Gay Pride

• I Wear Pants

  Shouldn't have been vetoed. If it allowed marriages or something then sure, send it to a vote. But anyone who is against civil unions is probably misguided in their thinking.
• Little Danny

  

  FairwoodKing;414513 wrote:The latest attack on gay rights just came in Hawaii. Both houses of the state legislature voted for a law granting civil unions to gay and straight couples. The governor, a Republican, vetoed it. She says that the matter should be placed before the voters.
  
  http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20100707_Lingle_vetoes_civil-unions_bill.html

  
  Sure this hacks you off because the governor is at odds with your political beliefs. How would you feel if the shoe were on the other foot and the governor vetoed a bill by the legislature to legally discriminate against gays?
  
  This is why our system of government is in place. It has worked this way for over 200 years.
• FairwoodKing

  Little Danny;414583 wrote: This is why our system of government is in place. It has worked this way for over 200 years.

  
  It did not work well for women until the early 20th century. They didn't even have the vote. It didn't work well for African Americans until the mid-20th century. In many places they were still required to sit in the back of the bus. It hasn't worked well for gays because we don't have our rights.
  
  I won't be happy until all citizens are treated equally and fairly.
• BCBulldog

  

  FairwoodKing;414724 wrote:It did not work well for women until the early 20th century. They didn't even have the vote. It didn't work well for African Americans until the mid-20th century. In many places they were still required to sit in the back of the bus. It hasn't worked well for gays because we don't have our rights.
  
  I won't be happy until all citizens are treated equally and fairly.

  
  Women's right to vote and desegregation are on an entirely different level than homosexual marriage. In fact, they aren't even close to being in the same category.
• WebFire

  BCBulldog;415187 wrote:Women's right to vote and desegregation are on an entirely different level than homosexual marriage. In fact, they aren't even close to being in the same category.

  
  I agree. I still want to know if I should be able to marry my sister?
• dwccrew

  

  WebFire;415393 wrote:I agree. I still want to know if I should be able to marry my sister?

  
  Only in West Virginia and Stark County, Ohio.
• Mister Twister

  FairwoodKing;414724 wrote:It did not work well for women until the early 20th century. They didn't even have the vote. It didn't work well for African Americans until the mid-20th century. In many places they were still required to sit in the back of the bus. It hasn't worked well for gays because we don't have our rights.
  
  I won't be happy until all citizens are treated equally and fairly.

  
  All citizens will not be treated equally and fairly as long as they continue to act seperatist from the populace.
• jmog

  FairwoodKing;414724 wrote:It did not work well for women until the early 20th century. They didn't even have the vote. It didn't work well for African Americans until the mid-20th century. In many places they were still required to sit in the back of the bus. It hasn't worked well for gays because we don't have our rights.
  
  I won't be happy until all citizens are treated equally and fairly.

  
  If you can't see that the examples you provided and gay marriage aren't even in the same conversation then you are so blinded by your biased views its funny.
  
  
  Women/blacks were denied Contitutional rights, homosexuals are not denied any Constitutional rights. Huge difference.
• FairwoodKing

  A judge in Boston has just decreed that the ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. Since Obama wants DOMA (Defense of Marriage Amendment) overturned, it is not likely that the federal government will appeal.
  
  http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2012311472_doma09m.html
• Curly J

  

  FairwoodKing;414724 wrote:It did not work well for women until the early 20th century. They didn't even have the vote. It didn't work well for African Americans until the mid-20th century. In many places they were still required to sit in the back of the bus. It hasn't worked well for gays because we don't have our rights.
  
  I won't be happy until all citizens are treated equally and fairly.

  Good luck with that. I guess I should take up the cause of fighting for Vegans and Vegetarians that can't eat at Staek Houses. Freakin Unfair !!!
  
  Now before you say Apples and Oranges look at the following.
  
  Many believe people 'choose' to be a vegeterian...in the same way people 'choose' to be gay....or are they different that one is chosen and one is genetic ?
  
