Our era's American civil rights issue: A milestone on gay discrimination

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
You're right. But the same issues of bigotry, the role of religion and so on apply regardless whether it's white bigots on blacks, black bigots on gays, or gay bigots on Muslims.

Agreed, I was just making the point that religion often spans party lines and when people make decisions based on religion it has nothing really to do with party, it has to do with religion.

Obligatory "both parties suck" comment.
 

khon

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2010
1,318
124
106
I completely agree, todays ruling was a major step forward in civil rights, I just hope it doesn't end up getting overturned by the extremely conservative current supreme court.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Don't kid yourself Craig... this isn't about "following the Constitution"... the CA supreme court already ruled that this was constitutional. This is about your agenda and what YOU want, wrapped in the guise of "being constitutional".
The California Supreme court determined that this law did not violate the STATE Constitution.

I know it's difficult for you, but try to remember that there is a difference between state and federal courts...
 

DanDaManJC

Senior member
Oct 31, 2004
776
0
76
The only reference in the New Testament to any kind of homosexual behavior was the pederasty practiced by Hellenic Greeks in worship of their pagan god Molech which Paul railed against in Corinthians. The extrapolation of that to a blanket prohibition of adult consensual emotional and sexual homosexual relationships is simply bigotry wrapped in a veil of religiosity.

on this note, here's an interesting and related article

http://www.religiondispatches.org/a...le_really_call_homosexuality_an_“abomination”
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
The only reference in the New Testament to any kind of homosexual behavior was the pederasty practiced by Hellenic Greeks in worship of their pagan god Molech which Paul railed against in Corinthians. The extrapolation of that to a blanket prohibition of adult consensual emotional and sexual homosexual relationships is simply bigotry wrapped in a veil of religiosity.

And thou art a complete fool

Romans 1

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,[c] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[d] unmerciful;
32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

And this is clearly the mind of God because we know in the OT he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah

Genesis 13:13
13 But the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the LORD.

Genesis 18:20
20 Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous
21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

Genesis 19:1-6, 24-25
1 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground.
2 "My lords," he said, "please turn aside to your servant's house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning."
"No," they answered, "we will spend the night in the square."
3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate.
4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house.
5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him
7 and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.
8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."

24 Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens.
25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, including all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Huh? LOL.........You are not manly if your gay. Give me a break............ We actually believe the bible, Zeebs. Its not for show or some gimmick. We ain't perfect, we make a lot mistakes, flatout disobey, get a lot of stuff wrong, but we also get a lot stuff right. Look on this issue I have my belief rooted in scripture. So what, sue me.

If you believe in bible you need to start killing them such as Leviticus 20:13 says.

As far as I'm concerned the Bible and Qu'ran are hate books no different than Mein Kampf was.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
If you believe in bible you need to start killing them such as Leviticus 20:13 says.

As far as I'm concerned the Bible and Qu'ran are hate books no different than Mein Kampf was.

Why? What do think Jesus came here for? We still have to at least try to live right, but its all under the blood of Calvary now :). Thank God.................I feel like preaching tonight :). Both my mom and brother are pastors. So I got some roots...........
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
I don't know if I fall in that category but your post is spot on. Blacks fought for equal rights and the very backbone and strength of that struggle was fuled by bible believing folks. The same bible in the new NT that says its a disgrace for men to be laying up with men. But now we are to some how toss that book away and following the beliefs of these folks. Not gonna happen.

I assume NT stands for new testament, I didn't realize there was an "old new testament" but yall did kinda throw the old book away and follow the beliefs of the new one once before...

I do find it rather amusing and ironic how yall cherry pick the shit you choose to believe out of that book though. I have read both books (old and new testaments) cover to cover multiple times so don't make me go "old testament" on your ass (couldn't resist using the quote). Hell, the "new NT" gives me enough ammo to prove vast cherry picking but your basic argument is "because its in a 2000 year old book discrimination is OK". Sorry bud, I aint buying what you are selling. According to YOUR religion it is God's place to judge NOT yours. Not discriminating against a group of people is not equal to condoning their "actions" so that excuse goes out the window too. What else ya got?
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
And thou art a complete fool

Romans 1

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,[c] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[d] unmerciful;
32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

And this is clearly the mind of God because we know in the OT he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah

Genesis 13:13
13 But the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the LORD.

Genesis 18:20
20 Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous
21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

Genesis 19:1-6, 24-25
1 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground.
2 "My lords," he said, "please turn aside to your servant's house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning."
"No," they answered, "we will spend the night in the square."
3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate.
4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house.
5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him
7 and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.
8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."

24 Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens.
25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, including all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land.

Oooh, I love playing this game.

