Homophobic bigots want judge ruling thrown out because he is gay.

[Craig234]

Just like the Judge in this case, you have a clear bias.

Well, idiot, you don't understand the word 'bias'. My bias is like the bias of somoene who finds the evidence someone is guilty leads them to a 'bias' he's guilty.

You are equating that with a bias to find somoene guilty without evidence - which is more guilty of you, not me.

My 'bias' is for the truth, for morality, not like yours, for bigotry.

I won't say I'm biased for the law, because while I'd acknowledge what it says, if it said this dicsrimination were allowed, I'd disagree with it.

But that's not the case. Children like you should not throw around a word like 'bias'.

You embarrass yourself posting an attack without any ability to even try to back it up with any substance.

Lacking any ability to do so, you pull out words and throw them around - ya, the judge's ruling is wrong, because... you can't say, because you're an idiot.

You want to say he's wrong, because you're a biased idiot, but you can't say how he is wrong.

 

[MikeMike]

Well, idiot, you don't understand the word 'bias'. My bias is like the bias of somoene who finds the evidence someone is guilty leads them to a 'bias' he's guilty.

You are equating that with a bias to find somoene guilty without evidence - which is more guilty of you, not me.

My 'bias' is for the truth, for morality, not like yours, for bigotry.

I won't say I'm biased for the law, because while I'd acknowledge what it says, if it said this dicsrimination were allowed, I'd disagree with it.

But that's not the case. Children like you should not throw around a word like 'bias'.

You embarrass yourself posting an attack without any ability to even try to back it up with any substance.

Lacking any ability to do so, you pull out words and throw them around - ya, the judge's ruling is wrong, because... you can't say, because you're an idiot.

You want to say he's wrong, because you're a biased idiot, but you can't say how he is wrong.

ah, personal attacks when I made no sort of that...

again, CLEAR BIAS.

 

[WHAMPOM]

To remove all sexual bias from a judge's position? To hold office you must be castrated, neuter, bi-sexual or in menopause? Seems I would rather just have someone who can tell right from wrong.

 

[classy]

Wishful thinking. I think. Classy will never be gay. What he intends always to be is a bigot. His bias against gays does not come from his wish to suppress any supposed gayness he has, though there are some who are like that. He opposed gays because he believes that God also opposes folk being gay. He has a book that says so. He can't listen to logic or to rational thought that says God made folk both animal and human gay by nature. He believes the bigots who put their human bigotry in the Bible and he believes the Bible is the Word of God. He believes in a pathetic god, a moron who would create gay people so he would have something to reject. He is ego delighted not to be among those God made gay.

Let me make something very clear, crystal clear. I am a hetero-sexual. I believe in hetero relationships and I support hetero relationships. God has nothing to do with how I view homosexual relationships. I don't believe in them nor do I support. I am hetero and support male and female relationships, because that is what made me. And that is exactly what has made every single person on this planet. So lets not get it twisted or confused. I support men being with women, because that was how I was made.

 

[Craig234]

Let me make something very clear, crystal clear. I am a hetero-sexual. I believe in hetero relationships and I support hetero relationships. God has nothing to do with how I view homosexual relationships. I don't believe in them nor do I support. I am hetero and support male and female relationships, because that is what made me. And that is exactly what has made every single person on this planet. So lets not get it twisted or confused. I support men being with women, because that was how I was made.

So you don't believe in relationships nor do you support relationships between men and women who cannot have children, because that is not what made you.

And men and women who CAN have children made every person on the planet.

YOU said that is the reason you ONLY believe in relationships between a man and woman who can have children -so that excludes the infertile as well as gays, right?

Because that is how you were made. YOUR words.

 

[classy]

So you don't believe in relationships nor do you support relationships between men and women who cannot have children, because that is not what made you.

And men and women who CAN have children made every person on the planet.

YOU said that is the reason you ONLY believe in relationships between a man and woman who can have children -so that excludes the infertile as well as gays, right?

Because that is how you were made. YOUR words.

Seriously, is it some how bleeping hard to understand why People in general don't support gay relationships? Is there some f'ing dream world you live in where you just can't see how on earth such a thing exist? Make your argument, stand on what you believe is right. But please give me a break with the shit you're just shocked at how men and women just believe in hetero-sexual relationships. Its how and why we fvcking exist. We are male and female. Every single living animal exists because of male and female. So don't act all surprised at folks like me who say we don't believe in it.

 

[Craig234]

Seriously, is it some how bleeping hard to understand why People in general don't support gay relationships? Is there some f'ing dream world you live in where you just can't see how on earth such a thing exist? Make your argument, stand on what you believe is right. But please give me a break with the shit you're just shocked at how men and women just believe in hetero-sexual relationships. Its how and why we fvcking exist. We are male and female. Every single living animal exists because of male and female. So don't act all surprised at folks like me who say we don't believe in it.

Answer the question.

 

[Wreckem]

Seriously, is it some how bleeping hard to understand why People in general don't support gay relationships? Is there some f'ing dream world you live in where you just can't see how on earth such a thing exist? Make your argument, stand on what you believe is right. But please give me a break with the shit you're just shocked at how men and women just believe in hetero-sexual relationships. Its how and why we fvcking exist. We are male and female. Every single living animal exists because of male and female. So don't act all surprised at folks like me who say we don't believe in it.

I see how you clearly ignore me.

People didn't support civil rights for blacks either. It was hugely unpopular until the late 60's/early 70's. Anti-miscegenation laws are the same as anti-gay marriage laws.

There is no legitimate reason to ban gay marriage. Moral reasons alone are not enough. Gay marriage is gaining support amongst the general population. It is just a matter of time.

 

[Craig234]

I see how you clearly ignore me.

People didn't support civil rights for blacks either.

There is no legitimate reason to ban gay marriage. Moral reasons alone are not enough.

Moral reasons are enough, if there were legitimate moral reasons. There aren't.

 

[Wreckem]

Moral reasons are enough, if there were legitimate moral reasons. There aren't.

Moral reasons alone are not enough per the Supreme Court. I forgot what ruling it was in, but in an equal protection/substantive due process case the majority opinion stated moral reasons alone are not enough to keep something from being unconstitutional in terms of equal protection/substantive due process.

Like I previously said, there is no rational basis to ban gay marriage. Anti-gay marriage laws are facially discriminatory. There are no legitimate state interests involved. Being gay is an immutable characteristic. Gays have historically been discriminated against. The issue should be reviewed under strict scrutiny, but its not needed because there is no rational basis for gay marriage bans.


I'd really like anti-gay righters to list the legitimate state interests in banning gay marriage. What are the rational reasons that aren't moral arguments?

 

[Craig234]

Moral reasons alone are not enough per the Supreme Court. I forgot what ruling it was in, but in an equal protection/substantive due process case the majority opinion stated moral reasons alone are not enough to keep something from being unconstitutional.

A law that discriminates against a class of people cannot be solely be based on moral reasons.

Like I previously said, there is no rational basis to ban gay marriage.

I'd like anti-gay righters to list the legitimate state interests in banning gay marriage. What are the rational reasons that aren't moral arguments.

It is a different definition of 'moral reasons'.

It's a bit much to get into right now.

 

[classy]

So you don't believe in relationships nor do you support relationships between men and women who cannot have children, because that is not what made you.

And men and women who CAN have children made every person on the planet.

YOU said that is the reason you ONLY believe in relationships between a man and woman who can have children -so that excludes the infertile as well as gays, right?

Because that is how you were made. YOUR words.

The relationship of male and female doesn't change or lessen because they may be infertile. That relationship still exists within the confines of a heterosexual relationship. The entire planet is and always will be heterosexual. So it shouldn't be a shock or some surprise that a human being doesn't support gay marriage. I take exception that means someone hates gays. That may mean they don't support them in that context, but that doesn't mean they hate them either. You like to use blacks and civil rights as a crutch, but even civil rights didn't support everything blacks believed in unconditionally. Still don't today.

You want to brand people because they hold to what they instinctively are. We are a heterosexual planet. I don't know with 100% certainity that its because of the design of nature or a joke of God, but that's what this planet is. The struggle here is not just about someone with pigment and someone without pigment. This not the same as finding common ground in a jewish person marrying a catholic. You want to trivialize this, but this is not just trivial. You can make your argument on a legal basis, but pretending its some shock on a heterosexual planet, people believeing only in heterosexual relationships, should not be a shock at all, but one that should unequivocally be expected.

 

[Moonbeam]

Let me make something very clear, crystal clear. I am a hetero-sexual. I believe in hetero relationships and I support hetero relationships. God has nothing to do with how I view homosexual relationships. I don't believe in them nor do I support. I am hetero and support male and female relationships, because that is what made me. And that is exactly what has made every single person on this planet. So lets not get it twisted or confused. I support men being with women, because that was how I was made.