  I know of vegeterians that used to eat meat, then gave it up for vegetables and I know of gays that were married then gave women for men. Were they both predisposed to a condition or did the either of them choose? (and who am I to really care...just saying)
  
  Then where does it stop on which group should get more rights and or equal rights over others. We will never all be equal. By making everyone 'equal' others lose opportunites or did not receive the same opportunities that was granted to the other group. I'm glad you are fighting for protection from being fired for your job for being gay...a job you, me, or any other man might not even get thanks to “Affirmative Action”. Good old Employment quotas...that leveled the table for everyone. Made it all "equal"...or was that special rights. I guess it depends on who and how it affects the certain individual.
• FairwoodKing

  Curly J;416760 wrote:Good luck with that. I guess I should take up the cause of fighting for Vegans and Vegetarians that can't eat at Staek Houses. Freakin Unfair !!!
  
  Now before you say Apples and Oranges look at the following.
  
  Many believe people 'choose' to be a vegeterian...in the same way people 'choose' to be gay....or are they different that one is chosen and one is genetic ?
  
  I know of vegeterians that used to eat meat, then gave it up for vegetables and I know of gays that were married then gave women for men. Were they both predisposed to a condition or did the either of them choose? (and who am I to really care...just saying)
  
  Then where does it stop on which group should get more rights and or equal rights over others. We will never all be equal. By making everyone 'equal' others lose opportunites or did not receive the same opportunities that was granted to the other group. I'm glad you are fighting for protection from being fired for your job for being gay...a job you, me, or any other man might not even get thanks to “Affirmative Action”. Good old Employment quotas...that leveled the table for everyone. Made it all "equal"...or was that special rights. I guess it depends on who and how it affects the certain individual.

  
  Your argument is bullshit. Vegans choose to be what they are. Gays do not choose. Gay men who marry women almost always get themselves into a mess. First, they have to think about men just to have sex with their wives. Then when the wife finds out (and she usually does), there is a messy divorce. I have many friends who have found themselves in these situations.
  
  What does Affirmative Action have to do with being gay? We were never included nor did we want to be. Of all the distinguishable groups of people that you can determine, we are the most talented. We don't have trouble in college or in finding jobs. We just have to worry about keeping those jobs when our bosses find out about us. In Ohio, the law doesn't protect us.
• majorspark

  

  FairwoodKing;416450 wrote:A judge in Boston has just decreed that the ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. Since Obama wants DOMA (Defense of Marriage Amendment) overturned, it is not likely that the federal government will appeal.
  
  http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2012311472_doma09m.html

  
  I actually agree with this decision. The federal government has no authority to define what constitutes a marriage. That is left to the states and the people to decide.
  
  You should note that the decision by this judge also affirms every state that defines marriage as a union between one man and one women as constitutional.
• Curly J

  

  FairwoodKing;417103 wrote:Your argument is bullshit. Vegans choose to be what they are. Gays do not choose. Gay men who marry women almost always get themselves into a mess. First, they have to think about men just to have sex with their wives. Then when the wife finds out (and she usually does), there is a messy divorce. I have many friends who have found themselves in these situations.
  
  What does Affirmative Action have to do with being gay? We were never included nor did we want to be. Of all the distinguishable groups of people that you can determine, we are the most talented. We don't have trouble in college or in finding jobs. We just have to worry about keeping those jobs when our bosses find out about us. In Ohio, the law doesn't protect us.

  Of couse it's bullshit. I was being somewhat facecious. The point I'm trying to make is it APPEARS, to some people, that some gays choose to be gay...like those that were previously married then adapt a gay lifestyle. You said they didn't choose, but to anti-gays it the same as someone becoming a vegetarian.
  
