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.

 

Southern Baptists - 'Same Sex Marriage is Not a Civil Rights Issue'

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



Originally posted by defcon5
They have equal treatment under law;


No, they don't. They SHOULD, but they don't. In most states, they are being denied equal treatment under the law as regards marriage and adoption.



however, they are not granted any special protections under law as a protected class from discrimination.


I'm not saying they are granted "special protections" as a "protected class". I'm saying that, according to the 14th Amendment, as citizens, they are entitled to all the same rights and protections are we all are. And those are being denied by the states.

By the way, being gay is beyond one's ability to control. Whether you accept that fact or not is your choice.

The reason there are discrimination laws that allow discrimination for work purposes is that the laws are changing. We are in the middle of another civil rights era and the people fighting for their rights are gay. There are also people desperately fighting against them to prevent them from enjoying the same rights as we all have, because they're closed-minded bigots. But the law is changing. As each state first allows civil unions and then allows marriage equality, gay people getting married will become as commonplace as interracial marriage (which was also once disallowed. - Heck there was a time blacks weren't allowed to marry each other). Saying "that's the way the law is" is a cop out. The laws need to change. Forget protected classes! When we start treating every citizen equally, there will be no need for protected classes!

I look forward to the time when this is no longer a discussion topic on this board.




posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by defcon5
 


I look forward to the time when this is no longer a discussion topic on this board.



That one got me. I truly hope our society will come to realize that things such as this should have no bearing at all. Whether homosexual, interracial or whatever description you can create to segregate the people, I hope we live to see the day it all disappears, and labels are forgotten entirely. A day when we're just people united for a greater good.
edit on 22-6-2012 by OpsSpecialist because: Error quoting previous post.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
They have equal treatment under law;

The law says heterosexual people can get married.
The law says homosexual people can not.
How is this 'equal treatment'?

Please explain it to me. Thanks.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
No, they don't. They SHOULD, but they don't. In most states, they are being denied equal treatment under the law as regards marriage and adoption.
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


No, they have the same legal treatment as everyone else.
If someone commits a crime again them, or they commit a crime, they are subject to the same laws as everyone else.

They enjoy all the same rights as everyone else, such as being able to vote, travel, worship as they see fit, attend school, do jury duty, dive a car, marry within the laws of their state, etc... ad infintium.

What they do not get is special treatment as a protected class.

This is why there is all the argument over whether its a lifestyle choice, or not, because it has a great effect on their protected status.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
By the way, being gay is beyond one's ability to control. Whether you accept that fact or not is your choice.

That is your opinion, its not been proven one way or the other, hence the fact its an ongoing argument.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The law says heterosexual people can get married.
The law says homosexual people can not.
How is this 'equal treatment'?

Please explain it to me. Thanks.
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Sure they can get married in accordance with the laws of their individual states, just like all the other citizens of those states. The law applies to them the same as everyone else. Right now the law states that you are restricted on who you can marry, no matter if your hetro or homo sexual. For example a person cannot also marry someone too closely related to them, same as it states you cannot marry someone of the same sex.

Again, you guys are thinking with your feelings on the subject, rather then the logic of what the laws actually are.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
By the way, being gay is beyond one's ability to control. Whether you accept that fact or not is your choice.

That is your opinion, its not been proven one way or the other, hence the fact its an ongoing argument.

The DSM-IV (the 'bible' of psychology) has removed homosexuality as a mental disorder.
Homosexuality is found all through the animal kingdom. 1-2% of the population is homosexual.
Of course both gay and straight people can 'control themselves' and not be sexually active at all.
But why should one group have to remain celebate and the other not? How is this equal rights?

All Psych Journal
The debate about if someone is homosexual from birth or if it is a learned behavior is still debated between sociologists, biologists, and psychologists. There have been found physiological differences in the brains of 'straight' people from 'gay' people when autopsied. This is not definitive .. but it is evidence that at least a good portion of homosexual people are born that way.


