show me the evidence and I will admit I was wrong.

>When blacks were not afforded equal rights it was because they were black.

They had exactly the same rights as whites! They could marry their own race, just like whites. Were you OK with that?
People were deinied the right to choose their partner specifically because of skin color and/or heritage, something that is totally different than who they choose to love

>Gays are not being discriminated against in any way because of any traits.

They are denied a right that I have. Therefore they are being discriminated against.
Once again, where do you see it written in the laws that they are being denied any rights because of their sexual orientation?

> Show me anywhere in the law where it says "Homosexuals are not
>allowed to marry"

Show me anywhere where any law from the 1950's said "blacks are not allowed to marry." Again, are you therefore OK with banning interracial marriage?

You forgot one very important part that changes the entire meaning of the phrase. In the 1950s blacks were not denied the right to marry, they were denied the right to marry whites. That one little word makes all the difference in context.

their trait means they will fall in love with someone of the same sex. your heterosexuality means you will fall in love with someone of the opposite sex. you are allowed marry the person you fall in love with because your trait falls in line with the law as it stands. homosexuals are not allowed marry the person they fall in love with because of the law as it stands.

2 simple questions each with a simple answer .......

do you understand that?

do you agree that that is wrong?

[billvon 2,400]

>A lot of people are opposed to same-sex marriages because they feel it
>would somehow lessen or trivialize the meaning of the partnership they or
>their family have enjoyed and taken pride in for many, many years.

A lot of whites felt the same way about allowing blacks to marry whites. Heck, as recently as the 1960's there was an episode of Star Trek that could not be shown in the South because it showed a black woman kissing a white man. (Apparently, though, it was OK for green women to kiss white men.)

[BikerBabe 0]

you're doing this on purpose, right?

right?

because it's really getting to the point of hilarity. ridiculousness. obvious willful blindness.

here, let me fix it for you:

Quote

You forgot one very important part that changes the entire meaning of the phrase. In the 2000s gays were not denied the right to marry, they were denied the right to marry the same sex. That [those]one little word (s) makes all the difference in context.

If you truly cannot see how you are saying the EXACT same thing...it goes back to the willful blindness thing.

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

People were deinied the right to choose their partner specifically because of skin color and/or heritage, something that is totally different than who they choose to love

And in this case people are being denied the right to choose their partner specifically because of gender. It is exactly the same thing, old guy.

Quote

You forgot one very important part that changes the entire meaning of the phrase. In the 1950s blacks were not denied the right to marry, they were denied the right to marry whites. That one little word makes all the difference in context.

Exactly. Everyone could marry, they just couldn't marry into a different race. Just like now, everyone can marry, they just can't marry into the same gender. It's exactly the same, old guy.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

But for those who do feel that way I can assure you, young man, that it most definitely is not petty in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, it is. They're assuming ownership of a word that was never just theirs in the first place, and basing the denial of an entire set of rights to another group of people just because they don't want 'their' word to be used. It's the definition of pettiness.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[TomAiello 25]

Quote

Unless you are going to argue that nude men turn you on just as much as nude women, and you've "made a choice" to go after women alone!

Only if they're carrying bibles.

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[skyjumpsteve 0]

Quote

There are laws here that require blood test to get a marriage license. If you test positive for AIDS for example you can’t get married, that is wrong.

Are you sure about that? Some states require a test to ensure each partner knows the others status but I don't think any state has ever even proposed not allowing someone to get married due to a positive result.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>(... it was OK for green women to kiss white men.)

allllll riiiiggghtttt
yeah

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[skyjumpsteve 0]

Quote

I know that it's easy to Google up a number of news stories about this.

Honestly, though, I think those are cases that needs to be dealt with individually, and are far out of the mainstream. I also think that what you're seeing is a violation of medical ethics, and can be sorted out pretty easily that way.

This really does happen a lot. I can't believe people think it is not an issue. It takes just one nurse, doctor, or hospital administrator to say "just following the rules....only "family" is allowed". I have read tons of stories over the years about this. When I had surgery a few years ago I was instructed to bring a power of attorney and some other notarized form to make sure my partner would not have any issues getting into the recovery room.

You are right though....it is definitely a violation of medical ethics. Outrageous yes but just another thing unmarried couples sometimes need to deal with.

[TomAiello 25]

Quote

It takes just one nurse, doctor, or hospital administrator to say "just following the rules....only "family" is allowed".