Leviticus 25:44 "Both your slaves, and your bondmaids, which you shall have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall you buy slaves and bondmaids."

I got a bunch more but I feel like I am taking advantage of you by posting much more. I really love when you guys quote the OT, its like shooting fish in a barrel....

I bet you don't use any form of contraceptive either for "man shall not spill his seed" and all that jazz...
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
And thou art a complete fool
Classy. :rolleyes:

Quite easily, Romans isn't speaking about homosexuals. Paul was criticizing individuals that betray themselves by behaving in discord with their natural sexual orientation. Homosexuals do not do this. The "natural use of a woman" (as used in this context) to a lesbian is sexual in nature. If she were to deny that she would equally be subject to Paul's condemnation.

Although the passages in Genesis are not part of the New Testament (learn't sumpthin' terday, din'cha? :rolleyes:), I can address those as easily, even generously. The traditional Jewish interpretation is that S&G sin was inhospitality to strangers, afterall, not homosexual sex. You do realize that Genesis is a Jewish book, right?

But at best you could intepret S&G's sin as that of homosexual rape. Now, If you do not know the difference between consensual homosexual sex and homosexual rape, then you're a moron. Furthermore, if you think that defending the rights of homosexuals to marry eachother is tantamout to defending the right of homosexuals to rape people then quite frankly I'm surprised you can figure out how to turn on your computer.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
I assume NT stands for new testament, I didn't realize there was an "old new testament" but yall did kinda throw the old book away and follow the beliefs of the new one once before...

I do find it rather amusing and ironic how yall cherry pick the shit you choose to believe out of that book though. I have read both books (old and new testaments) cover to cover multiple times so don't make me go "old testament" on your ass (couldn't resist using the quote). Hell, the "new NT" gives me enough ammo to prove vast cherry picking but your basic argument is "because its in a 2000 year old book discrimination is OK". Sorry bud, I aint buying what you are selling. According to YOUR religion it is God's place to judge NOT yours. Not discriminating against a group of people is not equal to condoning their "actions" so that excuse goes out the window too. What else ya got?

Hey I believe it is the word of God not because its 2000 years old. I said I don't support gay marriage. Would I vote for it, no, I wouldn't. If it became law would I shun a gay couple. No I would not. One of my friends and I do value him as a friend is gay. But I told him straight up I don't support gay marriage. And he gets on me about it to. I will never say to my children its ok.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Classy. :rolleyes:


Quite easily, Romans isn't speaking about homosexuals. Paul was criticizing individuals that betray themselves by behaving in discord with their natural sexual orientation. Homosexuals do not do this. The "natural use of a woman" (as used in this context) to a lesbian is sexual in nature. If she were to deny that she would equally be subject to Paul's condemnation.

Although the passages in Genesis are not part of the New Testament (learn't sumpthin' terday, din'cha? :rolleyes:), I can address those as easily, even generously. The traditional Jewish interpretation is that S&G sin was inhospitality to strangers, afterall, not homosexual sex. You do realize that Genesis is a Jewish book, right?

But at best you could intepret S&G's sin as that of homosexual rape. Now, If you do not know the difference between consensual homosexual sex and homosexual rape, then you're a moron. Furthermore, if you think that defending the rights of homosexuals to marry eachother is tantamout to defending the right of homosexuals to rape people then quite frankly I'm surprised you can figure out how to turn on your computer.

LOL
Dude it is plain as day. Give me a break.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Oooh, I love playing this game.

Leviticus 25:44 "Both your slaves, and your bondmaids, which you shall have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall you buy slaves and bondmaids."

I got a bunch more but I feel like I am taking advantage of you by posting much more. I really love when you guys quote the OT, its like shooting fish in a barrel....

I bet you don't use any form of contraceptive either for "man shall not spill his seed" and all that jazz...

LOL
Just give up
You're just blabbering nonsense now
 

Michael

Elite member
Nov 19, 1999
5,435
234
106
My view of the ruling is summarized by one of the points in the judgment:

"Plaintiffs do not seek recognition of a new right. To characterize plaintiffs’ objective as “the right to same-sex marriage” would suggest that plaintiffs seek something different from what opposite-sex couples across t...he state enjoy —— namely, marriage. Rather, plaintiffs ask California to recognize their relationships for what they are: marriages."

That one clause from the ruling is exactly why I have always supported same sex marriage. All Gays and Lesbians want is the right to be married. Nothing extra. Nothing different. Just the basic right that courts have always found to be a fundamental right.

Now that has nothing, zero, ziltch to do with the teachings of any Church. Just because the State recognizes a same sex marriage as a marriage does not mean a Church needs to.

However, it does mean that in all legal and secular matters, there is no difference between a "same sex" marriage and an "opposite sex" marriage.

