This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Should people be able to vote away civil rights for minorities?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Laihendi
Why should any of those things require you to be married to the other person?
Because it makes you a part of the family of someone else. You can't have joint insurance plans with any person, you can't get death benefits for a friend, two people who are just friends can't have parental rights, etc.
Post by
MyTie
Why should any of those things require you to be married to the other person?
Because it makes you a part of the family of someone else. You can't have joint insurance plans with any person, you can't get death benefits for a friend, two people who are just friends can't have parental rights, etc.
Why not? Why does government attach benefits to marriage? Why does government even recognize marriage? If two people want to be seen jointly, that should be thier option with or without marriage. The government's ability to deny this is horrible. Again, this brings us back to the freedoms arguement. Government shouldn't be allowed to grant the freedoms to people because the government shouldn't be allowed to deny the freedoms.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
k i'm just gonna copypaste what i posted before cause it kind of answers your argument and it seems like you obviously didn't read it o_O
feel free to make marriage a religious thing - but give it no legal benefits and form some other form of governmental union available to everyone with these legal benefits. Except that this is far too annoying and confusing, so let's just let gay people marry, k :)?
Too hard to do it the right way. Let's just allow government to control our lives a little bit more to avoid the hastle of working for our freedom. THANK GOODNESS the people who fought the revolution were not as lazy as you.
Post by
TheMediator
Why should any of those things require you to be married to the other person?
Because it makes you a part of the family of someone else. You can't have joint insurance plans with any person, you can't get death benefits for a friend, two people who are just friends can't have parental rights, etc.
Why not? Why does government attach benefits to marriage? Why does government even recognize marriage? If two people want to be seen jointly, that should be thier option with or without marriage. The government's ability to deny this is horrible. Again, this brings us back to the freedoms arguement. Government shouldn't be allowed to grant the freedoms to people because the government shouldn't be allowed to deny the freedoms.
The government claimed the term marriage and has done with it as it pleased, now if your religious group wants to keep clear of it, you should call your marriage a religious union or something. I mean, people call government marriages civil unions but they also use the term marriage, but you're the one with a problem with them getting confused, so you need to be the ones to dissociate with it.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
^ Civil union != marriage. Has far less benefits. However, the rest of your info is good :).
Hmmm... I thought they were just names for the same thing. I may be wrong though... that's pretty ridiculous if they aren't.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ASHelmy
America is a country where everyone votes, and while that sounds like a great way to make sure everything is fair, in reality it isn't, because it leaves minorities powerless.
Think about California. Gay marriage gets legalized. Yay for civil rights! Then a couple months later in the November election, proposition 8 was passed, and that right was taken away. Before you get any ideas, this isn't just a gay thread, it's a thread about any minority group... racial, or whatever.
So, how is it fair for it to be possible to vote away marriage rights for homosexuals? They only make up an estimated 5-10% of the population (or that's what Laihendi has heard), so obviously in any situation involving majority rule, they're at a disadvantage. Does this mean it's possible to vote away marriage rights because of their race? What about religion? Shouldn't the government take an active role in protecting groups that are facing discrimination?
It doesn't really seem to make sense that democracy should be allowed to be used to take away equal rights from minorities, but that seems inevitable when popular opinion is law . Anyways, what do you think? (And remember, this doesn't have to just be about gay people).
Simple answer: If, for example, a minority makes up 10% of the population, we could make their vote worth 10 votes :D (stupid solution with loads of problems, I know, but i just came up with it).
Actually, make that 9 votes :D.
Oh god no. This sort of logic is why blacks were only counted at 3/5s of a person way back when.
Also at the marriage thing, said twice, doesn't need to be repeated a third.
Well, laihendi is right, the minorities have no say in this. However, it can be argued that giving minorities those rights can have an effect on everyone else, so....
Post by
TheMediator
Civil unions and domestic partnerships lose over 1400 rights that are given to married couples. Civil Unions/Domestic Partnerships are "replacements" for marriage given by governments in some states that deem certain groups unsuitable for marriage.