That person ought to be removed. Honestly, I can't imagine it would take more than one phone call (or one conversation with another doctor on site) to put that right.

Quote

When I had surgery a few years ago I was instructed to bring a power of attorney and some other notarized form to make sure my partner would not have any issues getting into the recovery room.

What kind of visitation are we talking about here? In a hospital room or in the recovery room?

I had surgery several years ago and they didn't let anyone "visit" me in the recovery room. My parents (and I doubt you're going to find anyone with a claim to be "closer" family than that) had to wait for them to bring me out of the recovery room before they could see me.

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

People were deinied the right to choose their partner specifically because of skin color and/or heritage, something that is totally different than who they choose to love

And in this case people are being denied the right to choose their partner specifically because of gender. Exactley! So why are you and others here claiming it is because they are homosexual??It is exactly the same thing, old guy.

Quote

You forgot one very important part that changes the entire meaning of the phrase. In the 1950s blacks were not denied the right to marry, they were denied the right to marry whites. That one little word makes all the difference in context.

Exactly. Everyone could marry, they just couldn't marry into a different race. Just like now, everyone can marry, they just can't marry into the same gender. It's exactly the same, old guy.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

But for those who do feel that way I can assure you, young man, that it most definitely is not petty in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, it is. They're assuming ownership of a word that was never just theirs in the first place, and basing the denial of an entire set of rights to another group of people just because they don't want 'their' word to be used. It's the definition of pettiness.

Nobody is assuming ownership of any word. They are fighting to keep from happening what they believe will somehow lessen the respect others have for the meaning of what a marriage is. It is not for you or I to tell them how they feel any more than it is up to them to tell gays who they have affection towards.
To you it is petty. To them it is not. They outnumber you by a fair margin.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[skyjumpsteve 0]

Quote

That person ought to be removed.

Agreed.

Quote

What kind of visitation are we talking about here? In a hospital room or in the recovery room?

Recovery room after ACL surgery. Was told that family was allowed and to make sure there "wasn't an issue" to bring the paperwork. My partner is in the medical field and am sure he would not have had any difficulty getting in but we brought it just in case.

The point is I really believe people are denied access far more often than you think. It sucks but it is true.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Nobody is assuming ownership of any word. They are fighting to keep from happening what they believe will somehow lessen the respect others have for the meaning of what a marriage is. It is not for you or I to tell them how they feel any more than it is up to them to tell gays who they have affection towards.
To you it is petty. To them it is not. They outnumber you by a fair margin.

From what I've been reading in this thread, Mike said his only problem with same-sex marriage was use of the word "marriage," and he claimed that millions of people agree with him. This would imply that they are all assuming ownership of a word, and I believe this is what jakee is referring to as petty.

(I don't personally agree with Mike - that millions of people are against same-sex marriage just because of the word, but that was my understanding of what he said.)

And I'm curious.... What is your actual position on same-sex marriage? Do you think it should be legal or not? (I understand that you don't think they are being discriminated against, but that's not what I'm asking here.)

[Belgian_Draft 0]

"And I'm curious.... What is your actual position on same-sex marriage? Do you think it should be legal or not? (I understand that you don't think they are being discriminated against, but that's not what I'm asking here.) "

Finally! Somebody who pays attention!
I am not against same-sex marriages. If two people of the same sex want to get married, have at it. No skin off my back.
As an aside, a couple weeks ago I was walking to lunch with a friend who is gay. A young man crossed the sidewalk in front of us. He was wearing flip-flops and black socks, very short cut-offs, and a pink t-shirt. My friend pointed him out and said, "That is soooo gay."
We had a real good laugh over the irony.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Nobody is assuming ownership of any word.

That's exactly what they are doing. They're saying 'this word means what we want it to mean, and only that.'

Quote

To them it is not.

It doesn't matter what they think, it matters what it is, and it is pettier than an eight year old taking his ball home because the other team scored against him.

Quote

They outnumber you by a fair margin.

And people who agree with me outnumber you. But what the fuck does that mean?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Thank you for not feeding the trolls.

I love the irony of this.

Probably time to let the dead horse be.

[billvon 2,400]

>To you it is petty. To them it is not. They outnumber you by a fair margin.

