Marriage Equality and Other MOGAI/Queer Rights

[NobleOwl]

Some interesting information:

 

1. My wife and children are not permitted treatment by Catholic hospitals. Is this discrimination? Yes, but they are private hospitals.

 

A judge refuses to marry anyone because the marriage laws are not equal who will tell you where you can go to be married as performing marriages is optional and not required by law.. Is this discrimination? No.

 

Likewise, a judge can not want to perform homosexual marriages and thus perform no marriages, treating people the same, as performing marriages is optional and not required by law.. Is this discrimination? Perhaps, but not wrong.

 

A doctor refuses to perform an abortion and recommends a doctor who will, in a non-emergency situation. Is this discrimination? No.

 

I refuse to say the pledge because I find it insulting to veterans and o G-d. Am I discriminating? No.

 

A priest can refuse a Romany communion. Is that discrimination? Yes. But that is their right.

 

Same as it is the right of my Rabbi to choose not to do interfaith ceremonies.

 

Conscience is important.

[Alpha1]

A doctor refuses to perform an abortion and recommends a doctor who will, in a non-emergency situation. Is this discrimination? No.

 

In your opinion, should it be a different doctor than the objecting doctor who recommends, or should the morally objecting doctor be complicit in the pregnancy termination by forcing them to refer their patients to doctors they know will do it?

[agirl3003]

Of course all the issues can be easily solved, by me finding a doctor in a another town, yeah in a same manner Texas homosexauls can solve their problems by relocating to California, do yourself a favor and never become a problem solver of any sort.

 

Going to another town to find a different doctor isn't NEARLY the same thing as completely MOVING so you can be recognized as being married. You need to find a new home, a new job, and the price burden is very high. Saying 'oh you can just move' is not something someone should have to do. For instance I work in video game design, so I live in Austin since it is the best place to be for that. I work with a specific company, and I enjoy my job and life here. If I happened to be a lesbian(which I am not) and I wanted to marry my girlfriend, and you were to tell me to simply 'move' I would be upset. I have a life here. Friends, family, a job, I go to school here, just telling me to 'move' simply because I want to spend my life with someone is not feasible.

 

The fact is it's a stupid law, and I applaud the judge for refusing to marry until gay marriage is legal. We are ALL citizens, we all live here, pay taxes, and contribute to this country. No one should be denied rights that everyone else has. That is why blacks are now free. That is why women and blacks may now vote. We preach equality then deny a portion of our citizens basic human rights. That is wrong no matter how you slice it.

Edited February 27, 2012 by agirl3003

[NobleOwl]

In your opinion, should it be a different doctor than the objecting doctor who recommends, or should the morally objecting doctor be complicit in the pregnancy termination by forcing them to refer their patients to doctors they know will do it?

 

The doctor or his practice.

[TikindiDragon]

Of course all the issues can be easily solved, by me finding a doctor in a another town, yeah in a same manner Texas homosexuals can solve their problems by relocating to California, do yourself a favor and never become a problem solver of any sort.

Oh, please. Like there's only one doctor in your town. Having to drive a few extra miles to another surgery is also not the same as completely relocating state.

[VictorianVivian]

I don't have a problem with gays and lesbians... My best friend is actually a lesbian, ha ha. I don't think that they should have the right to marry, though. It's just against what I believe in, personally.

I don't believe that they are destroying the sanctity of marriage, no, not in the least. The majority of that is the fault of straight people, but I'm more worried about the kids.

 

Not that homosexuals can't properly raise kids, that's not what I'm saying. Face it, either way, the kid's gonna get bullied and picked on when he/she gets older for having same sex parents. I don't think that's fair; it's actually kind of selfish.

Giving EQUAL rights to one group does not strip another group of those same rights.

[prairiecrow]

Giving EQUAL rights to one group does not strip another group of those same rights.

Very true. Rights are not usually a zero-sum game, where there are only a certain number of rights to go around and giving them to gay people means straight people are SOL.

 

But there are a lot of people out there who'd really like you to believe that.

[rogue-fox]

Your explanation made absolutely no sense, it is based from a book that has been rewritten a zillion times to suit the needs of the church. Nice try, come back when you have a better explanation of why you feel the way you do other than "the bible says so" because that don't wash with me. If the bible told you that every friday you have to jump off a cliff because God commands it so and says everyone who does will be saved if they put their faith in him would you do it? I don't think so...

 

 

EDIT: I would like to add that I am not intolerant of other peoples religions.. In fact I am quite the opposite, my religion says to love everyone no matter age, sex, sexual orientation or religion. I personally find it annoying when a person tries to hide their real feelings on a topic with a silly cop out of an excuse like "The bible say so".

