Bush wants to ban gay marriage again

[Edric O]

And lastly.... who says you cant legislate morality?  Some states say prostitution is illegal.  Some say its legal.  Some states say porn stores and strip clubs are illegal.  Some say its ok to have them on every block.  Every town community has decency laws or "morality laws" based on ordinances passed by Township committees... Some say you get fined for not cutting the grass in your front yard.... others dont care.  Basically these laws dictate what can and cannot happen in that area, including moral issues listed above.  So why doesnt anyone moan about these?  Why do people conveniently ignored that morality is legislated all over the Freaking  U.S., and that banning gay marriage is just an offshoot of that?  Why do people freak out about the gay thing only?

I would go further: Every law has a moral component. The whole reason we have laws in the first place is to stop people from doing things we believe to be wrong. The question is not whether or not morality should be legislated. If we have any laws at all, we are legislating morality. The question is what kind of morality should be legislated.

In our case, that question becomes, "are long-term homosexual relationships moral? Why or why not?"

Also, if this amendment proposal passes, it will be the first article in the constitution that tells individuals what they can't do, instead of telling the government what they can't do. The only other such endevour I can recall is the prohibition amendment that some baptist nuts keep on proposing every once in a while, and gets shot down every time they try.

Sorry, but I have to correct you on that one. Marriage, in legal terms, is not something that two people do on their own. It is a government-given sanction of a relationship. A marriage license is something that the government gives you. Thus, the Federal Marriage Amendment would still tell the government what it can't do: It can't issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Many of the things we take for granted as "natural" are in fact only made possible by the existence of laws, which are in turn enforced by the government.

[Aylene]

It seems to be a question of sex discrimination to me.

Formulating the question like this,

"Can the government grant Miss X a license to marry Mr Y, yet withhold the same license from Mr Z, for the sole reason that Mr Z is male and Miss X is female?"

what do you think the answer should be?

[GUNWOUNDS]

I would go further: Every law has a moral component. The whole reason we have laws in the first place is to stop people from doing things we believe to be wrong. The question is not whether or not morality should be legislated. If we have any laws at all, we are legislating morality. The question is what kind of morality should be legislated.

In our case, that question becomes, "are long-term homosexual relationships moral? Why or why not?"

Sorry, but I have to correct you on that one. Marriage, in legal terms, is not something that two people do on their own. It is a government-given sanction of a relationship. A marriage license is something that the government gives you. Thus, the Federal Marriage Amendment would still tell the government what it can't do: It can't issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Many of the things we take for granted as "natural" are in fact only made possible by the existence of laws, which are in turn enforced by the government.

I agree on both points.  You're correct that the real question is whether long-term homosexual relatioships are moral.

And i also agree that the amendment is telling the government what it can and cannot do.  Nice observation.

Aylene your question is too awkward.  Its not discrimination on sexism.... its discrimination on sexual preference.

Dante said:

You seem to be missing the point. Homosexuals want the same rights as everyone else, and are being denied these rights due to their sexuality. It is society that creates the double standard, not us. Not 'special rights because we're gay' but 'equal rights because we're human.' As you said.

Response:  Regardless of society, hoimosexuals are still asking for the rights BASED on their sexuality.  And they want to change certain governemnt institutions.  The government wants to give people marriage licenses  so that they can clearly identify what is a family that will have children.  The children are a financial drain and therefore a married couple can be given a tax break that is deserved.  Why do two dude kissing need a tax break?  Pure exploitation.  MIght as well lobby to marry a toaster... hell just give out the benefits to anyone... forget the laws.  Give my dog a tax break too.

---------------------------------

Dante Said:

That point [in a previous post] has already been dealt with.

Response: yes but it has been forgotten too much throughout this thread and its the most important point.

--------------------------------------------------

Dante Said:

Firstly because it causes ill feelings, harm, etc. Secondly because it is not fair. Thirdly because it shouldn't be a moral issue at all. Fourthly, the USA is not the only country in the world.

Response:  Irrelevant... all countries have the same concept of laws regarding decency and community conduct.

------------------------------------------

Dante said:

Parents are dogmatic. Schools have a responsibility to be democratic and, though I know this phrase will come back to bite me, correct.

Response:  False... school's have only one obligation and that is to teach children the basic courses which are to be expounded upon in college.  Schools are not a talk show or a psychology experiment, or a democracy.  Basic tenets of knowledge are taught in schools, science, math, ABC's, etc.  Children still in a stage of sexual maturation and development do NOT need a school teacher or their peers giving them subjective info as the gospel truth.

