View Poll Results: Are you for or against gay rights?

Voters
104. You may not vote on this poll
  • For Gay Rights

    76 73.08%
  • Against Gay Rights

    28 26.92%
Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 153

Thread: Opinions on Homosexuality

  1. #111
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,675
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Well, I believe that homosexual equality, including the right to marry, IS a constitutionally-protected right. I hope that eventually SCOTUS will agree that when the constitution calls for equal protection and equal rights under law, it refers to ALL people. Homosexuals are people, the last minority that can be legally discriminated against. This must change, it must change on a federal level, and I believe that very soon it will change.

  2. #112
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,023

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    In other words, to build upon my response to Kal'Stang, an individuals "fundamental right" to something is violable by the state because it might be a paperwork hassle. Sorry, not buying that. If I have a fundamental right to something, it is the obligation of the state to secure that right. How complicated it might be in doing so is irrelevant.
    The right is to have access to the legal contract itself, not necessarily legal marriage, when the people are similarly situated. The contract itself is specifically designed for two people only, at least in the US. This is more than "minor paperwork" being changed, it involves a lot of legal issues that would need to be resolved prior to allowing such unions to occur legally to avoid their unions costing the government more than they actually benefit it.

    It is completely within the right of the government, state or federal, to not have legal marriage at all. I don't personally believe that this is in the country's best interest, but it wouldn't be wrong to do this. But as long as there is a contract, then all restrictions on it must be connected to a legitimate state interest in preventing the people in similar situations (in the case of SSM, why a man can marry a woman but a woman cannot marry a woman)(in the case of multiple marriages, it would be why a person can marry one other person but cannot marry more than one person) from entering the contract. There are legitimate arguments to keep marriages limited to two people and only allowing them into one contract, some I have given. There are no legitimate arguments of how limiting marriage by sex actually furthers in legitimate state interests at all, at least not one that wouldn't be discriminatory if it were not based on sex, but rather the actual ability of the two to procreate with each other.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  3. #113
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,023

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    It protects everyone, but not under the basis of sexual orientation. It is silent regarding this and homosexuals are not recognize at the Constitutional level as being a protected class.

    It is legal to discriminate against sex in some cases. If the ERA passed back in the 70's your argument would be correct. The government discriminates against sex by forcing only males to sign up for selective service and drafting. They discriminate against sex by having male and female only areas (like restrooms). It is legal for a state to say that a man can only legally marry a woman and visa versa.
    The Constitution itself doesn't actually mention protecting people on the basis of race either. Nor sex. The SCOTUS has stated that EP means that it applies to people similarly situated and has placed certain class restrictions at higher levels, but all things that can be discriminated against still have to meet their tier level of scrutiny when it comes to equal protection.

    There is good reason for those discriminatory laws based on sex that actually meet an important state interest and have shown how they actually apply to furthering that state interest. Anti-SSM bans have not even demonstrated how they live up to the bottom tier scrutiny of meeting a state interest in any way, shape or form, particularly because of other laws and how we can see that there are other couples similarly situated to same sex couples (infertile couples) who are allowed to marry just because of their relative sexes.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  4. #114
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,023

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    My marrying two women harms no one, yet you advocate the state violate my fundamental right to marry who I choose. Why?
    Many who want same sex marriage legalized are also for allowing multiple marriages or spouses. Some of us want to see the laws changed to allow at least some legal recognition of legal family given to multiple partners. But there are still inherent differences between the arguments for and against same sex marriage and those for and against multiple marriages/partners.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    When you can show me how polygamy or incestuous marriages harm any single person outside of that marriage.
    It is not "all about harm", but rather whether or not a restriction furthers an actual state interest in any way when applied to one group but not another. The arguments for and against same sex marriage are different from those for/against polygamy/multiple partners and the arguments for/against incestuous marriages.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    It was absurd rationale for allowing the state to violate a "fundamental right."
    The states cannot violate EP of the 14th Amendment.

    If they want, states could possibly get around violating EP by making the restriction based on ability to procreate rather than sex. The only thing is that this would apply to opposite sex couples as well. Probably not really within a state's best interest to do this though, so it could still be argued that such a restriction is going to hurt a state interest more than it would further another, but it would certainly put it on the bottom tier of scrutiny.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  5. #115
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,048

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    I did not vote because homosexuals are already protected under the Constitution just like any other American. Homosexuals do not need special rights anymore than rednecks need special rights (although rednecks are special).

  6. #116
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,023

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    How many people demanding rights of gay individuals are in fact including benefits from the state and NOT the act of simply being allowed to marry?
    How much do those benefits cost the state as compared to the benefits to the state for people being legally married? What is the difference in that comparison if the couple cannot have children together (but are still able and willing to adopt)? What is the difference if the couple has no desire to ever raise children together?