25% of americans support civil unions only (and NOT marriage) 28% think they should not have any legal status. That means that of that 53% who oppose gay marriage, some can reasonably be expected to object because it "changes the definition of the word." (Certainly not all of them, as evidenced by my neighbors who don't care about the definition but don't want their children 'taught to be gay.')

So let's say that of them, 90% (which is surely high) object because of the definition of the word. That's 48% of Americans. Not even a majority, much less "outnumber by a fair margin" the people who don't see it as a problem.

(As an interesting aside, only 20% of the US supported interracial marriage when those liberal, activist, legislate-from-the-bench Supreme Court justices made it legal.)

>It is not for you or I to tell them how they feel any more than it is up to them to
>tell gays who they have affection towards.

If someone felt that a black man should not be allowed to sit in the front of the bus because of their inherent inferiority, would you have respect for his opinion?

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

>To you it is petty. To them it is not. They outnumber you by a fair margin.

25% of americans support civil unions only (and NOT marriage) 28% think they should not have any legal status. That means that of that 53% who oppose gay marriage, some can reasonably be expected to object because it "changes the definition of the word." (Certainly not all of them, as evidenced by my neighbors who don't care about the definition but don't want their children 'taught to be gay.')

So let's say that of them, 90% (which is surely high) object because of the definition of the word. That's 48% of Americans. Not even a majority, much less "outnumber by a fair margin" the people who don't see it as a problem.Well, Bill, I was refering to the fact that they outnumber Jakee. So it only takes two.

(As an interesting aside, only 20% of the US supported interracial marriage when those liberal, activist, legislate-from-the-bench Supreme Court justices made it legal.)

>It is not for you or I to tell them how they feel any more than it is up to them to
>tell gays who they have affection towards.

If someone felt that a black man should not be allowed to sit in the front of the bus because of their inherent inferiority, would you have respect for his opinion?

No. But then nobody here is proposing anything like that, are they?

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[lewmonst 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

But for those who do feel that way I can assure you, young man, that it most definitely is not petty in any way, shape, or form.

Yes, it is. They're assuming ownership of a word that was never just theirs in the first place, and basing the denial of an entire set of rights to another group of people just because they don't want 'their' word to be used. It's the definition of pettiness.

Nobody is assuming ownership of any word. They are fighting to keep from happening what they believe will somehow lessen the respect others have for the meaning of what a marriage is. It is not for you or I to tell them how they feel any more than it is up to them to tell gays who they have affection towards.
To you it is petty. To them it is not. They outnumber you by a fair margin.

Their "feelings" are of no significance compared to other's "rights".

Majority opinion, which cannot even be assumed accurate in a vote with such misleading and bombarding advertising, still does not determine right from wrong. Nor does the bible. Not allowing gays to marry other gays, regardless of gender, is discrimination. Discrimination is wrong.

You still never answered my question from my previous post:
Discrimination is a manifestation of fear and insecurity. What is it about giving all humans equal rights that abhors you so much?

http://www.exitshot.com

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Thank you for not feeding the trolls.

I love the irony of this.

Probably time to let the dead horse be.

You're right. This whole thread is making circles.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[billvon 2,400]

>Well, Bill, I was refering to the fact that they outnumber Jakee. So it only takes two.

True. Of course, between Jakee, Lew and I, we outnumber _you!_

>No.

So is it up to us or not to "tell bigots how they should feel?"

Or is it that you simply have no respect for bigots in either case? That I could understand.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

What is it about giving all humans equal rights that abhors you so much?

I wasn't going to post in this thread anymore, but i will answer your question.

I have already addressed this, but will so again. There is nothing about all people having equal rights that abhors me. I would love a world where that actually happened. But you people here have interpreted my position that gays are not being discriminated against as my somehow being against their right to marry who they want. I am not.
People are disciminated against for all kinds of things. Gender, age, intelligence, height, weight, etc. I will worry about who people can marry (something that is relatively trivial) when discrimination for much more important things is eliminated.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

People are disciminated against for all kinds of things. Gender, age, intelligence, height, weight, etc. I will worry about who people can marry (something that is relatively trivial) when discrimination for much more important things is eliminated.

Per our Supreme Court, the right to marry is a basic human right. Not remotely a trivial matter.

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

There is nothing about all people having equal rights that abhors me.

You said you didn't want them to have 'special' rights. Are you determined not to tell anyone what you meant by that?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?