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.
That being said, sometimes I feel our society exaggerates the plight of gays. Is that really the worst thing we can think of as wrong in our world, or even in our own societies? I can think of other things: poverty, bullying, materialism, that if addressed, would make a far better world.
Seems strange they want to continue this outdated colonial law, meanwhile the former colonial power is probably the most liberal country in the world when it comes to gay rights. India wants to be more oppressive than their former colonial masters.
they just don't want a bunch of panty wearing fags corrupting their society.Who can blame them?exile the fags and forbid them to dwell in a normal society would be the best.
Now you mentioned bullying as a bigger plight. I would be interested to hear your argument separating 'bullying' from discrimination based on sexual orientation.
I think it's absurd!
Taking away their freedom to express their 'inclinations' while giving it to another orientation is in direct violation to this:
"We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness;"
Note, that they announced only the rights given to humanity by God. There is real questioning in the US, and around the world, whether God gave Man a "right" to engage in homosexual activity. That doesn't sound like His style.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
I agree with your statement completely. Sex is a component of some relationships. Sometimes for gays or straights, that's all there is to the relationship. But my point, once again, is that the only portion of a complete relationship that India, or anti-Sodomy laws, is inhibiting is the sexual portion. The only thing that you, or anyone else is asking India to change is the sexual activity portion of their laws. I'm sorry to insist, but the only issue in this case is sexual activity.
You seem to think I am focusing on sex and ironically I feel you are. Sex is just a component to an intimate relationship, but it's an important one for most people (of all orientations).
Again I agree completely. Neither is the United States. We could be ethically wrong as well. Yes the Nazis are an extreme example, but you need an extreme example to make your point. Besides, I didn't realize we had shifted to an ethical discussion from a legal one.
They are not somehow immune from being in error ethically because they are a sovereign nation.
I don't understand you. Clearly, that's not what's happening here. Were that the case, we could have had one post saying, some people on ATS agree with India and others don't, and it would be done. People are, however, trying to persuade others that they have the "right" view. Why? What is the goal in persuading some ATSer in Iowa that India has it wrong? It will certainly have no effect in the US, we don't have that issue before us.
I agree. Not only is this not about force, attempting to force belief would ultimately be futile. What I would argue for, and I think others in this thread, is simply sharing our views on the matter.
Battery acid, stoning, NAZIs? I didn't think I was being extreme, but perhaps it came across that way.
Let us not be so extreme here. Can't we be open to discuss and collaborate ideas? Does that automatically make someone imperialist?
And now, back to the legal issue. It may very well be a "huge huge issue" to you. It's not to many other people. India wants to punish that type of sexual activity, we punish bestiality and necrophilia. Again, what do you want to do? If you want to force India, by economic or military warfare to change their laws to what we happen to like, I think you're traveling down the wrong road. Why them and not Russia? They have roughly the same law. Is it because if we picked on India we might not get our nose bloodied? That sounds like a cowardly bully picking his target.
The gravity of the situation concerning gay rights and denying them of it…..is of huge moral consequence to me. It's a huge huge issue.
I do it rather hesitantly, however, because of your opening line to another poster; "I am a perpetual antagonist." I'm absolutely positive that you didn't mean that, unless you meant it to mean "I will always argue the opposite side whether I believe the position or not."
What I would argue for, and I think others in this thread, is simply sharing our views on the matter.
Can't we be open to discuss and collaborate ideas?
I see that homosexual protagonists simply do not answer critical questions - which proves they are dishonest.
Dishonest can never be ethical or correct; and we better not listen to them.
2. The purpose of sex is procreation.
The laws should support only this part.
The government is not responsible for perversions and fantasies of people