Wow im suprised u didnt say to everyone else here what i already told you.

this is what i said:

I say it's still grose for two ppl of the same gender to raise a child. What are gonna tell them when they ask who's mommy or something. AND NO YOU CANNOT SAY THAT THE MORE FEMININE MAN IS THE WOMAN OR SOMETHING. But you people are right about there being plenty of heterosexuals who dont deserve kids cause they mistreat them. But i still dont want a child to raised by 2 ppl of the same sex. That is supposed to by a man and woman uder the bible. I dont want a child to be influenced to date their same sex cause they were influenced or something. Its a bit easier for that not to happen when raised by heterosexuals.

[Viktorya]

Wow im suprised u didnt say to everyone else here what i already told you.

this is what i said:

I say it's still grose for two ppl of the same gender to raise a child. What are gonna tell them when they ask who's mommy or something. AND NO YOU CANNOT SAY THAT THE MORE FEMININE MAN IS THE WOMAN OR SOMETHING. But you people are right about there being plenty of heterosexuals who dont deserve kids cause they mistreat them. But i still dont want a child to raised by 2 ppl of the same sex. That is supposed to by a man and woman uder the bible. I dont want a child to be influenced to date their same sex cause they were influenced or something. Its a bit easier for that not to happen when raised by heterosexuals.

When a child asks who the mommy is you explain that that person has two daddies and that's okay because they're just as good as having two mommies or a mommy and a daddy or anything else.

 

Not everyone believes in what the bible says, and they have no reason to be forced to.

 

Your orientation is not influenced by your parents' genders. That's ridiculous. If the child is going to be gay then they will be gay. If they are going to be straight then they will be straight. Probably the only thing that having gay parents will influence is the child's tolerance and respect for other gay couples they may encounter later on in life.

[tyto_alba]

But i still dont want a child to raised by 2 ppl of the same sex. That is supposed to by a man and woman uder the bible.

Then, by your logic, non-Christians shouldn't have kids.

 

I see a problem with that. :U

[EverAll]

Ok, if you cant seem to understand why is it discrimination, answer me this question -

 

A judge in California says on TV "I will not marry people as long as homosexuals are allowed to get married in California" equal treatment for all, is it still cool with you guys ?

 

A judge In Idaho says on TV "I will not marry people as long as colored people are allowed to get married in Idaho" equal treatment for all, is it still cool with you guys ?

Those examples are completely different.

 

The judge is not marrying one group, and excluding another. The Californian example wants to take rights away! Seriously. It isn't that hard. The Texan judge is not against heterosexual marriage. Your example is just some bigot who is angry that Homosexuals have rights.

 

The judge we are discussing wants everyone, regardless of sexuality to have equal rights, and this is her form of protest.

 

Your example wants rights taken away.

 

As is your Idaho example. That is taking away rights, while this judge wishes to bring rights for oppressed minorities.

 

She is not marrying any couples, as a form of PROTEST.

 

Protest. She is not discriminating, she is protesting.

 

For equal rights.

 

Not to strip society's beloved straights of their rights.

 

But to give gays the rights they deserve.

 

This is how she is making her cause heard.

 

 

[Alpha1]

I dont want a child to be influenced to date their same sex cause they were influenced or something. Its a bit easier for that not to happen when raised by heterosexuals.

 

Studies show that the vast majority of children in homosexual households are heterosexual.

 

You don't need a father and a mother. Two of the same sex do fine at parenting. In fact, their children as a whole do better in school according to some studies.

[NobleOwl]

I say it's still grose for two ppl of the same gender to raise a child.

 

Why?

 

What are gonna tell them when they ask who's mommy or something.

 

Puh, not a big deal at all. To our children, I'm Shima and my wife is Dya. One means mother in Dine, the other is mother in Romani.

 

By that logic, no one single should be able to raise children, either from IVF or adoption?

 

That is supposed to by a man and woman uder the bible.

 

Where? The Bible says nothing of the sort. I've read it in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and English (and the New Testament in Dine). As a Jew, in fact, ophans are supposed to be taken in by the two nearest relatives -- and if those two are both male, then the child is said to belong to both houses.

 

I dont want a child to be influenced to date their same sex cause they were influenced or something.Its a bit easier for that not to happen when raised by heterosexuals.

 

Children raised by homosexuals are actually less likely to be homosexual. Current statistics state that 1 in 10 children raised by heterosexuals will self-identify as LGBT, while it is 1 in 15 for children raised by heterosexuals.

 

My wife and I are 90% sure our eldest is straight. We think that's great.

 

You can't "influence" someone to become homosexual. There are marked biological differences that we can see between hetero and homosexuals. Physical things that we have no control over.

 

If one could "become" straight, then there would be far fewer homosexuals in the world. I sat back and watched my now-wife get tortured with electroshock and vomit therapy and exorcisms, trying to "make" herself straight. Instead, she got a lacerated esophagus and brain damage, and was still gay.

[St. Jimmy]

I say it's still grose for two ppl of the same gender to raise a child.

You've said why you think it's wrong, but you still have yet to say why it's so "gross."