    All marriages boost the economy because people who can get married, particularly a marriage that gives them benefits, spend money on the wedding. A lot of money.

    The cost of gay marriage
    Would Gay Marriage Help the State Economy? - NYTimes.com
    Prop 8 Repeal Could Give California Economic Bump - US News and World Report
    Gay Marriage Makes Cents

    The list goes on. Most economists agree that legalized same sex marriage really is better economically than not having it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    In order for an action to be a right violation it can't simply be a possibility of injury argument.
    That's right. In this case it is a violation based on discrimination because one group of people can marry people of one sex while another group cannot do so, despite the fact that this cannot honestly be backed up by evidence that such restriction furthers any state interest.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  7. #117
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,867
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Benefits are benefits, rights are rights. They are not interchangeable as people are using them. The government providing you something is not a right, but a benefit. Everything that the government does in marriage is a benefit, not a right.
    Rights come with benefits. Yes benefits can be tacked onto a right but that does not mean that a right does not have its own inherent benefits.

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Because otherwise you are taking away rights of individuals.
    At this point I'm wondering if we are even talking about the same thing.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  8. #118
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,867
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    You are not addressing the issue: which is the fundamental right to marriage. Incestuous relationships occur, polygamous relationships occur. You have a fundamental right to engage in those relationships. Yet somehow you feel the state has a right to deprive those same people of their fundamental right to marry. Why? If these relationships are so damaging to the culture or to others, why does the state not ban sexual relationships between siblings, or between more than two partners? I will answer that for you--because you have the "fundamental right" to engage in those activities.
    First, it is illegal for siblings to have sexual relations. Second having sex between two partners is not in itself dangerous (so long as they are not in the same immediate family of course). Also just because incest and polygamy occurs it does not mean that there is no harm in those.

    Now it is obvious that you did not read any of the links that I gave. As such I can only come to the conclusion that you are just trolling. Until you come up with some substance I'll be disregarding your posts now.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  9. #119
    Global Moderator
    Custom User Title
    LaughAtTheWorld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seoul/Chicago
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,542

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Well, I believe that homosexual equality, including the right to marry, IS a constitutionally-protected right. I hope that eventually SCOTUS will agree that when the constitution calls for equal protection and equal rights under law, it refers to ALL people. Homosexuals are people, the last minority that can be legally discriminated against. This must change, it must change on a federal level, and I believe that very soon it will change.
    Hail Hooters! Hail Hooters! Hail Hooters!
    You just put to words what I always thought-that homosexuals are the last minority that can legally be discriminated against
    "The misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all" - Joan Robinson
    "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries" - Winston Churchill

  10. #120
    Educator
    taxigirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Last Seen
    10-21-16 @ 06:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    1,205

    Re: Opinions on Homosexuality

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    I did not vote because homosexuals are already protected under the Constitution just like any other American. Homosexuals do not need special rights anymore than rednecks need special rights (although rednecks are special).
    A lot of people say this and don't realize that homosexuals do not have the same rights that heterosexuals do, and there are no "extra rights". There is no federal law against housing discrimination that protects homosexuals, several states and municipalities have their own laws, but for the most part if you are gay a landlod can say you may not rent or you can be refused a loan for housing etc...

    There are few employment laws explicity protecting homosexuals, there are other laws that they can argue with (ex. sexual harrassment) but there is no guarantee that they will stand up.

    There are also no protections in place in cases of medical care (unless it comes to federal dollars) for visitation, rights to make medical decisions. The parties involved must have power of attorney, healthcare proxies etc.. If these are not in place then homosexuals do not have the rights as heterosexuals.

    Some federal laws have been enacted to protect them from discrimination in FEDERAL housing and employment, but nothing to stop the private sector.

    These are the rights that heterosexuals have. They are not "extra" rights.
    Please tell me what "special rights" they are asking for?

    "You know, when they came and took away my fourth amendment I kept my yap shut, what the hell, I really didnít have anything to hide anyway. When they grabbed up my second amendment I sat still and bit my tongue because, truth be told, Iím allergic to guns. But here we are, you with your cold hard fingers wrapped around the neck of my first amendment and Iíve got to shout as loud as I can, because if I donít, before you know it, you wonít let me say nothing at all"
    --Randolph J. Dworkin

    ďReading makes a full man, meditation a profound man, discourse a clear man.Ē
    -- Ben Franklin

    "It has been said that something as small as the flutter of a butterfly's wing can ultimately cause a typhoon halfway around the world"
    -- Chaos Theory

Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •