• 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!

LGBT Non-Discrimation Vote Passes Senate [W:215]

Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Funny, the right has no problem traveling that road along "slavery and misfortune" (as you put it) when it suits THEIR needs. Sorry, but as long as the right continues to be hypocritical in the regards for protections they shall be applied to LGBT as well. Either get your side of the isle to change or deal with it.

not fair to group ALL the right together, many of them support equal rights and want people protected from bigotry and discrimination

but yes unfortunately "stereo-typically" the view is they are against it

but lastly and most importantly is regardless of how anybody feels they are all just going to have to deal with it because equal rights is winning and discrimination and bigotry is losing. The writing is on the wall, heck this type of bigotry is already illegal in what 22 states? the vast majority of major cities and many cooperation have the plicy in place already.

THis is just the government trying to do its job, protect rights. Its sad people are bother by that.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Why do you keep point out the "right" to me? I am neither right or left. I care not what hypocrisy the right has, the subject here is creating more and more government stupidity and forcing beliefs down others throats. If you wish to discuss the right, the by all means start a thread on them.

But frankly religion and homosexuality are not the same thing. You are comparing apples to oranges, and I care not to purchase either. Religion seeks answers to life. This whole homosexual thing attempts to achieve recognition as normal an aberration of basic human instincts and dysfunction that differs from genetic design.

It doesnt matter what what lean you are, the plain simple fact is that until you can convince the right to give up their protections others will seek them as well.


Your opinion about homosexuality is noted and discarded. Most religion seeks control, hence the "believe in OUR religion or go to hell" mentality Christians and other similar religions share. And religion is a CHOICE. Most homosexuals I know have not chosen to be gay that's who they are.

So as before, don't like it, tough **** deal with it.
 
Last edited:
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

It doesnt matter what what lean you are, the plain simple fact is that until you can convince the right to give up their protections others will seek them as well.


Your opinion about homosexuality is noted and discarded. Most religion seeks control, hence the "believe in OUR religion or go to hell" mentality Christians and other similar religions share. And religion is a CHOICE. Most homosexuals I know have not chosen to be gay that's who they are.

So as before, don't like it, tough **** deal with it.

Try that on the other foot. YOUR opinions about religion and homosexuality are noted and discarded. Don't like it, tough, deal with it because this bill will probably die a quick death in the house, if it even reaches the floor.

Yes, religion is a choice, but for the many who are brought up from birth in this or that religion it is no more a choice than homosexual behavior is.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

1.)Try that on the other foot. YOUR opinions about religion and homosexuality are noted and discarded.
2.) Don't like it, tough, deal with it
3.) because this bill will probably die a quick death in the house, if it even reaches the floor.
4.) Yes, religion is a choice, but for the many who are brought up from birth in this or that religion it is no more a choice than homosexual behavior is.

1.) his opinion isnt denying right though, others want to and his opinion on homosexuality are based on facts, others were not
2.) nothing to deal with because equal rights is winning
3.) this is true but its temporary
4.) factually wrong but if you feel that way awesome perfect argument to protect them both then!!!
 
Last edited:
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Christianity:

"Let your gentleness show in your treatment of all people."

Phillipians 4:5

E.G. discrimination, hate, etc are not gentle

That doesn't mean we AGREE with LGBT, clearly it's a sin (whether you believe in God or not - it's damaging - hence a sin)

Should we start discriminating against adulterers? Soldiers who killed in war? Drunks?

No, of course not. Homosexuality is NOT different than the aforementioned sins.

We "all fall short of the glory of God" and those who 'show mercy will be shown mercy'.

Isn't that better than the false Christianity the 'hate' squad brings? They can't deal with their own sins, so the project outwards!
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Christianity:

"Let your gentleness show in your treatment of all people."

Phillipians 4:5

E.G. discrimination, hate, etc are not gentle

That doesn't mean we AGREE with LGBT, clearly it's a sin (whether you believe in God or not - it's damaging - hence a sin)

Should we start discriminating against adulterers? Soldiers who killed in war? Drunks?