---------------------------------------------------

Dante said:

The sun goes round the earth and evolution is a tool of the devil. Very scientific.

Also, even Buddhists? Find some proof of that, if you would.

Finally, the whole adoption of children thing is an entirely different can of worms that I would prefer to avoid, if possible.

Response:  The bible never said that the sun goes round the earth.  However it does say that the earth is a round spherical body that sits in space and rotates on its axis.  There is a post on fed2k where i posted the scripture before.  Its not the first time.  Secondly, evolution was never mentioned in the bible and natural selection is well accepted by christians... just not macro-evolution of additional parts which could possibly have irreducible complexity.

Yes the buddhists speak of gays negatively as well... want proof? 

------Comments by the Dalai Lama:

The Dalai Lama is the leader of the Tibetan people and is revered by millions of Buddhists worldwide. At a press conference in 1997-JUN, he commented: "From a Buddhist point of view [lesbian and gay sex]...is generally considered sexual misconduct". In his book "Beyond Dogma," he has written that "homosexuality, whether it is between men or between women, is not improper in itself. What is improper is the use of organs already defined as inappropriate for sexual contact." Buddhism prohibits oral, manual and anal sex for everyone - both homosexuals and heterosexuals. An article in Newsweek states that "Although he has affirmed the dignity and rights of gays and lesbians, he has condemned homosexual acts as contrary to Buddhist ethics."

------Many women, gays and lesbians have been attracted to Buddhism because of its relative lack of misogyny and homophobia, when compared to some other religions. But others report "virulently anti-gay sentiments and teachings from religious teachers in Tibetan and other Buddhist" schools.

-------According to Thai Buddhist beliefs, everyone is reincarnated, so gays and lesbians must have done something very bad in a previous life to be so punished

Guns

[Anathema]

5800 posts!

Many buddhists don't recognize the Dalai Lama anyway as the equivalent of the pope in buddhism. My knowledge of buddhisms history isn't up to scratch, but after it started in India and spreaded over all of Asia the Tibettans developed their own variant with the Dalai Lama as both the spiritual and secular leader.

I rather like some buddhist ideas, but I have no illusions about the Dalai Lama. People rightly point out that the Chinese occupation of Tibet is a breech of sovereignty and that they don't exactly promote human rights, but these people ought to do a little more research on how Tibet was before that. At that time Tibet was a despotic theocracy wich employed medieval scare methods for keeping the peasantry in line.

However it does say that the earth is a round spherical body that sits in space and rotates on its axis. 

I do vaguely recall a scripture describing the Earth a as a circle -not as a sphere- but that's about it. That the Earth was spherical was known for quite a long time and never denied by the Roman church, but we have the Greeks to to thank for that knowledge. But even then the Greeks, the Romans and the church believed that the sun revolved around the Earth- rotation of the Earth didn't fit into it.

Now on gay marriage, if you're argument is that the legal status is only handed out by the government because it encourages people to marry and thus get children, remember that lots of married couples don't get children at all. Some don't want to (or don't want to at the time) and some are too old to have children. If encouraging population growth is the rationale, surely it would make much more sense to just increase child welfare payment for the first 3 or 4 kids?

Bush' involvement in the matter reeks of a PR stunt for the reasons I already mentioned, and of one that I haven't mentioned.

Being part of the executive branch, the POTUS has nothing to do with constitutional amendmends. Proposed amendments must pass in both houses with 2/3 majorities, and then be approved by 3/4 of the states' legislative branches. The president doesn't even have to sign it. So why does he use so much of his time promoting this, while he should be occupying himself with more usefull stuff (Iran, terrorism, the Mexican border)? I think we both know the answer.

[Andrew]

Also, on the note of Religion being forced upon students...

Jewish family flees Delaware school district's aggressive Christianity

I think these religious extremists make Christians look bad, just like Islamic terrorists make Muslims look bad.

Looks like Delaware taxpayers are going to have to pay for the lawsuit.

[Dante]

Aylene your question is too awkward.  Its not discrimination on sexism.... its discrimination on sexual preference.

In other words you don't have an answer?

Response: Regardless of society, hoimosexuals are still asking for the rights BASED on their sexuality. And they want to change certain governemnt institutions. The government wants to give people marriage licenses  so that they can clearly identify what is a family that will have children. The children are a financial drain and therefore a married couple can be given a tax break that is deserved. Why do two dude kissing need a tax break? Pure exploitation. MIght as well lobby to marry a toaster... hell just give out the benefits to anyone... forget the laws.  Give my dog a tax break too.

Firstly, tax breaks are only a part of the issue. Legal rights also play a part. Secondly, childless heterosexual couples get these breaks as well as those with children. Children are therefore a non-issue.

Response:  Irrelevant... all countries have the same concept of laws regarding decency and community conduct.

Incorrect. Some countries still stone their offenders to death. Some countries outlaw chewing gum or bare legs on women. Some countries get their decency laws from weird old books, while others prefer weird old people. Some countries still practice the death penalty...

Response: False... school's have only one obligation and that is to teach children the basic courses which are to be expounded upon in college.  Schools are not a talk show or a psychology experiment, or a democracy.  Basic tenets of knowledge are taught in schools, science, math, ABC's, etc.  Children still in a stage of sexual maturation and development do NOT need a school teacher or their peers giving them subjective info as the gospel truth.

Incorrect, schools have responsibilities. To open minds, to teach children to form their own opinions rather than listen to those of others. To give them knowledge that they will require later, and not to withold infomation or resources that they might need. Education means much more than memorisation.

Response:  The bible never said that the sun goes round the earth.  However it does say that the earth is a round spherical body that sits in space and rotates on its axis.  There is a post on fed2k where i posted the scripture before.  Its not the first time.  Secondly, evolution was never mentioned in the bible and natural selection is well accepted by christians... just not macro-evolution of additional parts which could possibly have irreducible complexity.

I neither know nor care exactly what words the bible uses. It was used, along with Aristotle, to squash Galileo. And any group of people that persists in creation of such ridiculous words as 'evilution' in order to justify themselves to each other clearly have opinions on evolution that are worth less than the full stop at the end of this extraordinarily convoluted sentance.

-------According to Thai Buddhist beliefs, everyone is reincarnated, so gays and lesbians must have done something very bad in a previous life to be so punished

Tell me, did that one come from a similar source or did you make it up yourself?

Frankly, I don't care what buddhism says about homosexuality. It was just curiosity that prompted the question. As far as I'm concerned, religion as a whole is a bad thing. Buddhism included, though it is by far the least of a great many bad things.

Besides which, they can condemn all they like (and those phrases were far from vitriolic comdemnation). So long as they don't start with the preaching then I'm quite happy to live and let live.

Also, aren't we done here yet? This topic got old a long time ago.

[nemafakei]

Just one point that stuck out like a sore thumb... "Children still in a stage of sexual maturation and development do NOT need a school teacher or their peers giving them subjective info as the gospel truth"

It's a huge problem in schools that subjective - even flat out incorrect - information is given out by schools and teachers as gospel truth. As to democracy, I'd say perhaps - in the sense that there are open debates on information and the school should not be partial (which is in fact about the same thing as what you're saying). In some areas (grammar and arithmetic, for example) rote-learning (akin to teaching as absolute truth) is a necessary and useful part of education - but in humanities and especially social situations, I'd argue that you do need to demonstrate that subjective questions like this *are* subjective, and that all points of view should be considered and respected.

[Purge]

Damn, and here I thought the type of people that would be able to comprehend and enjoy Dune might be a little less prone to bigotry.

[Andrew]

Oh look! Christians want to protest at a US soldiers funeral because they think God killed him because God is angry that Americans are tolerating homosexuality!

(the soldier isn't a homosexual)

Ok, so really, who wants to be associated with this kind of religion? Really now... They are too busy protesting and telling others what they think God thinks, than studying the bible and what Jesus taught the apostles and others. Are they trying to convert people at the funeral to their religion? Or make homosexuals that may be at the funeral to somehow repent and magically become heterosexuals, or to make people at the funeral somehow direct their anger from the soldeirs death to homosexuals, instead of Bush?

Now I think that the law preventing people to protest near a funeral is wrong (kills free speech). People should go protest at the protesters church and tell them to STFU.

[GUNWOUNDS]

Stuff like that has to be a publicity stunt, becuz Americans obviously dont tolerate homosexuality. (Georgia and New York just banned Gay marriage and most other states support this mode of thought).  Just another publicity stunt like the "God Hates Fags" type protests, we all know that God doesnt hate individuals.  All for publicity so that people like Andrew will go "OMG Look at dis!111"  ;)

Guns

[Andrew]

Publicity eh?