Michael
 

MJinZ

Diamond Member
Nov 4, 2009
8,192
0
0
I don't even understand your question?

Nope, you wouldn't.

celebrity-pictures-irony.jpg
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
Huh? LOL.........You are not manly if your gay. Give me a break............ We actually believe the bible, Zeebs. Its not for show or some gimmick. We ain't perfect, we make a lot mistakes, flatout disobey, get a lot of stuff wrong, but we also get a lot stuff right. Look on this issue I have my belief rooted in scripture. So what, sue me.

Yep, you're a bigot.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
60
91
I am not ashamed to say I have my belief on this rooted from the bible. I don't care what kind of names or any other junk they or you say. Their opinions ain't create Jesus and I am not going to answer to him on behalf of your beliefs either.

If your bible or your Jesus teach intolerance for others simply because they choose to share their lives with others of the same gender, your bible, your jesus and a dollar bill aren't worth the price of a single item in a Ninety-Nine Cents Store, and regardless of how you try to justify your bigotry, you should be ashamed. If your religion teaches that it's right to deny to others the rights you claim for yourself, you also suck as an American.

Freedom is not just about getting rights, its just as much about accepting responsibility as well.

Responsiblity for what? This isn't about responsibility. It's about equal rights. The Constitution defines the rights of all American citizens, not to just the majority. The majority has no right to veto the Constitutional rights of the minority. If you want to talk about responsiblity, YOUR responsibility as an American citizen is to defend equal rights for ALL Americans.

Of course, as an African American, any of your family who were here during slavery couldn't legally marry, or own property, or learn to read, or choose where they wanted to live or what they wanted to do for a living, either. In fact, the Constitution originally regarded each of your predecessors as 3/5 of a human being, which is more humanity than you're showing. :thumbsdown:
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Why? What do think Jesus came here for? We still have to at least try to live right, but its all under the blood of Calvary now :). Thank God.................I feel like preaching tonight :). Both my mom and brother are pastors. So I got some roots...........

Translation: the bible is to be interpreted literally if that supports your views, and it's to be said you should not interpret it literally when that suits your views.

You've convinced me you do have Baptist pastors in your family who have influenced your logic (for the worse).

And what's your logic for why God made about 5% of the human population homosexual throughout history, but didn't say why in the bible? Nevermind, I just ate.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,921
5,544
136
That one clause from the ruling is exactly why I have always supported same sex marriage. All Gays and Lesbians want is the right to be married. Nothing extra. Nothing different. Just the basic right that courts have always found to be a fundamental right.

They already have that right, just as everyone else does. What they seek is to broaden the interpretation of marriage. If gay marriage is acceptable, shouldn't all other forms of marriage be allowed? Why should only gay's get a special pass? Shouldn't the Mormons be allowed to have multiple wives? What about siblings, why discriminate against them? What do we do about adult men from the middle east that want to marry children? If we're going to redefine what marriage is to make it "fair" shouldn't everyone be included?

The way I see it, if you support gay marriage, you pretty much have to support every other variation of marriage.
 

MJinZ

Diamond Member
Nov 4, 2009
8,192
0
0
They already have that right, just as everyone else does. What they seek is to broaden the interpretation of marriage. If gay marriage is acceptable, shouldn't all other forms of marriage be allowed? Why should only gay's get a special pass? Shouldn't the Mormons be allowed to have multiple wives? What about siblings, why discriminate against them? What do we do about adult men from the middle east that want to marry children? If we're going to redefine what marriage is to make it "fair" shouldn't everyone be included?

The way I see it, if you support gay marriage, you pretty much have to support every other variation of marriage.

There is no logic or rationale.

That's like saying if you support the death penalty, then you must support every sort of punishment and/or every sort of extinguishment of life, including genocide and murder.

At the heart of it, personal and individual liberties form the basis of these issues.

Marriage is not something the world has ever designated as between a man and another man or a woman and another woman. However, societies have historically allowed:

Allowed marriage between Men and multiple women

Allowed marriage between underaged teens

Allowed marriage between the very old and very young

Allowed marriage between slaves and owners

Therefore, the argument for the preservation of marriage as an established institution of society is not a strong one, because many historically established forms of marriage are currently taboo.

If we can not rely on the historical definition of marriage, we must use our own current constitutional and ethical framework to look at a marriage from a different perspective, one focused on what defines us as a society - namely, equality, liberty, and open-mindedness. Or at least, we'd like to pretend to be.

In that sense, group rights (multiple people marrying) are not completely comparable for many reasons.

Children? We arbitrarily assign age of consent, so that one's out.

Siblings? I don't see any moral or ethical issue, except genetically, this can pose a problem for society. It's like purposely asking tax payers to increase burden of genetic and birth defects.
 
Last edited: