Why I support Marriage Equality

[actsnoblemartin]

I believe gays and lesbians should be treated the same as heterosexuals. I believe that anything less then marriage is treating gays and lesbians as seperate but equal. I believe gays and lesbians should enjoy every benefit over 1,000 legal benefits and protections that straight people get when they get married.

I dont believe in half equality, or 75% eqaulity, I believe in full 100% equality for gays in the workplace, in marriage, hate crimes protection and others

[crin63]

I believe gays and lesbians should be treated the same as heterosexuals. I believe that anything less then marriage is treating gays and lesbians as seperate but equal. I believe gays and lesbians should enjoy every benefit over 1,000 legal benefits and protections that straight people get when they get married.

I dont believe in half equality, or 75% eqaulity, I believe in full 100% equality for gays in the workplace, in marriage, hate crimes protection and others

Hey Martin, In order for there to be hates crimes against them they have to be branded as a special class of people and that would seem to defeat what you are trying to accomplish. Hate crime legislation is all about silencing opposition, not about protecting anyone and it violates freedom of speech.

[PostmodernProphet]

I believe gays and lesbians should be treated the same as heterosexuals. I believe that anything less then marriage is treating gays and lesbians as seperate but equal. I believe gays and lesbians should enjoy every benefit over 1,000 legal benefits and protections that straight people get when they get married.

I dont believe in half equality, or 75% eqaulity, I believe in full 100% equality for gays in the workplace, in marriage, hate crimes protection and others

you started this thread once before.....I recall, because I responded that gays already have more than 100% equality in the workplace and hate crimes, since heterosexuals are not a protected class.....I am curious though, where you got the "over 1000 legal benefits" of marriage idea?......

[jimnyc]

I believe gays and lesbians should be treated the same as heterosexuals. I believe that anything less then marriage is treating gays and lesbians as seperate but equal. I believe gays and lesbians should enjoy every benefit over 1,000 legal benefits and protections that straight people get when they get married.

I dont believe in half equality, or 75% eqaulity, I believe in full 100% equality for gays in the workplace, in marriage, hate crimes protection and others

They SHOULD be separate but equal. Let me ask you a question, Martin. Do you think the world should bend over backwards to acknowledge and accept your Asperger's syndrome? And I'm not mocking you... I have Bi-Polar, do you think I should receive special treatment or acknowledgment simply because I have an abnormality?

And don't anyone give me this crap about how being queer isn't a disease or how the AMA stated as much - being a homo IS an abnormality and should be treated as such. No special accommodations, no special law changes...

Queers first demanded equal protections and rights via civil unions, but then they decided they would also demand the right to the term "marriage". Give them their damned civil unions and them tell them to STFU is what I say.

[Kathianne]

I have to agree with Jimnyc. As has been pointed out, Martin managed to say 'equal' and 'hate crimes' referring to the same 'group.' Of course if it were an 'equal' set, there would be no expectation of special punishment when a victim of a crime. The fact that he assumes the group is deserving of special protections, means they are not of the 'whole' in some special way.

[Mr. P]

Hey Martin, In order for there to be hates crimes against them they have to be branded as a special class of people and that would seem to defeat what you are trying to accomplish. Hate crime legislation is all about silencing opposition, not about protecting anyone and it violates freedom of speech.

:thumb:


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to crin63 again.

[creativeage]

I have to agree with Jimnyc. As has been pointed out, Martin managed to say 'equal' and 'hate crimes' referring to the same 'group.' Of course if it were an 'equal' set, there would be no expectation of special punishment when a victim of a crime. The fact that he assumes the group is deserving of special protections, means they are not of the 'whole' in some special way.

Wow! This was a very enlightening point. I couldn't pinpoint why I was so torn on the issue, but now I know: it's a "I want my cake and eat is too philosophy" that has bothered me. So, in essence, to be recognized as "equal" means just that. I rarely see a willingness to compromise from gay rights groups...maybe that is what is causing the continued controversy?

[darin]

:thumb:

Took care of it for ya! :)

[avatar4321]

I support marriage equality too. Thing is, we've always had it. Gays have always been allowed to marry whomever they choose.

They dont on the other hand, have a right to Redefine the institution of marriage simply to be accept. Marriage is what it is. And anyone can marry anyone of the opposite sex. All are equal.

[actsnoblemartin]

Hate crimes against gays, or if you want to classify it differently... attacks on gays motivated by hate of the gay or lesbian individual I believe and also I believe studies would back this up, are far higher then attacks against heterosexuals based on their sexuality, therefore, gays do need special protections in my humble 2 cents opinion mr crin, my dear friend :)

but I am all ears, how is hate crime legislation about silencing free speech?


Hey Martin, In order for there to be hates crimes against them they have to be branded as a special class of people and that would seem to defeat what you are trying to accomplish. Hate crime legislation is all about silencing opposition, not about protecting anyone and it violates freedom of speech.

[actsnoblemartin]

youre right, darnit. i did make a similar thread a while ago.

my understanding is that the enda, employee non discrimination act does not have protections for transgender, sexual orientation and sexual indentity, leaving the l.g.b.t. community vulnerable

and the second point my friend, is that marriage has over 1100 federal benefits, and domestic partnerships dont.


you started this thread once before.....I recall, because I responded that gays already have more than 100% equality in the workplace and hate crimes, since heterosexuals are not a protected class.....I am curious though, where you got the "over 1000 legal benefits" of marriage idea?......

[Kathianne]

youre right, darnit. i did make a similar thread a while ago.

my understanding is that the enda, employee non discrimination act does not have protections for transgender, sexual orientation and sexual indentity, leaving the l.g.b.t. community vulnerable

and the second point my friend, is that marriage has over 1100 federal benefits, and domestic partnerships dont.

got a link for the bolded, Martin? :thumb:

[actsnoblemartin]

First of all, let me just say I found what you wrote thought provoking/brilliant.

No, I dont think the world should have to bend over backwards to acknowledge or accept my aspburgers, though the more understanding of mental illness people have , the better in my humble opinion.

I respect what you have to say, and thought you did a good job saying it


They SHOULD be separate but equal. Let me ask you a question, Martin. Do you think the world should bend over backwards to acknowledge and accept your Asperger's syndrome? And I'm not mocking you... I have Bi-Polar, do you think I should receive special treatment or acknowledgment simply because I have an abnormality?

And don't anyone give me this crap about how being queer isn't a disease or how the AMA stated as much - being a homo IS an abnormality and should be treated as such. No special accommodations, no special law changes...

Queers first demanded equal protections and rights via civil unions, but then they decided they would also demand the right to the term "marriage". Give them their damned civil unions and them tell them to STFU is what I say.

[actsnoblemartin]

got a link for the bolded, Martin? :thumb:

yes my dear ms k :)

html format

http://74.6.146.127/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=1138+federal+benefits+of+marriage&fr=yfp-t-501-s&u=www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf&w=1138+federal+feeding+benefits+marriage&d=ULInnRlMSz4K&icp=1&.intl=us

pdf format

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf

[Kathianne]

yes my dear ms k :)

html format

http://74.6.146.127/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=1138+federal+benefits+of+marriage&fr=yfp-t-501-s&u=www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf&w=1138+federal+feeding+benefits+marriage&d=ULInnRlMSz4K&icp=1&.intl=us

pdf format

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf

Martin, thanks for the link. However you will note they didn't bother to list anything. Think Gene McCarthy waiving his paper, claiming a list of communists working in government. Never did get 'those' names either.

Please consider that your 'special problem' leaves you vulnerable to manipulation that is part and parcel of politics. Your 'good friend' PB does it to you, often.

[PostmodernProphet]

and the second point my friend, is that marriage has over 1100 federal benefits, and domestic partnerships dont

aren't you discriminating against men and women who choose to live together without being married?......

[Mr. P]

I've seen "benefits" mentioned in this thread several times. I'd just like to make the obvious statement: "benefits" do not equal "rights" nor constitute "equality".

[gabosaurus]

Which part of "I am the God of ALL people" do some of you not understand?

[Mr. P]

Which part of "I am the God of ALL people" do some of you not understand?

I know you think you are but..sit down, we need to talk.

[Sitarro]

I'm an single individual, where are my benefits. It's not fair that I would have to get married to get them. Wait, I have an answer to that, I could marry myself......I WANT MY 1,049 BENEFITS!!!!! I'm being discriminated against!

[PostmodernProphet]

Which part of "I am the God of ALL people" do some of you not understand?

wait....I thought it was the benefits that the federal government provided that they were missing.....are they being denied some of God's benefits too?......

I guess in answer to your question though, I could say I don't understand the part where ALL of God's people are supposed to be obedient to his requirements......and why it is missing from your equation........

[jimnyc]

First of all, let me just say I found what you wrote thought provoking/brilliant.

No, I dont think the world should have to bend over backwards to acknowledge or accept my aspburgers, though the more understanding of mental illness people have , the better in my humble opinion.

I respect what you have to say, and thought you did a good job saying it

Nothing brilliant about what I wrote, honestly. I just know what it's like to be a little "different" than others, and I think it would stink if I expected others to cater to me as a result. What I make in this world will be a result of my own doing without assistance or change from others.

I have no issue with understanding. I understand that queers are different. I understand they believe in their cause and their rights. I understand they want acceptance. But they don't deserve them simply because they'll jam it down our throats on a daily basis. I've known homos and have always treated them equally, so long as the fuckers don't try to kiss me! But I seriously don't think they need legislation and ADDITIONAL rights because they are different than others. They should accept who they are and move on with their lives. While they think they are in the midst of a "movement" and changing people's minds, they fail to realize that they are nauseating many and making just as many becoming even more resentful of their actions. I was one of the "live and let live" crowd before, but now I'm ready to join a group to protect what marriage stands for as a result of their actions.