No, of course not. Homosexuality is NOT different than the aforementioned sins.

We "all fall short of the glory of God" and those who 'show mercy will be shown mercy'.

Isn't that better than the false Christianity the 'hate' squad brings? They can't deal with their own sins, so the project outwards!

personal precived sins that are subjective on a national level are all completely meaningless when it comes to protecting rights anyway

But i do agree 100% with your basic premise Christianity/Religion is no a logical reason what so ever to oppose this bill, none.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

1.) his opinion isnt denying right thought, others want to nd his opinion on homosexuality are based on facts, others were not
2.) nothing to deal with because equal rights is winning
3.) this is true but its temporary
4.) factually wrong but if you feel that way awesome perfect argument to protect them both then!!!

Another nonsense reply munging the posts of others and proclaiming your opinions to be fact. C'mon back when you have something significant to contribute.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

personal precived sins that are subjective on a national level are all completely meaningless when it comes to protecting rights anyway

But i do agree 100% with your basic premise Christianity/Religion is no a logical reason what so ever to oppose this bill, none.

Agreed.

We're stuck in this system where God has not revealed himself directly; only to those who have faith in his mediator, so attempting to create objective law in a secular world, which does not perceive truth, is purely a waste of time.

So the conclusion must be: protect the weak, downtrodden, innocent, abused (REGARDLESS of their lifestyle)

"Learn to do good, seek justice, Correct the oppressor,
Defend the rights of the fatherless child,
And plead the cause of the widow."

Isaiah 1:17

Christianity isn't religion really (not the bible - but clearly men have made it that) - it's a ontological argument for reality.
 
Last edited:
NOTE: Don't have a link for this yet. Vote just passed the 50 vote threshold in the Senate. Will post a link as soon as one becomes available.

It is only right that a person's private life is no damn business of the government, nor the business of whoever employs that person.

EDIT: Final vote was 64-32.

EDIT2. Got the link. Article is here.

Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

The republican controlled house won't even bring it to the floor. Sad but true.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Another nonsense reply munging the posts of others and proclaiming your opinions to be fact.
2.)C'mon back when you have something significant to contribute.

translation: you have no argument, we all knew that already

also what OPINIONS did i post? lol please list the OPINIONS i posted and called facts in what you quoted, i bet you dont do it

2.) yes that good avice for you, are you claiming what i said to be wrong? we love for oyu to try and prove it and further show how your post is a failure.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

It doesnt matter what what lean you are, the plain simple fact is that until you can convince the right to give up their protections others will seek them as well.


Your opinion about homosexuality is noted and discarded. Most religion seeks control, hence the "believe in OUR religion or go to hell" mentality Christians and other similar religions share. And religion is a CHOICE. Most homosexuals I know have not chosen to be gay that's who they are.

So as before, don't like it, tough **** deal with it.

I am dealing with it. I am searching out active groups that may be guided to focus their violent intent in a manor that will reduce collateral damage and actually do some good. Sure, their a bunch of dumbasses, but they may at least be guided to be less dumb.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

translation: you have no argument, we all knew that already

also what OPINIONS did i post? lol please list the OPINIONS i posted and called facts in what you quoted, i bet you dont do it

2.) yes that good avice for you, are you claiming what i said to be wrong? we love for oyu to try and prove it and further show how your post is a failure.

Troll somewhere else.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

1.)I disagree with the 'personal perceived sin'.

2.) It's objective law from the creator, not subjective 'opinion'.

3.) (and it makes sense frankly - imagine a pro-homosexual nation: it wouldn't survive a generation, the youth would be corrupted sexually and no family units would develop - See Rome circa 30 BC - 70 AD)

4.) Or even more interesting is Augustus ban on adultery 40 years prior; same story, and these were pagans without objective law (basically the USA of today, no objective law, just opinion) - they perceived that adultery is socially destructive.

5.) (pro-drugs, pro-adultery, pro-war, same story - wouldn't survive a generation - look at the USA! Pro-war stances have almost literally destroyed this once-powerful nation)

But we're stuck in this system where God has not revealed himself directly; only to those who have faith in his mediator, so attempting to create objective law in a secular world, which does not perceive truth, is purely a waste of time.

So the conclusion must be: protect the weak, downtrodden, innocent, abused (REGARDLESS of their lifestyle)

1.) you are free to do so but facts prove you wrong
2.) more of your OPINION but for your argument sake, say its true, that still has nothing to do with american law and equal rights. Its not based on YOUR opinions or religion.
3.) well you just proved how uneducated you are on this subject, currently the argument could be made we are already there, just not legally yet

4.) also meaningless to america and equal rights

5.) you are free to have this opinion but pro-equality and equal rights is winning

6.) weird im a Christian and theres no parts of that that says i should deny equal rights and force my views on others and judge people

7.) good luck with that

oh by the way, nothing changed

fact is personal precived sins that are subjective on a national level are all completely meaningless when it comes to protecting rights anyway
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Troll somewhere else.

BOOM! there you have it, personal failed insults and deflections right on time this is typical of people that cant defend their failed posts.

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC

so sticking to topic, you can or cant point to things i labeled a fact that are not and prove it?

so is religion FACTUALLY like sexuality in the matter of choice? can you back that up with ant facts or no? seems not

let us know when you want to stick to the topic and you have ANYTHING factual that backs up your claims. heck one thing . . one
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

1.) you are free to do so but facts prove you wrong
2.) more of your OPINION but for your argument sake, say its true, that still has nothing to do with american law and equal rights. Its not based on YOUR opinions or religion.
3.) well you just proved how uneducated you are on this subject, currently the argument could be made we are already there, just not legally yet

4.) also meaningless to america and equal rights

5.) you are free to have this opinion but pro-equality and equal rights is winning

6.) weird im a Christian and theres no parts of that that says i should deny equal rights and force my views on others and judge people

7.) good luck with that

oh by the way, nothing changed

fact is personal precived sins that are subjective on a national level are all completely meaningless when it comes to protecting rights anyway

I edited my post, because I realized I went a bit far.

1.) What facts? Are you suggesting that theft isn't universally wrong? E.G. are you suggesting there is no objective morality?

2.) Agreed, actually that was basically the point of my post

3.) Agreed - we'll collapse because of it. Do you know any teenagers? Notice how dead they are to the idea of morality? [where will that lead do you think?]

4.) Agreed - my point being that pre-Christianity, government perceived the negative detriment of making all behavior acceptable (primarily sexual, since it literally can destroy a society)

5.) So you are in fact suggesting that there is no action/reaction positive/negative to behavior? Look at the USA pre-WW1 and post-WW1: war shredded this nation

6.) Yup, that is exactly what I'm arguing.

7.) So you disagree that we should protect the weak regardless of lifestyle? I thought that is what you were arguing?


Sexuality is choice. 100%

I choose not to cheat on my wife. I choose not to have sex with men. I choose not to look at young women. Etc. Etc.

How can you argue otherwise? Are gay people so enslaved by their desire that they can't control it? Is that what you're suggesting?

IMO life is a STRUGGLE between selfish behavior and unselfish behavior. Sex (outside the confines of marriage) is almost universally selfish behavior.

(unwanted babies, abortions, bad parents, rape, non-commitment by one party, emotional abuse, etc)
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

BOOM! there you have it, personal failed insults and deflections right on time this is typical of people that cant defend their failed posts.

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC

so sticking to topic, you can or cant point to things i labeled a fact that are not and prove it?

so is religion FACTUALLY like sexuality in the matter of choice? can you back that up with ant facts or no? seems not

let us know when you want to stick to the topic and you have ANYTHING factual that backs up your claims. heck one thing . . one

Your opinions are not facts nor are your posts any sort of successful (except as trolls) and I'll discuss the topic at hand with those who aren't trolls who fool with the posts of others.
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

I edited my post, because I realized I went a bit far.

1.) What facts? Are you suggesting that theft isn't universally wrong? E.G. are you suggesting there is no objective morality?

2.) Agreed, actually that was basically the point of my post

3.) Agreed - we'll collapse because of it.
3a.) Do you know any teenagers? Notice how dead they are to the idea of morality?
3b.) where will that lead do you think?]

4.) Agreed - my point being that pre-Christianity, government perceived the negative detriment of making all behavior acceptable (primarily sexual, since it literally can destroy a society)

5.) So you are in fact suggesting that there is no action/reaction positive/negative to behavior? Look at the USA pre-WW1 and post-WW1: war shredded this nation

6.) Yup, that is exactly what I'm arguing.

7.) So you disagree that we should protect the weak regardless of lifestyle? I thought that is what you were arguing?


8.) Sexuality is choice. 100%

9.) I choose not to cheat on my wife.
10.) I choose not to have sex with men.
11.)I choose not to look at young women. Etc. Etc.

12.)How can you argue otherwise?

13.) Are gay people so enslaved by their desire that they can't control it? Is that what you're suggesting?

14.) IMO life is a STRUGGLE between selfish behavior and unselfish behavior.

15.) Sex (outside the confines of marriage) is almost universally selfish behavior.

(unwanted babies, abortions, bad parents, rape, non-commitment by one party, emotional abuse, etc)

1.) yes that is a fact, theres not. if you disagree please list them and i will prove them wrong with examples.
2.) good
3.) nope just a meaningless baseless opinion that hsa ZERO factual support. there will be no collapse
3A.) yes i have one and i work at the school district and coach. No they are not like that at all in fact the majority of them are better than when i was young as far as not judging old people, handicapped, homosexuals, races, genders etc
3B more equal rights and less discrimination and bigotry
4.) more opinion, but discrimination and not having equal rights sure can
5.) nope i didnt suggest that at all and more of your unsupportable opinion
6.) what that your religion is meaningless to equal rights or that you think your religion should rule others
7.) didnt say that either, you like to make stuff up a lot. im saying theres nothing that says they are factually weak

8.) uhm what does "sexuality" have to do with sexual orientation? thats right nothing
yes you are definitely not educated on this topic

9.) yes true
10.) yes true which has absolutely nothing to do with attraction and sexual orientation
11.) see 10#

12.) i didnt in fact nobody educate on thsi topic would ever make it because what you are sayign has nothing to do with sexual orentation, sorry but you are greatly confused.

a person can choose not to have sex that doesnt change their orientation one bit

13.) "desries" no and no nobody woudld suggest that but what NONE OF US can control is sexual orientation, it has a specific target or range and thats that

14.) nothing wrong with that opinion

15.) another opinion based on ZERO facts

it seems you would do much better if you actually knew anything about the facts of sexual orientation, come back when you do it will work out better. Good luck!
 
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

1.)Your opinions are not facts
2.) nor are your posts any sort of successful (except as trolls)
3.) I'll discuss the topic at hand with those who aren't trolls who fool with the posts of others.

1.) yes i agree, now can you point out an opinion i called fact and prove it wrong or no?
2.) they are completely successful at proving your failed posts wrong, hence your inability to be civil, stay on topic and not post failed insults
3.) if they are educated on this topic they will point out your factaul mistakes too

again PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC and let us know when you can back up the lies you posted and when you can explain how religion is factually like sexual orientation as far as facts are concerned We LOVE to read it. just ONE fact that backs up up . . .ONE
 
Last edited:
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Yes, religion is a choice, but for the many who are brought up from birth in this or that religion it is no more a choice than homosexual behavior is.

Raised methodist and dragged to church on a regular basis, now atheist. Still gay however.

Any more horrible analogies you wish to put forth?
 
Last edited:
As I pointed out several days ago on this topic... This has been going on since the appointment of the first Speaker.
How many amendments to the ACA were brought to the floor when the Dems were in power? Sad but true.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-mainstream-media/177520-lgbt-non-discrimation-vote-passes-senate-w-215-a-4.html#post1062518437

You don't see the difference between voting on countless amendments to a bill, none of which would pass, and allowing a vote on a bill the senate already did pass?

In the Hawaii marriage case, one devil in a red dress proposed 20 amendments. None passed. She just wasted hours of everyone's time.
 
You don't see the difference between voting on countless amendments to a bill, none of which would pass, and allowing a vote on a bill the senate already did pass?

In the Hawaii marriage case, one devil in a red dress proposed 20 amendments. None passed. She just wasted hours of everyone's time.

In the case of the ACA, some had merit, some did not. But that was just the example of one bill. How many other bills died without ever seeing the light of day?

Don't like my example of the ACA, fine. Look up HR 554 that would have amended Rules of the House of Representatives to require that legislation be available on the Internet for 72 hours before consideration by the House, allowing the members and the public to actually read it before it was voted on. It had a ton of bipartisan support, but the Speaker chose not to bring it to a vote. A bill that I strongly supported, but the Speaker had a different opinion. She was the Speaker, she won...

The Speaker has to weigh the merits of a zillion bills that come to his or her desk. That is where the lobbyists come in......... But that is a different topic...This one is just a bit more high profile than the others, and it effects you directly, so you know about it. But, please don't act like this Speaker is the only one that does it.
 
In the case of the ACA, some had merit, some did not. But that was just the example of one bill. How many other bills died without ever seeing the light of day?

Don't like my example of the ACA, fine. Look up HR 554 that would have amended Rules of the House of Representatives to require that legislation be available on the Internet for 72 hours before consideration by the House, allowing the members and the public to actually read it before it was voted on. It had a ton of bipartisan support, but the Speaker chose not to bring it to a vote. A bill that I strongly supported, but the Speaker had a different opinion. She was the Speaker, she won...

The Speaker has to weigh the merits of a zillion bills that come to his or her desk. That is where the lobbyists come in......... But that is a different topic...This one is just a bit more high profile than the others, and it effects you directly, so you know about it. But, please don't act like this Speaker is the only one that does it.

I'm not acting like he's the only one to ever use these powers, but seeing as he's the only thing standing between a vote on a nondiscrimination law, i'm certainly going to condemn him for it just the same.

The ACA amendments are just awful analogy, sorry.
 
Last edited:
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Raised methodist and dragged to church on a regular basis, now atheist. Still gay however.

Any more horrible analogies you wish to put forth?

Yes, and a person raised in that environment is most likely to be, shocker - a methodist. Just as many gays are likely to stay in the closet their entire lifetime. I am not making this an absolute as you seem to. I'll reiterate - many who are brought up from birth in this or that religion it is no more a choice than homosexual behavior is.

I'll go further to say, belief in God and adherence to a religion is as deeply influenced by how one is raised as the choice one makes to engage in homosexual behavior is influenced by genetics.

Still not answered is the objection to this amendment because it requires hiring and continued employment of pedophiles in all sectors of American life. With this amendment in force it would be illegal to fire a professed pedophile who works as an elementary school teacher.
 
Last edited:
Re: Senate passes LGBT anti-discrimination bill

Yes, and a person raised in that environment is most likely to be, shocker - a methodist. Just as many gays are likely to stay in the closet their entire lifetime. I am not making this an absolute as you seem to. I'll reiterate - many who are brought up from birth in this or that religion it is no more a choice than homosexual behavior is.

I'll go further to say, belief in God and adherence to a religion is as deeply influenced by how one is raised as the choice one makes to engage in homosexual behavior is influenced by genetics.

People brought up on a religion are capable of researching various alternative belief systems and settling on whatever they prefer. The fact many do not only tells us they choose not to. If you're talking of this bill and allowing someone to be fired for their sexuality, that's just not the same. Staying in the closet and staying a virgin for one's whole life is a sure path to misery. It's not a reasonable demand.

For that matter, i'm not pushing for religion to be removed from ENDA the way others demand that sexuality is not protected. I don't care to see someone fired for being methodist or jewish or whatever. I'm just saying it's BS that one is protected and the other is not.
 
Back
Top Bottom