Protesting against Freedom - Rally against Gay marriage.............

[HFWR]

Oh, Wil-l-l-l-bur....

 

[bpp]

By the way,

(not counting straights wearing sweaters over their shoulders--what's up with that?)

They're called "Preppies." Is it 1981 where you live, by any chance?

Bpp

 

[haha]

given that gays make up maybe 10% of population

Could you give the source documentation of this assertion?

Ha

 

[mickj]

Could you give the source documentation of this assertion?

Ha

3-5% ......

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=478685

 

[sgeeeee]

And what is the percentage of gay horses?

 

[justin]

That seems to me a rather fine distinction. I am assuming that you equate "the state" with the legislature? Who, theoretically, represent the will of the people, right?

That is correct. "The State", to me, includes the legislature, the executives, the judiciary, state agencies, legislation, administrative rules, executive orders, and agents of the state. These are all elements that give the state form and function. The constitution is what brings about the existence of the state. It is a set of rules the state must abide by. Although the constitution governs and establishes the state, I wouldn't say it "is" the state.

 

[Sheryl]

You know, I've enjoyed this thread, but I'm surprised that a board with the average age being significantly over 19 years of age doesn't have anyone willing to take an opposing view on this issue.  I wonder if those who want a ban on gay marraige are just keeping quiet, perceiving they are in the minority view.   

I was curious about this too. Given the divisiveness of the subject I imagine anyone who does hold the opposing view is just not jumping in. It makes me wonder about whether this is a true 50-50 type issue or whether there is really only a very small but very vocal percentage of the population opposed.

The only "rational" basis I can think of is a religious one.

 

[setab]

.

The only "rational" basis I can think of is a religious one.

I agree. That may be why people aren't jumping in. This isn't the best forum for a thoughtful discussion of religious beliefs.

setab

 

[justin]

Non-religious morals, values and beliefs could also cause one to be against gay marriage. A belief in the sanctity of marriage as between one man and one woman. A belief that raising kids in a heterosexual lifestyle or family environment is "better" than a homosexual lifestyle or family environment (kids will behave better, be smarter, more athletic, etc). A belief in old fashioned family values. The slippery slope argument - what's next, marriage between two men and a woman? Where do we draw the line and why? What if two hetero guys marry out of convenience (but don't really love each other) just to get health insurance or save money on taxes?

Some of those rationales are defensible, some border on absurd, and others are logically flawed.

On a different note, I saw this phenomenon of only a single side of an issue being presented elsewhere during my ultraliberal constitutional law class at my ultraliberal law school. Anyone with an outspoken conservative viewpoint was demonized and ostracized by fellow students and faculty. It got to the point where no one would ever say anything bordering on conservative, even though we knew that a number of people held those conservative views. Who wants a label like "racist bigot homophobic sexist pig" following them around law school for three years and then into the profession? Talk about an oppressive and stifling environment. It isn't too much different on these boards at times.

Welcome to groupthink. What a great thing it is.

 

[Sheryl]

I think this is going to be one of the challenges that the party currently not in power is going to face as they attempt to reclaim power. They need to be inclusive or at least respectful and tolerant of the less-than-wacko conservative viewpoints.

It seems right now we have deteriorated into a polarized, namecalling free-for-all resembling an elementary school playground. You are either a racist bigot homophobic sexist pig wingnut, or a leftist fringe wacko commie tree hugger.

Sigh. I hate politics.

 

[justin]

I learned real quick. Sit down, shut up, face forward and keep your hands to yourself.

 

[HFWR]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

 

[Nords]

It got to the point where no one would ever say anything bordering on conservative, even though we knew that a number of people held those conservative views.  Who wants a label like "racist bigot homophobic sexist pig" following them around law school for three years and then into the profession?  Talk about an oppressive and stifling environment.

Many of Hawaii's Democratic state senators & representatives are actually Republicans who feel that the way to accomplish their goals is to be elected as a member of the majority.  Unless you're the governor, being a Republican dooms a politician to gadfly status.  If the gov wasn't such an exceptional concensus builder, even she would be gridlocked & overridden.

Talk about an oppressive and stifling environment.  It isn't too much different on these boards at times.  

Remember... complainers become moderators!

Sigh.   I hate politics.

I think this board's political discussions are best accomplishedover here.  

Unless kayaks are involved.

 

[sgeeeee]

. . .The only "rational" basis I can think of is a religious one.

While it is possible to start from religious beliefs (or moral values) and rationally reach a conclusion, religious beliefs themselves are not arrived at rationally.  They are a matter of faith.  They are not subject to scientifice scrutiny by those who hold them.  And this is the problem.  

