Minnesota Moves Forward...

[MotF Bane]

Classy, there is nothing that makes your "moral compass" any more accurate than that of others. There is nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality, because MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE.

 

[wuliheron]

Classy, there is nothing that makes your "moral compass" any more accurate than that of others. There is nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality, because MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE.

Morals like the ten commandments are given by God and there's nothing subjective about God! He is the ultimate objective objector!

 

[classy]

This thread just makes me that much more in favor of severely restricting parents autonomy in raising their kids. We're permitting them to raise backwards, biggotted Americans. If we can get a good, progressive agenda into schools, and take away their ability to shield their kids from it, their argument will significantly weaken when they can no longer claim to be dislike homosexuality because they want to shelter their kids from it.

Backwards. My oldest was never in trouble. She was never suspended, did drugs, became a drunk, never arrested, no babies, and has maintained a job since she was 16. I didn't like some of her boy friends, but what father ever does.

My little one, well liked, well adjusted just like her sister, but smarter. She is a 5th grader and has often had straight A's. She has tested on her state tests the last two times in the top 5% of all students in the state when it comes to Math and top 10% for the other categories.

So if I raised them backwards, I can asure you millions of parents want or wished their kids to be backwards just like mine.

Classy, there is nothing that makes your "moral compass" any more accurate than that of others. There is nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality, because MORALS ARE SUBJECTIVE.

I never said my moral compass was better, but I would implore you that my expectations of what should be expected based on a person's gender is not flawed.

 

[Nebor]

Backwards. My oldest was never in trouble. She was never suspended, did drugs, became a drunk, never arrested, no babies, and has maintained a job since she was 16. I didn't like some of her boy friends, but what father ever does.

My little one, well liked, well adjusted just like her sister, but smarter. She is a 5th grader and has often had straight A's. She has tested on her state tests the last two times in the top 5% of all students in the state when it comes to Math and top 10% for the other categories.

So if I raised them backwards, I can asure you millions of parents want or wished their kids to be backwards just like mine.



I never said my moral compass was better, but I would implore you that my expectations of what should be expected based on a person's gender is not flawed.

Maybe they're so well behaved because they're lesbians, too caught up in the self-hatred their father has taught them to feel to get in any trouble. Maybe we'll never know.

 

[classy]

Maybe they're so well behaved because they're lesbians, too caught up in the self-hatred their father has taught them to feel to get in any trouble. Maybe we'll never know.

Or maybe I am right? Or maybe I am a good parent?

 

[zsdersw]

Or maybe I am right?

There's very little you've been right about in this and other threads discussing homosexuality.

 

[PokerGuy]

Why is one ok and another not?

Because the people in the society get to decide what behavior is OK and what is not.

 

[MotF Bane]

Because the people in the society get to decide what behavior is OK and what is not.

If that justification were valid, black people would still be slaves, women wouldn't be able to vote, et cetera.

 

[classy]

There's very little you've been right about in this and other threads discussing homosexuality.

I beg to differ. I think I have presented my opinion very well. You see at hatred or bigotry. But if you were born a male, you should be living as a male and that comes with certain expectations. So just because you don't agree with those expectations, doesn't mean my expectations were wrong, flawed, or bigoted. And it also doesn't mean I should cast those expectations aside either because you rejected them.

 

[zsdersw]

Because the people in the society get to decide what behavior is OK and what is not.

That's a definition of majority-rules. I'm asking why you think it's OK to recognize one type of beneficial relationship and not another.

 

[PokerGuy]

If that justification were valid, black people would still be slaves, women wouldn't be able to vote, et cetera.

The society as a whole changed their collective minds, for the better. That doesn't mean society can't decide what behavior is permitted or not.

The whole "it's just not right" argument is fail because it assumes your "side" somehow has the "correct" position and the other is wrong just because. In a democratic society, society as a whole gets to determine who is right, including changing the constitution if need be.

 

[PokerGuy]

That's a definition of majority-rules. I'm asking why you think it's OK to recognize one type of beneficial relationship and not another.

