• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New York to Become the Sixth State to Legalize Gay Marriage

ARealConservative said:
but Woolworth changed their policy because the boycotts caused them to lose money. this was solved without govenrment force, as it should be.
Click to expand...

The government sent in the FBI, after buses were set on fire, during Freedom Summer. And don't forget about Mississippi Burning either, and the civil rights workers who were murdered, the black citizens who were severely beaten, the churches that were burned to the ground, and the homes that were destroyed. It took Federal troops and the FBI to end it.
 
CriticalThought said:
Ah, so you disagree with that particular provision of the Civil Rights Act which deals with making it illegal for businesses to discriminate on the basis of skin color?
Click to expand...

I believe practicing individual bigotry is a right that the courts have removed, yes.
 
ARealConservative said:
but Woolworth changed their policy because the boycotts caused them to lose money. this was solved without govenrment force, as it should be.
Click to expand...

Maybe I've come into this roommate, but are you really equating the national gay civil rights debate with equal treatment at woolworths?

It was merely a step on the road, just like the bus boycott after Rosa Parks, it all led to the civil rights act.

When it comes to the rights of the people, the government must step in to secure those rights.

Just because you change the policy of a company or busses, doesn't mean you've truly gotten your rights.
 
danarhea said:
The government sent in the FBI, after buses were set on fire, during Freedom Summer. And don't forget about Mississippi Burning either, and the civil rights workers who were murdered, the black citizens who were severely beaten, the churches that were burned to the ground, and the homes that were destroyed. It took Federal troops and the FBI to end it.
Click to expand...

you are back to voting rights again? lol.
 
ARealConservative said:
I believe practicing individual bigotry is a right that the courts have removed, yes.
Click to expand...

Denying gays the right to marry and relieve equal treatment under the law by things like DOMA and bans in many states is not "individual bigotry".

That's state sanctioned discrimination because of sexual orientation, youre free to be a bigot all you want! Ask the WBC...
 
ARealConservative said:
you are back to voting rights again? lol.
Click to expand...

Yes I am, because deprivation of voting rights was done by individuals who had what you call "core beliefs", as well as the government, which makes it extremely germane to this discussion. Or would you rather believe that the Ku Klux Klan was a governmental organization?
 
Last edited:
Jetboogieman said:
Denying gays the right to marry and relieve equal treatment under the law by things like DOMA and bans in many states is not "individual bigotry".

That's state sanctioned discrimination because of sexual orientation, youre free to be a bigot all you want! Ask the WBC...
Click to expand...

but an individual that hires people and does not wish to provide insurance to gay spouses is individual bigotry. we are specifically talking about that tangent, which you possibly missed coming in mid debate?
 
ARealConservative said:
I believe practicing individual bigotry is a right that the courts have removed, yes.
Click to expand...

What did the courts have to do with it? Doesn't Title II of the Civil Rights act protect people from being discriminated by businesses due to skin color? Wouldn't that be the legislator?
 
danarhea said:
Yes I am, because deprivation of voting rights was done by individuals who had what you call "core beliefs", as well as the government, which makes it extremely germane to this discussion. Or would you rather believe that the Ku Klux Klan was a governmental organization?
Click to expand...

but voting it is an issue specific to government.

health care private employers provide has nothing to do with govenrment functions.
 
ARealConservative said:
but an individual that hires people and does not wish to provide insurance to gay spouses is individual bigotry. we are specifically talking about that tangent, which you possibly missed coming in mid debate?
Click to expand...


So you would support an indvidual offering health insurance to married gay couples yet denying it to married heterosexual couples right?
 
toddwv said:
Why is it always the conservatives who seem to be so obsessed about marrying animals? Personally, I've never felt attracted to livestock...
Click to expand...

Who wants to marry somebody incapable of getting of a decent job, has no assets, will die in 8 to 12 years, and you will have to pick their crap up in a baggy? Hugh Heffner is a better catch than that, and he is disgusting... :vomit:
 
CriticalThought said:
What did the courts have to do with it? Doesn't Title II of the Civil Rights act protect people from being discriminated by businesses due to skin color? Wouldn't that be the legislator?
Click to expand...

the civil rights act would of never been constitutional without the courts incorporating "some' of the bill of rights and applying them to the states.
 
ARealConservative said:
but voting it is an issue specific to government.

health care private employers provide has nothing to do with govenrment functions.
Click to expand...

YOU are the one who brought up the "fact" that it is OK to discriminate, based on core beliefs. I am knocking that pillar down to the ground. Individuals deprived people of their voting rights too, and it was based on their core beliefs.
 
danarhea said:
YOU are the one who brought up the "fact" that it is OK to discriminate, based on core beliefs. I am knocking that pillar down to the ground. Individuals deprived people of their voting rights too, and it was based on their core beliefs.
Click to expand...

ok is subjective. you aren't knocking **** down to the ground.
 
ARealConservative said:
ok is subjective. you aren't knocking **** down to the ground.
Click to expand...

Not subjective at all, but is a matter of law. You are not allowed to deny blacks the right to vote, nor are you allowed to decide that you don't have to sell a home to a black, gay, or anybody else you don't happen to like.
 
winston53660 said:
So you would also support an individual offering health insurance to white couples but not black couples as well right?
Click to expand...

yes.

I would also support a person that would only work for a black person - a right that is still preserved today. I see no need to make rights based on where you fit on the employment ladder. Perhaps this was something needed before my time (I have my doubts), but it is unnecessary government power today.
 
danarhea said:
Not subjective at all, but is a matter of law. You are not allowed to deny blacks the right to vote, nor are you allowed to decide that you don't have to sell a home to a black, gay, or anybody else you don't happen to like.
Click to expand...

yawn.............
 
ARealConservative said:
yes.

I would also support a person that would only work for a black person - a right that is still preserved today. I see no need to make rights based on where you fit on the employment ladder. Perhaps this was something needed before my time (I have my doubts), but it is unnecessary government power today.
Click to expand...


It doesn't matter where one is placed on the ladder an executive VP can be denied healthcare insurance based purely on his / her race, sexual orientation, what ever just like a janitor can be denied equal healthcare to his counter parts because of race, sexual orientation, gender, whatever.
 
ARealConservative said:
black voting is a straw man - it has no bearing on individual discrimination, it is a government function.
Click to expand...

But an employer cannot discriminate against a black person in employment.
 
Redress said:
But an employer cannot discriminate against a black person in employment.
Click to expand...

also, the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

your turn to state something obvious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom