Hey MStone, why are Panamanians so hateful and ignorant? Is it their general lack of education, or their willingness to make comments about people and things they have zero experience with firsthand?
In reality, that was rhetorical, I don't really care what you think.
That's harsh and racist. I know many Panamanians, and not one is hateful and/or ignorant.
But what if our creator actually made us male and female for a reason? And marriage, too.
I understand you're point but its not a reason to discriminate. The "creator" is the only one with all the facts so he is the only one who can pass judgment. If I remember correctly Jesus said that "the one without sins can throw the first rock", since no one is without sins, then no one can do it.
Which state had the wedding photographer case? I assumed it was AZ, but apparently not?
It was NOT Arizonia. It was New Mexico. Anderson Cooper had one of the Arizonia Senators on his show who is a proponent of this Arizonia bill. It was made clear you could already turn away a gay person as a business person in Arizonia. This legislation was not needed to do that. The Senator also could not cite one example of there being a problem in Arizonia with a business who wanted to turn somebody away someone for being gay on religious grounds from not being able to do so. Then again the Senator was an idiot. This bill was passed just to appease some right winged religious groups as just a way to kick dirt in gay people's faces, as there is nothing preventing business people from turning away gay people now.
Be extremely suspicious of anyone who is absolutely sure of what God wants.
And the opposite.
Quote:
For myself, as, no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaningless was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. - Aldous Huxley
I wasn't talking about biology or Catholocism. I said, "What if our creator made us male and female for a reason?"
Sex and gender are exactly the same.
Before DNA showed us differently, it was easy to say, "Sex and gender are exactly the same."
Some people who have YY chromosomes, have the complete organs of a female, and identify themselves across the whole spectrum from female to male. Even some that Identify themselves as female, prefer a female lover. So, genetically they are more male than the average male, while physically they are female, and still can respond as if the DNA or the physical/hormonal body doesn't matter. The same thing applies to men with XX chromosomes.
While most gay and lesbian people have chromosomes that match their physical bodies, it would seem that a third unknown factor determines one's orientation. Until that factor is known, people, such as you, can make such "black/white" statements from the comfort of ignorance.
I'm very happy to have an orientation that matches my body type. Growing up to adulthood was trying enough for me to feel accepted as a person, without throwing on one more thing to deal with.
You don't make people equal under the law by giving certain groups special privileges. Gays are being given the privilege of not being refused service. As a hetero, I can be refused service, so things are not equal under the law.
Hmmm... I'm curious. When was the last time you were refused service and why?
1) How is Apple against you being a white male who likes women? What civil rights are being preventing by you liking to smoke weed? Are potheads not allowed to get married in your state?
2) Marijuana is no less important? WTF are you smoking? Oh, never mind.
3) Lots of things have come a long way but until there are equal rights there are still a ways to go.
4) Everybody — not every thing — should be equal under the law.
You don't make people equal under the law by giving certain groups special privileges. Gays are being given the privilege of not being refused service. As a hetero, I can be refused service, so things are not equal under the law.
Actually if you were refused service because you hetero-sexual, it would be illegal in any state that has a law on discrimination for sexual orientation.
Be extremely suspicious of anyone who is absolutely sure of what God wants.
And the opposite.
For myself, as, no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaningless was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. - Aldous Huxley
You think we should be suspicious of anyone who is not 100% sure of what God wants? Why? Anyone who is 100% sure of what God wants is delusional. Anyone who isn't 100% sure is sane.
But if i own a business and would prefer not to sell a cake to a gay couple that should be my right. If they don't like it they can get a cake from someone else who will happily make one for them.
When you open for business you open for the public. That includes everyone. If you don't like it then don't bake a cake at all.
We need laws that simply state that no state law or regulation could be construed as requiring any one party to enter into a contract with any other party.
Would municipalities be allowed to reject a contract that allows blacks to ride at the front of the bus?
You don't make people equal under the law by giving certain groups special privileges. Gays are being given the privilege of not being refused service. As a hetero, I can be refused service, so things are not equal under the law.
I repeat, sexual orientation is not a protected class in AZ. You can be discriminated against gays equally for being a hetero. But of course you wouldn't pretend to suggest you actually were. That would be certifiably idiotic. Straight white privilege owns the title for discrimination. Losing the unquestioned and unearned entitlement you've taken for granted may be hard to accept, but pretending to be a victim in the move towards equality isn't a credible argument. That simply displays gross ignorance of all actual victims through time.
1) You mean that special privilege to get married to the person they love? What a bunch of takers¡
2) You can be refused to have your marriage to a single women who is also not otherwise married acknowledged under the law in your state? Well, yeah, if she's your sister, daughter or mother, but you're taking a pretty big step there if you want to argue that "the gays" shouldn't be allowed to marry until you can marry someone in your immediate family.
Actually, in UK, the issue of who can live together is vexed. If two homosexual men can get married and live together, they have better housing rights than two brothers living together, for example. That strikes me as unfair. I don't mean two brothers marrying, just sharing a house.
Comments
That's harsh and racist. I know many Panamanians, and not one is hateful and/or ignorant.
But what if our creator actually made us male and female for a reason? And marriage, too.
I understand you're point but its not a reason to discriminate. The "creator" is the only one with all the facts so he is the only one who can pass judgment. If I remember correctly Jesus said that "the one without sins can throw the first rock", since no one is without sins, then no one can do it.
Which state had the wedding photographer case? I assumed it was AZ, but apparently not?
It was NOT Arizonia. It was New Mexico. Anderson Cooper had one of the Arizonia Senators on his show who is a proponent of this Arizonia bill. It was made clear you could already turn away a gay person as a business person in Arizonia. This legislation was not needed to do that. The Senator also could not cite one example of there being a problem in Arizonia with a business who wanted to turn somebody away someone for being gay on religious grounds from not being able to do so. Then again the Senator was an idiot. This bill was passed just to appease some right winged religious groups as just a way to kick dirt in gay people's faces, as there is nothing preventing business people from turning away gay people now.
What God wants is easy, doing it is what's hard.
In this thread: Straight white men explain why discrimination is OK.
An Ad Hominem fallacy.
Be extremely suspicious of anyone who is absolutely sure of what God wants.
And the opposite.
Before DNA showed us differently, it was easy to say, "Sex and gender are exactly the same."
Some people who have YY chromosomes, have the complete organs of a female, and identify themselves across the whole spectrum from female to male. Even some that Identify themselves as female, prefer a female lover. So, genetically they are more male than the average male, while physically they are female, and still can respond as if the DNA or the physical/hormonal body doesn't matter. The same thing applies to men with XX chromosomes.
While most gay and lesbian people have chromosomes that match their physical bodies, it would seem that a third unknown factor determines one's orientation. Until that factor is known, people, such as you, can make such "black/white" statements from the comfort of ignorance.
I'm very happy to have an orientation that matches my body type. Growing up to adulthood was trying enough for me to feel accepted as a person, without throwing on one more thing to deal with.
You don't make people equal under the law by giving certain groups special privileges. Gays are being given the privilege of not being refused service. As a hetero, I can be refused service, so things are not equal under the law.
Hmmm... I'm curious. When was the last time you were refused service and why?
Actually if you were refused service because you hetero-sexual, it would be illegal in any state that has a law on discrimination for sexual orientation.
You think we should be suspicious of anyone who is not 100% sure of what God wants? Why? Anyone who is 100% sure of what God wants is delusional. Anyone who isn't 100% sure is sane.
An Ad Hominem fallacy.
An Ad Hominem fallacy fallacy.
When you open for business you open for the public. That includes everyone. If you don't like it then don't bake a cake at all.
Everyone should have the right to discriminate between right and wrong.
Some people think it is wrong that "mud people" are allowed to frequent the same facilities as "good white Christians".
Should those folks be allowed to discriminate between 'right and wrong"?
We need laws that simply state that no state law or regulation could be construed as requiring any one party to enter into a contract with any other party.
Would municipalities be allowed to reject a contract that allows blacks to ride at the front of the bus?
But what if our creator actually made us male and female for a reason? And marriage, too.
Then we will all get smitten. But don't hold your breath waiting.
You don't make people equal under the law by giving certain groups special privileges. Gays are being given the privilege of not being refused service. As a hetero, I can be refused service, so things are not equal under the law.
I repeat, sexual orientation is not a protected class in AZ. You can be discriminated against gays equally for being a hetero. But of course you wouldn't pretend to suggest you actually were. That would be certifiably idiotic. Straight white privilege owns the title for discrimination. Losing the unquestioned and unearned entitlement you've taken for granted may be hard to accept, but pretending to be a victim in the move towards equality isn't a credible argument. That simply displays gross ignorance of all actual victims through time.
Actually, in UK, the issue of who can live together is vexed. If two homosexual men can get married and live together, they have better housing rights than two brothers living together, for example. That strikes me as unfair. I don't mean two brothers marrying, just sharing a house.
There are no gay people. Only heterosexual people with identity issues.
Are you being serious right now?
He is. He is saying "People choose to be homosexuals, so it is OK to discriminate against them".
But he cites a red herring - it doesn't really matter whether or not it is genetic or a choice.