D.F. Swaab conducted the next noteworthy experiment in 1990. This experiment became the first to document a physiological difference in the anatomical structure of a gay man's brain. Swaab found in his post-mortem examination of homosexual males' brains that a portion of the hypothalamus of the brain was structurally different than a heterosexual brain. The hypothalamus is the portion of the human brain directly related to sexual drive and function. In the homosexual brains examined, a small portion of the hypothalamus, termed the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), was found to be twice the size of its heterosexual counterpart [2].

At the same time, another scientist, Laura S. Allen made a similar discovery in the hypothalamus as well. She found that the anterior commissure (AC) of the hypothalamus was also significantly larger in the homosexual subjects than that of the heterosexuals [2]. Both Swaab's and Allen's results became a standing ground for the biological argument on homosexuality. The very fact that the AC and the SCN are not involved in the regulation of sexual behavior makes it highly unlikely that the size differences results from differences in sexual behavior. Rather the size differences came prenatally during sexual differentiation. The size and shape of the human brain is determined biologically and is impacted minutely, if at all by behavior of any kind.



Side note - The US Dept of Defense lists homosexuality as a mental disorder - in opposition to what the Psychiatric society says.

edit on 6/22/2012 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


I'm not getting your point, it says exactly what I said:

The debate about if someone is homosexual from birth or if it is a learned behavior is still debated between sociologists, biologists, and psychologists. There have been found physiological differences in the brains of 'straight' people from 'gay' people when autopsied. This is not definitive ..

AMT the law says its a choice.
Hey, I don't write laws, I simply explain how they work..

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
Sure they can get married in accordance with the laws of their individual states,

And note how the laws are different for the two groups according to their sexual orientation.
'Straight people' can get married to whom they wish.
'Homosexual people' can not get married to whom they wish.
The law itself discriminates against citizens
It treats citizens differently based on sexual orientation.
Time to change the laws.
edit on 6/22/2012 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
I'm not getting your point,

I'm sure I"m not expressing myself well. I"m tired today ...
Let's see if I can put it out point by point ...
- Heterosexuals can marry whom they wish. Homosexuals can not. This is not equality.
- The law says 'they can help it'. this is obviously wrong. the law needs rewriting.

(in the previous link I gave, autopsies have shown that the brains of gay men are different than the brains of straight men. There is evidence of a physical difference. And even if there weren't ... so what? If a person is gay then a person is gay. However they got there, that's what they are. Marriage is a civil right and they deserve equal civil rights.)


the law says its a choice.

which is why it's time to change the law. people don't choose same sex attraction.
It just works that way .. either by nature or by nurture. Either way ... it's there and
it's not something that can be controlled anymore than a heterosexual person can
control who they are attracted to.


Hey, I don't write laws, I simply explain how they work..

I hear ya. I know that.

ETA - my degree is psychology .. not law .. so I naturally go in that direction first during a discussion.
edit on 6/22/2012 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
'Straight people' can get married to whom they wish.
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Did you not read what I posted, even straight people have restrictions on whom they can marry.
You cannot marry your first cousin for example (well maybe in the deep south...
But its still not legal
)

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
And note how the laws are different for the two groups according to their sexual orientation.
'Straight people' can get married to whom they wish.
'Homosexual people' can not get married to whom they wish.


And not only are they denied to marry the consenting adult of their choice, they are denied to participate in a contract with the state that affords over 1000 FEDERAL rights and benefits. This is why states laws against marriage equality are discriminatory of a FEDERAL level.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


You can't marry your first cousin. That apples to straights and gays equally.
The part that's NOT equal is to marry the consenting adult of one's choice.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by FlyersFan
'Straight people' can get married to whom they wish.
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Did you not read what I posted, even straight people have restrictions on whom they can marry.
You cannot marry your first cousin for example ...

Yes .. I saw that. But you know what I mean. Two consenting NON RELATED adults who are straight can get married. Two consenting NON RELATED adults who are homosexual can not. It's not equal. extra DIV



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Yes .. I saw that. But you know what I mean. Two consenting NON RELATED adults who are straight can get married. Two consenting NON RELATED adults who are homosexual can not. It's not equal
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Sure it is, consenting adults who are straight can also not marry a member of their own sex. So the same laws apply to homo or heterosexuals. It doesn't matter if a hetro sexual would most likely never try and marry a member of the same sex, it simply matters that the same laws apply equally to them.