More and more we hear the fundamentalist right cry "foul" because their views are not given the same credence as the views of "the left".  But this is not a "left" versus "right" debate.  This is a debate about scientific reasoning and tolerance versus the faith of one particular religious group.  These people want the world to accept their starting point beliefs and live in accordance with the conclusions they come to from that starting point.

But it's worse than that, because they have no scripture that tells them to pass laws outlawing gay marriage.  This is only their interpretation.  Other religious leaders use the same scripture to reach different conclusions.  So these people want us to start with an assumption that we cannot question (their religion), believe that their understanding of that religion is the only viable one, and allow them to dictate the lives of everyone to conform to those beliefs.  

So they want to ignore scientific data and reason as it relates to their religion, ignore all other religious beliefs, ignore all religious leaders in their own religion who disagree with them, and force all of society to conform to their views.

Don't you dare question their line of reasoning or they will cry "foul".  "You say you are a liberal, but you are narrow minded because you won't acknowledge that my ideas have as much merit as yours."  Go ahead and cry "foul".  I cry "bullshit".  Tolerance and broad minded thinking do not require us to value intolerance and ignorance as equivalent to acceptance and knowledge.  

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Could you give the source documentation of this assertion?

Ha

Theres always a couple of gay guys on "Survivor"...

 

[Martha]

On a different note, I saw this phenomenon of only a single side of an issue being presented elsewhere during my ultraliberal constitutional law class at my ultraliberal law school. Anyone with an outspoken conservative viewpoint was demonized and ostracized by fellow students and faculty. It got to the point where no one would ever say anything bordering on conservative, even though we knew that a number of people held those conservative views. Who wants a label like "racist bigot homophobic sexist pig" following them around law school for three years and then into the profession? Talk about an oppressive and stifling environment. It isn't too much different on these boards at times.

Welcome to groupthink. What a great thing it is.

I went to a small town ultra conservative grade school and high school. Prayers in school. No homework on Wednesdays as it was church night. Worst years of my life. I think I was born a secular humanist.

A kid in my class who was gay killed himself.

 

[shiny]

These people want the world to accept their starting point beliefs and live in accordance with the conclusions they come to from that starting point.

I think I've mentioned before that I grew up in the South with very religious grandparents (and many other family members although my parents weren't necessarily fanatical) and it was a complete paradigm shift for me the day I realized that what they believed was not the actual starting point.

 

[justin]

I went to a small town ultra conservative grade school and high school. Prayers in school. No homework on Wednesdays as it was church night. Worst years of my life. I think I was born a secular humanist.

A kid in my class who was gay killed himself.

A gay guy killed himself at my law school while I was there.

 

[shiny]

A gay guy killed himself at my law school while I was there.

Maybe it wasn't because he was gay, maybe it was because of Professor Byrd. ha

Really, that is the main reason that I can't stand all this anti-gay stuff, anything that makes a person feel so bad about who they are that they want to kill themselves is just anti-human.

 

[Cut-Throat]

The arguments against the civil rights of gays are the same old tired arguments that we heard in the 1950's against the granting of civil rights to blacks.
Some were argued quite eloquently.

Any conservatives around here that think granting civil rights to all races in the United States was a bad idea?

 

[haha]

I agree.  That may be  why people aren't jumping in.  This isn't the best forum for a thoughtful discussion of religious beliefs.

setab

Or often enough, for thoughtful discussion of anything.

Ha

 

[justin]

Any conservatives around here that think granting civil rights to all races in the United States was a bad idea?

Yeah, go ahead and speak up. We'll keep an open mind. Until we lynch you.

 

[Andre1969]

Once upon a time, mixed marriages were looked down on disparagingly. In fact, back when she was in her teens, my Grandma was dating a boy that her father didn't approve of. Even went so far as to get his shotgun and chase the boy down. He was going to put a stop with it. No way was he going to allow his precious baby girl to get herself tangled up with...

a CATHOLIC!!

Times change. I would like to think people evolve. For the better. But they don't always.

 

[REWahoo]

Or often enough, for thoughtful discussion of anything.

That's a thoughtless thing to say.

 

[shiny]

Once upon a time, mixed marriages were looked down on disparagingly. In fact, back when she was in her teens, my Grandma was dating a boy that her father didn't approve of. Even went so far as to get his shotgun and chase the boy down. He was going to put a stop with it. No way was he going to allow his precious baby girl to get herself tangled up with...

a CATHOLIC!!

Times change. I would like to think people evolve. For the better. But they don't always.

We don't even have to go back that far in my family. My grandmother thought I could do better for a husband than a Catholic (of course I'm glad that I had my paradigm shift by then )