  Affirmative Action was started to help minorities get jobs. You know it might be Equal Rights in the eyes of those it helps. It looks like Special Rights on those that it hurts. But since gays are not included in it, it doesn't even affect you at all...even though you are a man. (gay or not)
  
  What bothers me the most is you say I can't/won't be fired for being straight ? BULLSHIT. (not a high probably, but it could occur) I can be fired for anything being Ohio is an at will State and I don't believe they are required to even tell you why. You want that Special Right protecting you beacuse you are gay, in the mean time not protecting me since I'm straight. (at least that's the way it sounds and the way some anti-gay people think) That my friend is not equal in my book. If you say no one should be fired due to their sexual orientation, I can buy that. What I don't want is You protected and me not, because right now NEITHER one of us is in Ohio due to our sexual orientation. (gay, straight, or bi)
  
  Everytime Gay Rights, Equal Rights, Insert the blank Rights is said, many people look at it as which right am I losing, never had, or not gonna get. What special right are they going to get that I am not ???
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  FairwoodKing;417103 wrote: We just have to worry about keeping those jobs when our bosses find out about us. In Ohio, the law doesn't protect us.

  My aunt has been a dyke since the early 70's and has lived in Akron since then. She has never been fired from a job because of her sexual preference nor is she ridiculed for her choice. Her neighbors watch out for her and could really give a crap less what she is.
  
  We keep hearing the same thing over and over from you Fairwood that OH employers are out to get you. None of my employees have ever spoke of their sexual preferences, and I don't care to know about them.
  
  Why challenge the fear of acceptence in OH, there are other places to go besides OH that are cheaper to live in than WA.
  
  How do you as a queer believe that you can convince a predominately christian nation of voters to help you when you consistantly call them out demanding that you will do everything in your power to change what they believe in to what you believe in?
• FairwoodKing

  ^^^ Yes, in theory, in Ohio you could be fired for being straight. In all of my experiences, I have only heard of this happening one time, and it was such a bizarre situation that it's not worth repeating. The reality is that you don't get fired for being straight but people do get fired for being gay. This is the way the real world operates.
  
  Washington where I live is an at-will state, also. But if you're fired for being gay (or female or old or Jewish, etc.) , you do have considerable legal recourse. That's what we want for the whole country.
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  FairwoodKing;417251 wrote:^^^ Yes, in theory, in Ohio you could be fired for being straight. In all of my experiences, I have only heard of this happening one time, and it was such a bizarre situation that it's not worth repeating. The reality is that you don't get fired for being straight but people do get fired for being gay. This is the way the real world operates.
  
  Washington where I live is an at-will state, also. But if you're fired for being gay (or female or old or Jewish, etc.) , you do have considerable legal recourse. That's what we want for the whole country.

  Bio-Hazzzzard;417237 wrote:How do you as a queer believe that you can convince a predominately christian nation of voters to help you when you consistantly call them out demanding that you will do everything in your power to change what they believe in to what you believe in?

  Will you answer this question?
• FairwoodKing

  Bio-Hazzzzard;417284 wrote:Will you answer this question?

  
  People's beliefs can be changed. It wasn't so many years ago that Christians (especially in the South) believed that black people should be slaves because the Bible says that people of color were enslaved. It took women thousands of years to get their rights because the Bible says that woman is merely the rib of Adam. Eventually, Christians (and people of other faiths) will come around to see that gay people are not sinners for what we do. A lot of Christian churches are very open to us.
  
  It's our job to educate these people to show them that their beliefs are wrong.
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  As a christian myself, my beliefs will never be changed.
  
  Why do you continue to think that you can change my mind as a christian believer to what I know is clearly wrong with what you believe in.
  
  We are clearly in an argument of opposite beliefs.
  
  I will accept a queer as a person and a human being , but I never will believe in their acts. My beliefs will not be changed
  as yours will neither.
  
  ......and it is our job of christian belief to educate queers that they are wrong.
• I Wear Pants

  People said the same thing about blacks, women, american indians, asians, mentally disabled people, athiests, Lutherans, Muslims, believers in science, etc.
• Curly J

  

  FairwoodKing;417251 wrote:^^^ Yes, in theory, in Ohio you could be fired for being straight. In all of my experiences, I have only heard of this happening one time, and it was such a bizarre situation that it's not worth repeating. The reality is that you don't get fired for being straight but people do get fired for being gay. This is the way the real world operates.
  
  Washington where I live is an at-will state, also. But if you're fired for being gay (or female or old or Jewish, etc.) , you do have considerable legal recourse. That's what we want for the whole country.

  Did the person fired for being straight have any legal recourses ??? Would he in WA ???
  
  Yes this is the real world and I've never heard of any one being fired because he was gay, well scratch that...Back in 1989 when I was in the Air Force, they discharged a freind of mine that was 'rumored' to be gay. I still don't know if he was or wasn't, but was discharged due to his mental state. I saw him on a few occasions prior to the discharge and I believe he was going, or was crazy.
  
  I tend to think that most companies now days will NOT fire you for being gay. They are afraid of the of legal actions, bad publicity and any sort of ramifications they might incur. At least here in the Cincy area. I'm sure they'd even think twice if the gay person in question was educated and had money like yourself. Companies don't want to take the chance and have to spend money over something like that the way the economy is right now.
  
  I'm not sure the last time you lived in Ohio, but things have changed, people have changed. Things are so different now it's like a different state. (once again in my area)
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  Employers are out to make money and whomever can make an employer the most money and have a good attitude wins the job, no matter what they believe in.
  
  I would rather benefit with more money from the most qualified employee than to worry if my employee is gay
• Footwedge

  Bio-Hazzzzard;417313 wrote:As a christian myself, my beliefs will never be changed.
  
  Why do you continue to think that you can change my mind as a christian believer to what I know is clearly wrong with what you believe in.
  
  We are clearly in an argument of opposite beliefs.
  
  I will accept a queer as a person and a human being , but I never will believe in their acts. My beliefs will not be changed
  as yours will neither.
  
  ......and it is our job of christian belief to educate queers that they are wrong.

  What would you do if you had a son....and at the age of 18, he told you that his innate desires regarding sex were wired towards other men?
  
  Would you hate the little "queer" because the Bible told you to?
• Footwedge

  Curly J;416760 wrote:Good luck with that. I guess I should take up the cause of fighting for Vegans and Vegetarians that can't eat at Staek Houses. Freakin Unfair !!!
  
  Now before you say Apples and Oranges look at the following.
  
  Many believe people 'choose' to be a vegeterian...in the same way people 'choose' to be gay....or are they different that one is chosen and one is genetic ?
  
  I know of vegeterians that used to eat meat, then gave it up for vegetables and I know of gays that were married then gave women for men. Were they both predisposed to a condition or did the either of them choose? (and who am I to really care...just saying)
  
  Then where does it stop on which group should get more rights and or equal rights over others. We will never all be equal. By making everyone 'equal' others lose opportunites or did not receive the same opportunities that was granted to the other group. I'm glad you are fighting for protection from being fired for your job for being gay...a job you, me, or any other man might not even get thanks to “Affirmative Action”. Good old Employment quotas...that leveled the table for everyone. Made it all "equal"...or was that special rights. I guess it depends on who and how it affects the certain individual.

  Why would anyone choose to be gay?
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  I never said that I hated queers maybe you should have read a little closer. Hate and not believing in it are two different things.
  
  I wouldn't believe in it but I would still love the son I can never have
  
  The Bible says to hate no one... pick it up and read it for yourself
• majorspark

  

  Footwedge;417348 wrote:What would you do if you had a son....and at the age of 18, he told you that his innate desires regarding sex were wired towards other men?
  
  Would you hate the little "queer" because the Bible told you to?

  
  Where in the Bible does it say you should hate homosexuals? That is not what he is saying. He is not talking about hate. He is talking about what he believes to be right and wrong.
  
  The Bible also teaches that any sexual activity outside of the bounds of marriage is sin. So if I believe in this, am I also bigoted against unmarried heterosexuals engaging in sexual activity? Does this mean I have a hate for them?
  
  I counsel my children to wait until they are married. If they fail in any way no way would I hate them. I would love them just the same. I would however be sad knowing the consequences that sexual sin could bring into their lives