Sure you do. But since every other person on the planet was made the same way, and huge numbers of them don't non-reason as you do, only a foolish bigot would attach any truth or importance to what you say. You might as well say your reasons are because you breathe air like every parent on the planet also does. You are simply a bigot and you got it from religion. And all the folk who support gay marriage also support heterosexual marriage as well.

It isn't about why you support something, it's the fact that you don't want it for a minority that is of importance. And not every marriage produces children, anyway. So you would also have to be against marriage between old people.

Just take a look at yourself. You should like an idiot and on this issue you are.

 

[Craig234]

The relationship of male and female doesn't change or lessen because they may be infertile. That relationship still exists within the confines of a hetrosexual relationship. The entire planet is and always will be heterosexual. So it shouldn't be a shock or some surprise that a human being doesn't support gay marriage. I take exception that means someone hates gays. That may mean they don't support them in that context, but that doesn't mean they hate them either. You like to use blacks and civil rights as a crutch, but even civil rights didn't support everything blacks believed in unconditionally. Still don't today.

You want to brand people because they hold to what they instinctively are. We are a heterosexual planet. I don't know with 100% certainity that its because of the design of nature or a joke of God, but that's what this planet is. The struggle here is not just about someone with pigment and someone without pigment. This not the same as finding common ground in a jewish person marrying a catholic. You want to trivialize this, but this is not just trivial. You can make your argument on a legal basis, but pretending its some shock on a heterosexual planet, people believeing only in heterosexual relationships, should not be a shock at all, but one that should unequivocally be expected.

Your answer *proves* that you do not believe what you said.

YOU said that the reason you distinguish between a gay relationship and a hetersexual one is that all you care about is the procreation - "because that is what made [you]".

But that is not true. If it were, you would equall discriminate against any relationship that, like gays, could not 'make you', was not where 'every person came from'.

But that's not how you deal with others who do not reproduce. You *single out* gays from others who do not reproduce for special discrimination.

You don't EXPLAIN a word of it, you don't JUSTIFY it, because you hide behind a dishonest and false reason, that the only thing you care about is the reproducing.

So let's be clear, that reproduction has NOTHING to do with it, since you fully support infertile couples' rights as equal couples.

So why are you racing around saying reasons you don't believe? I don't think you are doing it knowing you are doing it. It fits what I said about how bigotry affects people, that it makde you make up irrational excuses to hide behind on your bigoty, to justify it, however little sense it makes if you were to be rational, which you are not.

Let's face the facts:

The world is NOT 100% heterosexual as you say. While the exact percentages are debatable, it's not far off to suggest 4% are homosexual.

YOU can't handle the fact that it's not 100%. So instead of being a responsible and principled person and taking responsibility for your problem with a group of people, you indulgue yourself in lazily claiming they do not exist, that they're somehow 'wrong' or to 'blame', and you are entitled to abuse your power as a voter to discriminate against them.

You are unable to defend your behavior and so you make false attacks. You call correct analogies to civil rights for blacks - blacks like you - a "crutch" to try to pretend you argued against the analogy, without actually doing so, just calling it a name (talk about a "crutch").

The struggle here IS just like one about someone with more and less pigment (and the other traints that change with race). It's about the ~95% straight and ~4% gay.

You have been challenged a hundreds times to provide a justification for you to deny rights to gays, and you have never done so, because the basis is only one things, bigotry.

That's why every excuse you come up with, like saying the reason is that they don't reproduce, falls apart - because they're EXCUSES not reasons.

You don't give a crap about reproduction by your admission despite saying you did before - it was just an attempt to use some reason you could come up with as an excuse.

If you were honest, you would recognize that.

But instead you hide behind not trying to discuss the issue - you will be a silent bigot.

No one can deny you that right any more than you can deny a white racist the right to be a bigot against you, but both are equally wrong.

But what we did here was to expose your attempt to hide behind a 'reason', your stated 'reason' of reproduction, as a fabrication.

A man and a woman who love each other and not reproduce, you do not discriminate against. A gay couple who love each other and don't reproduce, you deny rights to.

Not for any reason but bigotry, as you have shown in over 100 exchanges.

 

[Moonbeam]

The entire planet is and always will be heterosexual. So it shouldn't be a shock or some surprise that a human being doesn't support gay marriage.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

You poor pathetic bigot. You sound like the last racist on Earth arguing for segregation because every white person in the South feels that way.

The entire planet isn't heterosexual, has never been, and never will be.

There will always be animals and people who want to have sex with the same gender and they deserve the same ability to marry as anybody else. It's just the only way to be fair and being fair is what a real human being strives for, just as every white bigot had to make room for his human black brother because a racially discriminatory society, no matter how small the number affected, is unjust. Classy, grow up and get a spine, you fucking hypocritical coward. Your brain dead attitude toward gays is still to be found among folk that hate you for your race. You support them when you support your own stupidity. You make the planet more inviting for bigots by being one yourself. You add to the total misery and stupidity on the planet. There is zero logic in your thinking, zero, as in none at all.

 

[classy]

Craig you can believe whatever you want. I never said for procreation only. But that is how the planet exists. The staple of this planet is male with female. I don't support marriage of gays, but I would support some type of civil union. So you stick that bigotry bullshit. Gay relationships are not equal. If anything they are a mistake of nature. How else do you explain 95% to 4% (your numbers)? Whats the truth Craig or the lie? Is it the 95% or the 4%? Lets get raw, would you sleep with a person if there is 95% chance you'll get HIV Craig, or do you fucking wing it on the 4%?

 

[classy]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

You poor pathetic bigot. You sound like the last racist on Earth arguing for segregation because every white person in the South feels that way.

The entire planet isn't heterosexual, has never been, and never will be.

There will always be animals and people who want to have sex with the same gender and they deserve the same ability to marry as anybody else. It's just the only way to be fair and being fair is what a real human being strives for, just as every white bigot had to make room for his human black brother because a racially discriminatory society, no matter how small the number affected, is unjust. Classy, grow up and get a spine, you fucking hypocritical coward. Your brain dead attitude toward gays is still to be found among folk that hate you for your race. You support them when you support your own stupidity. You make the planet more inviting for bigots by being one yourself. You add to the total misery and stupidity on the planet. There is zero logic in your thinking, zero, as in none at all.

I don't have to grow a spine. I have said it clear as day. I do not support gay marriage. End of discussion. If this is as simple as black and white then so be it. I don't need your support for anything and if the gay movement is so righteous, then they don't need my support. So, what's your problem, why you mad?

 

[Wreckem]

I don't have to grow a spine. I have said it clear as day. I do not support gay marriage. End of discussion. If this is as simple as black and white then so be it. I don't need your support for anything and if the gay movement is so righteous, then they don't need my support. So, what's your problem, why you mad?

It doesn't matter if you support it or not. But you damn better be glad there were plenty of white people who supported the civil rights movement. What it comes down to is, you come off as a bigot, just like the white bigots that didn't think blacks were equal.

Also, it doesn't matter if the majority doesn't support gay marriage either. The constitution, equal protection, and substantive due process is to prevent tyranny of the majority.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Craig you can believe whatever you want. I never said for procreation only. But that is how the planet exists. The staple of this planet is male with female...

Have you considered that non-procreative coupling is a natural reaction to excessive population pressure?

 

[Moonbeam]

I don't have to grow a spine. I have said it clear as day. I do not support gay marriage. End of discussion. If this is as simple as black and white then so be it. I don't need your support for anything and if the gay movement is so righteous, then they don't need my support. So, what's your problem, why you mad?

Because you are a hypocrite. You lend support to the same kind of thinking that lynched black people and gets gays dragged to death in chains behind cars. The way you think is evil and you are what you think. If only 4% of the human race were black could we not deny them the right to marry?

 

[Craig234]

Because you are a hypocrite. You lend support to the same kind of thinking that lynched black people and gets gays dragged to death in chains behind cars. The way you think is evil and you are what you think. If only 4% of the human race were black could we not deny them the right to marry?

Except this is totally different because BLACK straight couples who love each other can usually have children, and GAY couples who love each other can't have children with each other, so SCREW their right to get married, except that infertile STRAGHT couples can't have children with each other either, but that's TOTALLY DIFFERENT because they're they're the opposite sex so THEIR love for each other deserves PROTECTION to equal rights, not like gays. Get it yet? Me too, the warped sickness of bigot logic.

Tonight, I was getting a chili dog at a fast food restaurant and watched a black family next to me, a father and two young daughters, one about 6 or 7, the other about 3 or 4.

The 7 year old was extremely degrading to the cashier. While he was turning around to push a button or get an order for someone, she hit the counter, BANG BANG BANG like she was demanding him to pay attention to her, yelling the hot dog she wanted. NOW. Then she said CHINESE MAN - and it wasn't cute little girl talk, it was in the same degrading tone a 60's white sherriff said the N word to a black protestor he was threatening - CHINESE MAN, give her her hot dog or she is going to climb over the counter and beat you.

Her father had put up with way too much of this, and at that one, finally did say to her, 'you aren't going to do anything', but not too scolding, and she kept it up.

Watching her berating behavior remembering some of the bigoted whites who would have denied her rights, with her repeating the same behavior clueless, reminds me of classy.

It doesn't matter that he's black, his bigotry could happen the same from any race, but it just adds that level of cluelessness that he should better understand the wrong of bigotry.

It's equally wrong for a white who has always had 'advantage' to be a bigot, but what black person in the US doesn't have some awareness of the problem of bigotry?

And yet religious blacks were a key constiuency in the vote to deny gays rights, blacks are statistically much more likely to be bigoted against gays.

Listen to the arrogance from Classy, he 'doesn't believe' in gay relationships - so he makes their love sub-human, not worthy of rights, he happily votes to deny equality.

HEY GAY MAN, you try to get married she's going to come get you and beat you.

I only mention Classy's race in hopes it'll help him get a clue by analogy, but he isn't, so it's probably worth dropping that approach. The point is generic to any race.

Classy is simply ignorant. You can point out other examples of bigotry all day, he doesn't care. It's like trying to tell a group of cats to share their food nicely. All he knows is his emotional reaction to gays - ick. They repulse him, and so his bigotry makes him find excuses for treating them badly. He has no idea of them as 'equal human beings', of the 'golden rule', empathy, of carefully being rational - any excuse he can pull out of the garbage to throw at them and let him justify his bad treatment is just fine.

Short of shooting him with a gay gun and having him fall in love and experience bigotry, it's not clear how he'll get a clue, and even then he might just refuse to recognize his being gay, as you watch so many gays refuse to recognize they are gay and spend years trying to force themselves to have heterosexual relationships, often leaving a path of people harmed behind them. Maybe he'd spend years putting himself into 'conversion therapy' that tries to use repulsion conditioning to get him not to have his loving feelings towards men.

He's not strong enough to understand the nature of homosexuality, so he takes the easy but wrong version instead and just denies it exists, except as 'wrong' choices.

He doesn't 'acknowledge gay relationships'. Not every human being has the strength to be able to be a moral person and understand the equality of others.

The lynching bigots who tried to subjugate blacks were weak people - ask them and they were strong, who's the group using the rope? But they acted out of fear and ignorance.

They may have had the 'strength' of numbers, but they were weak people.

And Classy is a weak person, in his bigotry. He might 'like' his gay co-workers, might have 'conflicted feelings', but he can't have the strength to treat them with respect.

By respect, I don't mean to be polite to them, I mean to be bothered to understand them and to understand why he's wrong and arrogant to deny them rights, indulging himself.

When we look at bigots, it's natural to see them as 'evil', hurting others, but I've long felt that we should understand that they rarely seem to understand that they are bigots.

They understand the hate aimed at them for their bigotry, somewhat, but lash back at it, attacking it as 'political correctness' or trying to force them to hold certain views. They turn their stubbornness not to have views forced on them as a strength, as 'defending their freedom' and tune out the critics.

These views are hard to change, and when a majority of a society has them, it's even harder. Our nation had prevalent racist views for centuries it took a century to soften.

It took a black man beating a white for the boxing championship (that *stunned* whites; before which, whites were obviously the superior athletes, right?) It took the integration of the military, it took the Supreme Court ending segregated schools enforced by marshals, it took the gentle likeableness of a Jackie Robinson who could outplay his teammates, it took the peaceful resistance of a Rosa Parks, it took civil rights leaders preaching morality, to chip away and make people think about their views - and this was BEFORE change.

This helped pave the way for a US President who had not had any interest in race issues to lecture the nation on its cancer of racism, helped pave the way for the Nobel Peace Prize for a black civil rights leader, helped pave the way for the class of a Sidney Portier in the movies challening racial views, helped pave the way for blacks to unite peacefully and not peacefully, from marches with signs "I AM A MAN" to riots, paved the way for a civil rights bill to correct the worst inequalities in law - which provided SOME reduction in racism.

Indeed decades later, the young are far more without racism in a way no American generation could have dreamed of the previous 300 years, because of the changes.

And I think Classy is going to change his bigotry with a few posts telling him he's wrong?

No. White bigots may have put down their torches and guns to block blacks from a college when faced down with a gun, and Classy may not march on gay weddings and go to jail to protest them when they're legally protected, but that didn't mean the bigots changed their views much. They still 'felt they were right' even if they couldn't win elections anymore.

Polls show young people today - as much as they say bad things are 'gay' - are the least bigoted towards gays of any generation in American history, at least.

And that, too, is on the backs of decades of gradually pushing the 'existence' of gays into public awareness, ending the lie they don't exist, unrepresented in film and tv.

Polls show that finally, after centuries of discrimination, this forced national conversation to confront gay bigotry is finally ending it, at least for things like gay marriage bans.

I can only try to help someone like Classy, to understand the moral issues, why he's harming others wrongly, so he's not left hateful and a vote to discriminate.

But I've said what I see can be said to him. And I don't have a gay gun to shoot him with. Which would be the equivalent of the 'black like me' author who disguised himself as black to 'discover' the 'shocking' way that blacks were treated, which whites 'had no idea about', in 1959 (and oh by the way, I learned while writing this post, he received so many threats for daring to expose the treatment of blacks, he and his family had to leave the US and move to Mexico for a while, he was threatened and once beaten giving speeches).

Indeed, reading Classy's rationalizations about how he 'doesn't acknowledge gay relationships', this comment on the 'Black Like Me' experience is relevant:

He got there by hitchhiking, mostly with whites. Generally they were friendly, but almost all "showed morbid curiosity about the sexual life of the Negro, and all had, at base, the same stereotyped image of the Negro as an inexhaustible sex-machine with oversized genitals and a vast store of experiences, immensely varied." They assumed "that marital fidelity and sex as love's goal of union with the beloved object were exclusively the white man's property." One burly white man asked him if his wife "ever had it from a white man," and said: "We figure we're doing you people a favor to get some white blood in your kids." This "grotesque hypocrisy slapped me as it does all Negroes."

The black like me author did not, like most whites then, like Classy now, simply indulge his feelings and bigotry; rather, he had a sense of fairness and justice and missing equality.

Whites voted against equality for blacks for the same types of reasons Classy votes against equality for gays - and 'you can't make him' change his vote.

No, we can't - we can just try to help him understand why his vote is wrong so that he becomes a better and stronger person who stops hurting innocent people.

Save234

 

[zsdersw]

Craig you can believe whatever you want. I never said for procreation only. But that is how the planet exists. The staple of this planet is male with female. I don't support marriage of gays, but I would support some type of civil union. So you stick that bigotry bullshit.

So you weren't telling me the truth earlier.. as I suspected.

Gay relationships are not equal. If anything they are a mistake of nature.

The unbridled arrogance and ignorance you possess on this issue never ceases to amaze.

 

[classy]

Look I am not going to post anything else, because this is bullshit. I am not obligated to support a gay relationship because my skin is black. My skin color doesn't obligate me to support anything or anyone in this life. Your reverse racism argument Craig is a damn joke, you prick. Moonie in any response always has to find some black angle. I am a human being who has worked hard to earn everything I have in this life. No handouts whatsoever. I don't hate gays, I don't support gay marriage.

I do support civil unions. We have had and still do today have common law marriage in some states. I do believe they should have some recognization of their commitment to each other.
I don't support what I see occuring with trangendered folks. The woman who is now being denied benefits of her dead husband because she was born a man is not right. That person is legally a woman now in the eyes of the law and should be treated as such.
I do believe that when two couples one straight and one gay apply for adoption, that a child should be placed with the straight couple. I do believe any solid couple straight or gay should always go in front of a single parent home, except for some extraordinary circumstances.
I don't believe gays should be fired from jobs or any harm whatsoever should come to them.
So for you two bozos to even suggest that I hate gays is a joke.
I don't support gays unconditionally in everything which many of you think because I am black, I should be required to do. This is America, I am entitiled to my own opinion. This is a heterosexual planet and like it or not this country is a Judeo Christian culture with religous beliefs wrapped inside its laws. Just like every other damn country on this planet that has religion wrapped into some of its laws.
Whites did support blacks, but not in everything. Many believe in equal rights, but not in AA. I don't see many whites rallying for reparations either despite the fact there is true legal right for them to be paid out. Does that make these people bigots. Not even close, they just don't support those things, don't mean they are anti-black.
I have made my decision that because I struggle with this on different aspects that I won't rally for or against gay marriage. Thats it. Nothing more or less than that. You two dazzling circus clowns insist on judging the totality of person based one view point, you need to grow the hell up.
I love people, all people, and strive to accept anyone. But I am an individual, I do have likes and dislikes. I believe in telling the truth and being honest, even on the internet. A lot people say they support gay marriage, but it must be lip service. It has failed miserably in every vote across the nation, from Cali to Maine. This goes beyond just two people standing at the altar, its the things beyond that I have reservations about. This isn't just 2+2, this is complicated on many levels and in many different aspects. If you believe its the same as blacks striving for civil rights, then thats your opinion. Will that argument win out ultimately? Maybe.

On a side note I don't support polygamy either.......what does that make me?

 

[Jaskalas]

I don't have to grow a spine. I have said it clear as day. I do not support gay marriage. End of discussion. If this is as simple as black and white then so be it. I don't need your support for anything and if the gay movement is so righteous, then they don't need my support. So, what's your problem, why you mad?

A commentary for this situation.

Marriage is nothing more than a wink and a nod from the government allowing a union that already exists to be formally recognized. As if you're given permission to what is already yours.

I'm on the fence on this issue, cause like you, I believe in men and women being together. The issue comes with all the noise the Dems make on this matter. It might just make sense to say 'fine, have it' and shut them all up.

 

[Craig234]

To be clear, Classy, I did not say 'you have to support gay marriage because you are black'. I said the opposite, that the issue is the same for any race.

I did say that I thought that it would make sense for race analogies to be an especially effective way to communicate a point about bigotry with someone who is black.

And I said clearly that turned out not to be the case here, and noted how blacks are MORE likely to be bigoted against gays.

I then went on to make points on the issue that are based on morality and fairness for any race.

There are people who are more broadly bigoted on sex issues, so they'd be guilty of more things you mention - support gay discrimination in employment, support discrimination against transsexuals, support discrimination against people with gender identity problems, and so on - a sort of ignorant 'that's perverted, screw them'.

I understand you are not like that, and that's good. You seem to be limited to gay marriage (and 'gay relationships' you 'don't believe in', despite supporting civil unions).

But someone who opposes discrimination on several issues and supports it on one, still has a problem for supporting it on one.

You keep saying 'this is a heterosexual planet'. No, it's not. It's a majority heterosexual planet, with about 4% who are gay, who are not non-people to be ignored they exist.

Why should any minority part of the people get that treatment, gays, the infertile, people with various races conditions, attributes, and so on?

You make a point that opposing a right for a group doesn't make you bigoted against that group. I agree - which is why you have been asked I'd guess over 100 times to provide a reason for discriminating against gays on marriage which is NOT bigoted, the same way someone who opposes reparations for blacks, to use your example, could argue for that position without bigotry (it is also possible to oppose reparations for reasons that ARE bigotry).

And you haven't. You have given scraps like how you opposie it because 'only men and women can reproduce, which is where you came from', but when that stated principle is questioned to see if you really apply it, you don't - infertile hetero couples are more than welcome to marry.

You don't sound like you 'hate gays' generally, as you support their raising children, etc. You don't let an 'ick' reaction drive you to blindly vote against them on many issues.

But you are supporting discrimination against them on marriage, and the only reasons I've seen from you do imply bigotry, in that one area.

It could be discussed; I've looked at a variety of issues. The bible is pretty clear about marriage being 'between a man and a woman', for example.

But you haven't really provided much except the determination to exercise your right to practice unjustified discrimination.

As for polygamy, I think it raises some interesting questions, and a case can be made for it, but the issues are different than gays.

It involves everything from complicating legal structures to issues of fairness to each of the partners, but does not involve people treating gays as less than equal loving people.

You ask what I think about your opposition to polygamy; like gay marriage, I'd need to hear your reasons. If you just 'have the right to oppose it', it limits the discussion.

The society wasn't ready to recognize women's rights in 1700, black rights in 1800, or gay rights in 1900; it's not ready to recognize polygamists' rights today.

Does that mean it should, that it compares to other issues? Maybe, maybe not that's debatable but note people could HAPPILY champion one on that list and oppose others.