Sounds like the church brainwashed people in those states and erased "majority rule, minority rights" from their brain and replaced it with "do what the church wishes".
Sigh. People shouldn't even be able to spread religion to kids, they don't even get the option of whether they do or don't want to get brainwashed, and by the time they're an adult, unless they have a true truth seeking quality, can't break free.
Post by
Queggy
Laihendi, you claim that being gay is uncontrollable by you and it is all determined by chemicals in your brain. This would suggest that physically, people are supposed to be gay. If this is true, then why aren't human beings designed to mate male with male or female with female? Perhaps being gay is not determined by what you think it is. I realize this isn't exactly what this topic was determined for, but it seems like it might fit into the discussion.
If the body determines whether they is gay or not, shouldn't the body also being able to follow out that decision? Unless of course the body
doesn't
determine whether a person is gay or not. You always say,
"Why would I choose to be gay? Why would I want to be mocked and ridiculed?"
Well, I've frequently heard you complain at how stupid your grandparents (and possibly parents? I can't be sure on this one . . .) are stupid. And I know that you used to be Christian, so you know that being gay is against those religious morals. So perhaps you made an unconscious decision to be gay, because that would be the perfect way to rebel at what you saw as stupidity incarnate . Perhaps it wasn't determined by uncontrollable chemicals in the brain?
Maybe, instead of catering to the wishes of some people, they should learn to suck it up and stop trying to become a martyr figure or a rebel. Maybe they should try to stop getting attention and actually do something else.
Now that that has been said, I realize that this post will generate a lot of flames (especially from Laihendi) but that is my view. So,
"Flame on!"
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
This would suggest that physically, people are supposed to be gay.
Ostriches have wings. This would suggest that physically, ostriches are supposed to fly. If this is true, then why are ostriches bodies physically not capable of flying?
Post by
ASHelmy
This would suggest that physically, people are supposed to be gay.
Ostriches have wings. This would suggest that physically, ostriches are supposed to fly. If this is true, then why are ostriches bodies physically not capable of flying?
You continue your awesome.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Laihendi
Laihendi, you claim that being gay is uncontrollable by you and it is all determined by chemicals in your brain. This would suggest that physically, people are supposed to be gay. If this is true, then why aren't human beings designed to mate male with male or female with female? Perhaps being gay is not determined by what you think it is. I realize this isn't exactly what this topic was determined for, but it seems like it might fit into the discussion.
If the body determines whether they is gay or not, shouldn't the body also being able to follow out that decision? Unless of course the body
doesn't
determine whether a person is gay or not. You always say,
"Why would I choose to be gay? Why would I want to be mocked and ridiculed?"
Well, I've frequently heard you complain at how stupid your grandparents (and possibly parents? I can't be sure on this one . . .) are stupid. And I know that you used to be Christian, so you know that being gay is against those religious morals. So perhaps you made an unconscious decision to be gay, because that would be the perfect way to rebel at what you saw as stupidity incarnate . Perhaps it wasn't determined by uncontrollable chemicals in the brain?
Maybe, instead of catering to the wishes of some people, they should learn to suck it up and stop trying to become a martyr figure or a rebel. Maybe they should try to stop getting attention and actually do something else.
Now that that has been said, I realize that this post will generate a lot of flames (especially from Laihendi) but that is my view. So,
"Flame on!"
You realize that Laihendi isn't openly gay, right? If he wanted to rebel... wouldn't he tell someone? (other than telling people anonymously on the internet).
Laihendi, you claim that being gay is uncontrollable by you and it is all determined by chemicals in your brain. This would suggest that physically, people are supposed to be gay.
It doesn't mean they're supposed to be gay, it means they are gay. Since you based your entire argument on that mistake, it makes the rest pretty much... wrong.
Post by
309832
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
273605
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Laihendi
This thread isn't supposed to be exclusively about gay people though.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.