See, as crazy as that might sound, that's how the law works.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Okay .. I tried to see what you are seeing. I really did. I just can't.

What I see ... gay people aren't asking for special rights or special protections, they are asking to be able to marry the same as everyone else. Two consenting .. non related .. adults who love each other want to be able get married.

What I see ... the Baptists see this as a religious 'values' issue.

What I see ... laws based upon religious 'values' and the bible rather than on civil rights.

I'm just not seeing how homosexuals have the same marriage rights as non-homosexuals. If they did have the same rights, then they'd be able to be married. And they aren't.

Sorry .. I really did try to see where you were coming from on this. I just can't.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by Annee
 


really though .. does it matter which came first? Religion or marriage?
(I still think it was religion .. but whatever)
Who cares what the social play was 200,000 years ago when it comes to this?
This is now .. and in the here and now what is important? Right?


Me? Hell NO!

I'm a very vocal advocate of Equal Rights and No Religion in Government.

Religion is a personal choice.

Gender orientation is a Birth Right.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The law says heterosexual people can get married.
The law says homosexual people can not.
How is this 'equal treatment'?

Please explain it to me. Thanks.
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Sure they can get married in accordance with the laws of their individual states, just like all the other citizens of those states. The law applies to them the same as everyone else. Right now the law states that you are restricted on who you can marry, no matter if your hetro or homo sexual. For example a person cannot also marry someone too closely related to them, same as it states you cannot marry someone of the same sex.

Again, you guys are thinking with your feelings on the subject, rather then the logic of what the laws actually are.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


The laws also used to say that you couldn't marry someone that was a different race than you. The Supreme Court ruled that this was unconstitutional, so the laws were changed. It is unconstitutional to say that you can't marry someone who is the same gender as you. It hurts no one, it involves consenting, tax-paying adults, there are no birth defects with childbirth (as with close relatives) -- there is NO reason to not allow these kinds of marriages to take place. This issue just needs to get to the Supreme Court - and it will, eventually.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv

The laws also used to say that you couldn't marry someone that was a different race than you. The Supreme Court ruled that this was unconstitutional, so the laws were changed.


there also used to be a law stating abortion was illegal...whats your point?
laws will always have critics and supporters...some more than others.
Unfortunately gay marriage doesnt have the popular opinion


there are no birth defects with childbirth (as with close relatives).

thats a moot point....
since there is no such thing as natural childbirth by homsexuals
edit on 22-6-2012 by truthseeker808 because: (no reason given)



Originally posted by FlyersFan
Homosexuality is found all through the animal kingdom.

no offense...but that is a horrible example
animals will always be animals....they have no concept of morality or modesty

"Current understanding is that many species that were formerly believed monogamous have now been proven to be promiscuous or opportunistic in nature; a wide range of species appear both to masturbate and to use objects as tools to help them do so; in many species animals try to give and get sexual stimulation with others where procreation is not the aim; and homosexual behaviour has now been observed among 1,500 species and in 500 of those it is well documented.[1]
edit on 22-6-2012 by truthseeker808 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeker808
since there is no such thing as natural childbirth by homsexuals

Um .... homosexual people give birth or procreate all the time.
I don't know what you are saying here ... please explain. Thanks.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by truthseeker808
since there is no such thing as natural childbirth by homsexuals

Um .... homosexual people give birth or procreate all the time.
I don't know what you are saying here ... please explain. Thanks.


i was hoping you werent going to use the "surrogatesque" arguement

well its pretty simple....two homosexual men cant have a child through sodomy can they?
its not meant to be(im not saying that in my opinion homosexuals shouldnt have children btw)


This is vastly different from a male/femal relationship, where one or the other has a physiological problem(i.e. ovulatory disorders, sperm count etc)
edit on 22-6-2012 by truthseeker808 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join