It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by Dramey
Then the door to door salesmen that are the religious missionaries are an even bigger force of distraction.
I think you are being a little unfair in this respect. Take a step back, look outside of this issue altogether, and we see all sorts of groups of people with agendas, who are being forceful. Since there is more heterosexuals, there is more heterosexuals with agendas that are being advertised on a daily basis... but I am not trying to play sides, or even play with numbers. I am just trying to be realistic and reasonable.
You forgot to add "straight" agenda to your list. We gay people have had to put up with that one being shoved down our throats our entire life.
but like you said its not just the gay agenda thats working this way, religion, politics, pharmaceuticals etc, its all propaganda advertising
Originally posted by TheRedneck
I have decided that this is far from a cry for equal rights. The issue at hand (gay marriage) is more about a way to irritate and 'get even' with the Christian religion in general, which so many gay rights activists seem to hate. As I said in the first sentence, I cannot condone hatred.
Don't you see you are generalizing people the same way you say you were generalized?
Well, there's really no "middle ground" to start with.
Either you're for someone having equal rights, or you're not.
For all intents and purposes, a marriage is a contract made before the government between yourself and your partner. You have the option of involving religion, but marriage is, at its core, completely secular. Want proof?
Go get a priest to marry you without a marriage license, then try to file your taxes as a married couple. That'll learn ya.
Denying homosexuals the rights available to heterosexuals (in this case, the right to engage in a contract with another adult) is inequal protection under the law.
Now perhaps some people feel that hteir personal brand of faith gets precedence over the US and California constitutions.
Plain fact is, though, that's not the case, and I imagine you'd be hard pressed to defend similar legislation that decides minority rights via majority vote.