Seems they are changing Christian camps to try and bring in more kids.

It's all about marketing :)

Vacation Bible schools get creative to draw in children

It's funny, I was never taught in catechism class or church that homos are evil and will go to hell (and if you tolerate homos you will die and go to hell). Must be a regional thing where there is plenty of kool-aid.

[Lord J]

You know, what you've described sounds very much like fear to me. Easily misinterpreted, but still. Fear is non judgemental and irrational, as was your reaction. Immediate feeling of revulsion, yes. People who are afraid of, say, snakes or spiders will instantly recoil from them, labelling them as disgusting when they aren't, really. So uncomfortable were you with the situation (nervousness of repetition, being in close contact with the person in question?) that you left. It is a common reaction when faced with something frightening to run away. Now granted I may be reading into this too much, and after all you should know your own reactions better than anyone, but people do sometimes remember things slightly differently, glossing over things that they don't like (and who would like feeling fear, let alone admitting to it?). It's not odd at all that a gay male friend should not arouse the same reaction, because a gay man would be no 'threat,' unlike a gay woman.

Gut reaction? It may well be. But I'd be more inclined to label deeply subconscious fear, manifesting as revulsion, than revulsion itself. But as you implied yourself, a mature mind is more than capable of overruling these irrationalities.

Actually, modern psychology shows that many times a response (including emotional responses, such as disgust, fear or hate) precedes any justification or reasoning.  Given the break with religious dogma that Chatfsh mentioned, it sounds likely to me that she was conditioned to fear homosexuality while pursuing the religion she was involved in, and when she broke from the religion she carried some "hangers-on" which made it likely that she would react a certain way (disgust/fear) to a certain stimulus (homosexual interest).

Another point considering these "tea rooms":  There are sex clubs in a number of large cities where straight people engage in all kinds of sex acts.  This is in no way unique to homosexuals alone.

AIDS is from Africa, and is growing currently predominately in the Black community.  Especially here in the Mississippi Delta.  That is due to a mixture of illicit drug use and prostitution/promiscuous straight sex.

Anyway, as someone who is straight but is closely associated with a number of homosexuals (both male and female) I think that it is only obvious that gay people deserve the same representation and rights as straight people.

[Andrew]

Clergy from across Prince Edward Island are holding a special church service this Sunday that invites the gay and lesbian community to join with other parishioners.

This is the type of church activities I like to see. Guess Canada is more ok with gay people than other places. Our churches arn't discriminating or harassing or restricting rights of gay people. Good for PEI (no wonder I never heard of homophobic religious bashing here).

[Andrew]

Researchers investigating reports of gay men who willingly contract AIDS just for kicks

Interesting. People want to contract AIDS. I say let them. Less stupid people in the world once they die from it (or the cold whatever). But then AIDS survivors are starting to live for 10+ years, so I guess it isnt working as good as it should be. I think we need suicide booths like in Futurama for these types of people.

[TMA_1]

Must be a regional thing where there is plenty of kool-aid

hmmmm... so many things to attack, and you just had to attack kool-aid. Its one of my favorite drinks, take it back.

pretty pathetic eh? lol its true, I love cherry and lemon-lime kool-aid. But dont any of you love the cheapness and tastiness of the stuff?

okay Ill shut up. dont want to taint the topic at hand.

[Acriku]

Must be a regional thing where there is plenty of kool-aid

hmmmm... so many things to attack, and you just had to attack kool-aid. Its one of my favorite drinks, take it back.

pretty pathetic eh? lol its true, I love cherry and lemon-lime kool-aid. But dont any of you love the cheapness and tastiness of the stuff?

okay Ill shut up. dont want to taint the topic at hand.

Some might say you have something to lose if Pres. Bush bans gay marriage... ;-)

[Acriku]

Washington's community of gay Republicans includes at least one member of Congress, more than a dozen high-ranking congressional aides, current and former White House staffers, advisers to the Pentagon, press strategists for prominent conservatives, several well-known journalists, and a legion of influential lobbyists.

Interesting piece of information... from http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/1006nj2.htm

Also:

Openly gay D.C. activist and fund raiser Michael Rogers, runs blogactive.com, actively seeks to expose closeted gay Republicans who vote against gay civil rights. His work has has included exposing two high level officials with the RNC, Jay Banning, the RNC