It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gay Marriage Acceptance or No Jobs

page: 8
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 


I am an american and there is still slave trading
all over this planet.
That is not the issue being discussed here.




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic
 


Please show me the part dealing with homosexual rights,
I must have missed that one.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by mamabeth
 


It's kind of easy to miss, as it does not use the word homosexual. Here is the source:

US Constitution Amendment 14

And here is the relevant quote:



No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Emphasis added.

What this says is that if a state has a legal construct, in this case called "marriage", then that state may not discriminate in the application of the protections of the legal construct called "marriage" among citizens of that state.

That is why a state cannot have laws barring interracial marriages, or interfaith marriages... because that would be illegal discrimination.

And the same holds for laws discriminating against people being involved in the legal construct called "marriage" that happen to have the same gender.

I understand from reading your posts that you consider homosexual marriage to be a sin. And while I disagree with that position, I respect it and defend your right, and the right of your church, to hold that opinion, and in the case of the church, to discriminate as to whom it will apply a religious construct called "marriage".

But in the United States, it is not legal to discriminate in this fashion as regards secular law, which is what the US is based upon.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic
 


I obey secular law as long as it doesn't go
against God's laws.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by redoubt
I think it is a mistake to say that homosexuality is anything approaching 'normal' when it comes to the existence of the human race. But it is natural, much like so many other afflictions that we do NOT discriminate against.


How can it be natural when the human body isn't made for stuff like that?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Fortunately that opinion is in the minority now. So, please, don't force that repugnant 18th century thinking into todays society.


That is not true. The "people" in "over 30 states" have amended their Constitutions to stay homosexual marriage.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by texastig

Originally posted by redoubt
I think it is a mistake to say that homosexuality is anything approaching 'normal' when it comes to the existence of the human race. But it is natural, much like so many other afflictions that we do NOT discriminate against.


How can it be natural when the human body isn't made for stuff like that?


Well, the whole "feels good" arguers might say otherwise. Males have a prostate that can only be stimulated by anal penetration, and women have the ability to engage in various intimate encounters.

The human body, one could say, is made for reproduction AND enjoyment of sex, not just one or the other.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by mamabeth
 


And I admire your conviction. Again, even though I disagree with it.

But in the United States, secular law trumps the concept of God's law, because the US does not put any particular religion ahead of any other (or lack of). So something called "God's law" cannot have legal standing in the US.

So you are perfectly free to not recognize or support gay marriage. If the state in which you live has legal protections for heterosexual married couples, that state is required to recognize homosexual marriages. So far, this has not been enforced, but hopefully it will be soon.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by JonoEnglish
Employment should always be about the ability of the person to do the job in question.


That is correct but homosexuals cannot keep their hands of people and they can't keep
their mouths shut about their homosexual encounters.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by texastig

Originally posted by JonoEnglish
Employment should always be about the ability of the person to do the job in question.


That is correct but homosexuals cannot keep their hands of people and they can't keep
their mouths shut about their homosexual encounters.


Are you being intentionally dense? Homosexuals vary just as much as heterosexuals. Most never lay their hands on people and most don't tell anyone about their encounters, embracing a "don't kiss and tell" policy in a sense.

If anything, it's heterosexuals that can never keep their mouths shut about their encounters:

"Hey dude, I totally banged Sherry last night!"
"Awesome!"

or

"She has a nice [buttocks]. I'd hit that."

You can't have a double standard.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


That's just it,society does have double standards.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
Are you being intentionally dense? Homosexuals vary just as much as heterosexuals. Most never lay their hands on people and most don't tell anyone about their encounters, embracing a "don't kiss and tell" policy in a sense.
If anything, it's heterosexuals that can never keep their mouths shut about their encounters:

"Hey dude, I totally banged Sherry last night!"
"Awesome!"

or

"She has a nice [buttocks]. I'd hit that."

You can't have a double standard.


Decent people don't go around saying that stuff.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by texastig
 


Yet they have the same legal rights as everyone else. In other words, your argument to allow the discrimination is moot.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
Yet they have the same legal rights as everyone else. In other words, your argument to allow the discrimination is moot.


How can you have rights based on a perverted behavior?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by texastig

Originally posted by Varemia
Yet they have the same legal rights as everyone else. In other words, your argument to allow the discrimination is moot.


How can you have rights based on a perverted behavior?



How can you deny rights based on your opinion that it is perverted behavior? This is a multi-faceted society, and currently some people have unequal rights to you simply because of something they basically cannot help.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by AngryOne
 


If all of the world were homosexual, there would still be many children through surrogacy. Even though homosexuals are attracted to members of the same sex, they still have the innate desire to reproduce and care for children. The birth rate would certainly be lower due to accidental pregnancies not existing, but it definitely wouldn't be the end of our species.

Also, on a side note, it would be impossible for the entire world to become gay, and there's no way accepting it as normal could ever cause it. Heck, I've actually actively tried to be gay, since I thought I was. It just hasn't been working. Turns out I just had some kind of hormonal imbalance and wasn't thinking straight (edit: lol, just noticed this. No pun intended). The point is that I actively tried to bed with another man, and I couldn't perform. It makes sense though, considering that in Kindergarten I would blow kisses to all the girls, indicating that before puberty I was wired to like girls.

Let's just say that the world is made up of many colors, and until you wear the glasses to see each color for what it truly is, you will forever be judging from a black and white perspective.
edit on 21-3-2011 by Varemia because: (no reason given)


Surrogcy is a new phenomenon.

I personally will never understand how someone can be sexually attracted to someone of the same sex, yet accept it happens, have gay and lesbian friends.

Life is not black and white we as a civilised society should accept people for what they are not their sexuality.

How many folk citicise Muslims and their so called intolerance, are intolerant of those of the same sex loving each other and wanting to make their love legal.

Imho narrow mindeness is what causes most probs in our world.

Live let live as long as you are not harmed.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
How can you deny rights based on your opinion that it is perverted behavior? This is a multi-faceted society, and currently some people have unequal rights to you simply because of something they basically cannot help.


There is NO scientific data that someone is born a homosexual. The penis was made for reproduction and for relieving ones self.
You cannot have "rights" based on behavior.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by texastig
 


Rights are not based on behavior, leaving convicted felons out of the argument. Saying that homosexual people are trying to base rights on the behavior is inaccurate.

What is happening is that homosexuals' rights are being denied because of their behavior because that behavior grosses people out. And frankly, it grosses me out. That's why I don't engage in homosexual behavior.

But what is happening is that people are trying to enshrine their disapproval of behavior in illegally discriminatory laws.

What's next? Who's rights shall next be suppressed because a lot of people find their behavior objectionable? People who smoke, maybe? People who eat meat? People who won't eat meat? Muslims? Christians? Jews? Blacks? Whites?

It is already happening with gays, Muslims and smokers. How many more do you all want to add to the list of "their rights don't count because I don't like their behavior"?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by mamabeth
 


I wish you had continued to cook your dinner instead of ranting about something that you clearly are too ignorant to understand.
Banning gay unions is unconstitutional. The same as it was to ban interacial marriages.

Whom other people love is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS....so please, go back in the kitchen where you appearently belong.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by mizbeach40
 


So,I am ranting about a topic that I don't know
anything about?For your information,back in the
mid to late 70's,I was a fag hag!ALL of my male
friends were homosexuals.
So,who should go back into the kitchen?

Mods,I don't know if using the term fag hag is still
acceptable in this day and age,it was in the 70's.
edit on 22-3-2011 by mamabeth because: note for mods



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join