Beneficial is in the eye of the beholder. We make such distinctions as a society all the time. Marriage with one person = fine. Marriage with two people = prison. Taking drugs with permission (prescription from doctor) = fine. Taking same drug without permission = prison. Society as a collective makes the call as to what is acceptable.

 

[zsdersw]

I beg to differ. I think I have presented my opinion very well. You see at hatred or bigotry. But if you were born a male, you should be living as a male and that comes with certain expectations. So just because you don't agree with those expectations, doesn't mean my expectations were wrong, flawed, or bigoted. And it also doesn't mean I should cast those expectations aside either because you rejected them.

You've presented your opinions very sloppily. I've argued with people of your mindset who did a far better job articulating that point of view than you could ever hope to.

You've also gotten sexual orientation and sexual activity mixed up, wrongly asserted that social environment plays a key role in determining sexual orientation (as opposed to sexual activity), and incorrectly asserted that sexual orientation is a binary condition; homo- or hetero-.. with nothing in between.

 

[PokerGuy]

If that justification were valid

It's not justification, it's a simple fact. That's how a democracy or democratic republic works.

 

[zsdersw]

Beneficial is in the eye of the beholder. We make such distinctions as a society all the time. Marriage with one person = fine. Marriage with two people = prison. Taking drugs with permission (prescription from doctor) = fine. Taking same drug without permission = prison. Society as a collective makes the call as to what is acceptable.

Society benefits from a 1-man, 1-woman marriage. Society also benefits from a monogamous homosexual relationship (much reduced spread of STDs, higher productivity, reduced crime/substance abuse, etc). If government's role is to recognize and incentivize beneficial relationships it should do so for all such relationships.

 

[classy]

If that justification were valid, black people would still be slaves, women wouldn't be able to vote, et cetera.

Lets talk about that for a moment. This is a moral issue based on the actions of a person. There is no morality in the color of person's skin or their nationality. The person is just black, brown, or white, but it carries with it no action of their own volition. Now you may say being gay is the same. But being gay requires a choice on the persons behalf to engage or act a certain. As I stated before, if all a person needs is simple desire to justify one's actions we are all in trouble. And unfortunately that is the base of the argument presented. I am attracted to this so that means I need to fulfill my desire.

That is not enough to say a person's belief then should be supported. I have stated that I choose not to actively support nor deny them the rights they seek. I support some things they desire, some I question, and others I oppose. But there is no people group that has absolute support from me or you. If I said do you support civil rights, I believe you would say yes. But in same breath you don't support AA. How about reparations? I don't hate or judge, but I am not going to buy into any idea that I don't agree with. And there is zero wrong with my belief that a person born a certain gender should live in accordance with the expectations of that gender. And I have billions to support that my belief is not without merit.

 

[classy]

If government's role is to recognize and incentivize beneficial relationships it should do so for all such relationships.

Z sometimes I think you believe everyone is a fool. You, I, and everyone else knows this goes beyond just marriage.

I posted this link before

http://www.baycitizen.org/education/story/parents-clash-over-gay-curriculum/

After a lesbian student at Jesse Bethel High School in Vallejo joined with the American Civil Liberties Union in 2008 to accuse the local school district of discrimination, district officials agreed as part of a settlement to show films and assign homework depicting same-sex families, beginning in elementary school.

Source: The Bay Citizen (http://s.tt/129t3)

This is the real truth of what you really want. This to me is unacceptable. But this is and will be the driving force after marriage. If it was just a vote to allow you to marry a tire off a Ford Pinto, I would do it tomorrow. But I am not interested in giving you access to my kids to sell your lifestyle. Guaranteed you will sue a local church because its beautiful and you want a church wedding. I am not interested in that. The movement has already attacked the Boy Scouts. Once you get the equal tag everything will be fair game. People are not stupid Z.

If one of my own becomes gay, I will love them all the same, but they'll have to discover it on their own as adults.

 

[lupi]

Stay out of peoples bedroom! The older I get the more the politics of this country disgust me.

John going home and boinking Ed is an in the bedroom event no one cares about. John and Ed going down to the courthouse to get married is just a wee bit more public.

 

[PokerGuy]

If government's role is to recognize and incentivize beneficial relationships it should do so for all such relationships.

Again, beneficial is in the eye of the beholder, and society at large can decide if the benefits outweigh the negatives.

 

[wuliheron]

John going home and boinking Ed is an in the bedroom event no one cares about. John and Ed going down to the courthouse to get married is just a wee bit more public.

For a marriage to be legal it must be consummated, in other words, if you want to keep the government out of your bedroom its too late and if you want to keep all these things private its too late.

 

[Nebor]

This is the real truth of what you really want. This to me is unacceptable. But this is and will be the driving force after marriage. If it was just a vote to allow you to marry a tire off a Ford Pinto, I would do it tomorrow. But I am not interested in giving you access to my kids to sell your lifestyle. Guaranteed you will sue a local church because its beautiful and you want a church wedding. I am not interested in that. The movement has already attacked the Boy Scouts. Once you get the equal tag everything will be fair game. People are not stupid Z.

That's what I really want, and that's already well under way. By targeting the kids with mass media, as well as in schools by presenting same sex couples as an every day occurrence, we can build a more tolerant, less bigoted future American. We've already reached a point where kids like yours with a closed mind towards homosexuality will automatically be excluded from the "cool kids" groups in high school. We just need to back the age at which that ostracization occurs to the age of a 5th or 6th grader.

Just like when we deal with Sharia law and Islam, we can't tolerate intolerance.

 

[classy]

That's what I really want, and that's already well under way. By targeting the kids with mass media, as well as in schools by presenting same sex couples as an every day occurrence, we can build a more tolerant, less bigoted future American. We've already reached a point where kids like yours with a closed mind towards homosexuality will automatically be excluded from the "cool kids" groups in high school. We just need to back the age at which that ostracization occurs to the age of a 5th or 6th grader.

Just like when we deal with Sharia law and Islam, we can't tolerate intolerance.

LOL
World Domination, huh? Either you want them tolerant or open minded to be available for your dream fantasy, Its Raining Men.

 

[Nebor]

LOL
World Domination, huh? Either you want them tolerant or open minded to be available for your dream fantasy, Its Raining Men.

My fantasy is equality for everyone. I asked a gay friend of mine in Chicago why one particular bar in the gay part of town had 3 bachelorette parties at a time, all night, every night. He said that's the only bar that hadn't banned bachelorette parties. The community decided that until gay marriage is legal there, they don't need heterosexuals rubbing their marriages in their faces. I'd never thought of it like that, but it makes sense.

 

[zsdersw]

Again, beneficial is in the eye of the beholder, and society at large can decide if the benefits outweigh the negatives.

What exactly are the negatives?

 

[zsdersw]

Z sometimes I think you believe everyone is a fool. You, I, and everyone else knows this goes beyond just marriage.

This is the real truth of what you really want. This to me is unacceptable. But this is and will be the driving force after marriage. If it was just a vote to allow you to marry a tire off a Ford Pinto, I would do it tomorrow. But I am not interested in giving you access to my kids to sell your lifestyle. Guaranteed you will sue a local church because its beautiful and you want a church wedding. I am not interested in that. The movement has already attacked the Boy Scouts. Once you get the equal tag everything will be fair game. People are not stupid Z.

If one of my own becomes gay, I will love them all the same, but they'll have to discover it on their own as adults.

Once again when the facts intrude upon your preciously narrow view you bring in extraneous and wholly separate issues as a distraction.

I am not seeking government-sponsored "selling" of my "lifestyle" (your term, not mine), nor am I in support of forcing churches to do anything or forcing schools to teach certain things.

And no, you probably wouldn't support just a vote to allow gay marriage... because that's all that's being proposed and you already don't support it.

I'm sure some in the gay rights movement want the things you mentioned, but I am not one of them... nor do I support everything they support simply because I'm gay. It is also a fact that voters can support gay marriage without voting to support the other stuff you brought up.

You cannot lump everything and everyone into one issue and group just because it casts your views as more favorable.