 

I dont want a child to be influenced to date their same sex cause they were influenced or something. Its a bit easier for that not to happen when raised by heterosexuals.

 

Wrong. Both of my parents are straight. By your logic, I should be too. But I'm not.

[Alpha1]

Where? The Bible says nothing of the sort. I've read it in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and English (and the New Testament in Dine). As a Jew, in fact, ophans are supposed to be taken in by the two nearest relatives -- and if those two are both male, then the child is said to belong to both houses.

 

Whenever it mentions a male coming together with his wife becoming one flesh.

 

Children raised by homosexuals are actually less likely to be homosexual. Current statistics state that 1 in 10 children raised by heterosexuals will self-identify as LGBT, while it is 1 in 15 for children raised by heterosexuals.

 

From what I've read, it depends.

[NobleOwl]

Just going to leave this list here, since I'm a scientist an all:

 

Biological differences in hetero and homosexual males:

 

Gay men and straight women have, on average, equally proportioned brain hemispheres. Lesbian women and straight men have, on average, slightly larger right brain hemispheres.

 

The VIP SCN nucleus of the hypothalamus is larger in men than in women, and larger in gay men than in heterosexual men

 

The average size of the third interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus in the brains of gay men is approximately the same size as in women, which is significantly smaller, and the cells more densely packed, than in heterosexual men's brains

 

The suprachiasmatic nucleusis larger in gay men than in straight men, and the suprachiasmatic nucleus is also known to be larger in men than in women.

 

Gay men's brains respond differently to fluoxetine than heterosexual men.

 

Gay men have increased ridge density in the fingerprints on their left thumbs and pinkies than heterosexual men.

 

 

Biological differences in hetero and homosexual females:

 

The functioning of the inner ear and the central auditory system in homosexual women are identical to the functional properties found in men.

 

The startle response in lesbians also matches heterosexual males.

 

Homosexual females' brains react differently to the hormones in female urine than do those of heterosexual women.

 

Whenever it mentions a male coming together with his wife becoming one flesh.

 

Which has zero to do with parenting, same-sex or otherwise. When it was written, sex-for-procreation-only was (and still is by Jews and some sects of Christianity) to be a sin. It also has zero to do with sex, actually. (At least according to every single rabbi I have ever talked too, including Orthodox.)

Edited February 27, 2012 by NobleOwl

[Fuzzbucket]

From what I've read, it depends.

Statistics don't "depend". The statistics are out there. The only thing that "depends" is any one situation.

 

Actually I know a lot of gay and lesbian people, and strangely enough not one single gay/lesbian couple among them who has raised children has had even one of those children identify as gay/lesbian. And every last one of the gay/lesbian adults had parents who identified as straight.

 

As to teasing - IF it happens we should try to stop it, not say "Oh well, if they had proper parents this wouldn't have happened." Kids get teased for all sorts of reasons. Kids will pick on another kid for their trainers, their hair colour, the street they live on, their accent.

 

Instead of spouting bible stuff which may or may not hold up, depending on your bible knowledge, the translation you use and so on, we should learn from some of the best kids out there:

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/...s-students.html

 

They put some of the people in this thread to shame.

Oh and by the way - if you are going to quote the bible as the ultimate authority - I hope you don't eat prawns. Or clam chowder.

All creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to regard as unclean.

 

Leviticus 11.....

Edited February 27, 2012 by fuzzbucket

[prairiecrow]

Oh and by the way - if you are going to quote the bible as the ultimate authority - I hope you don't eat prawns. Or clam chowder.

 

 

Leviticus 11.....

Some Christians have an almost miraculous ability to pick and choose which Bible verses are valid and which ones aren't... and I find it hilarious that the ones that are "valid" are often the ones interfering with the rights of others, while the "invalid" ones are the ones that would inconvenience the Christians themselves.

 

Also, trying to use Biblical arguments against homosexuality is, to a non-Christian, about as persuasive as trying to argue from the storyline in a Batman comic. The majority of people on this planet are not Christian, and our numbers are growing all the time. Do we not deserve to have our moral systems and beliefs considered? And if we happen to be gay and want to marry the person we love, and our moral systems would permit us to do so... why shouldn't we?

Edited February 27, 2012 by prairiecrow

[Rosedamai]

I dont want a child to be influenced to date their same sex cause they were influenced or something. Its a bit easier for that not to happen when raised by heterosexuals.

I live in a conservative country where some people still hold homosexuality as some sort of a mental disease. I live in a stereotypical family with a mom, a dad, me, and my brother. My mom, dad and bro are all straight.

 

I'm bi.

 

Geez. I wonder what influenced me. Perhaps Satan himself hovered over my cradle when I was a baby.

[agirl3003]

Some Christians have an almost miraculous ability to pick and choose which Bible verses are valid and which ones aren't... and I find it hilarious that the ones that are "valid" are often the ones interfering with the rights of others, while the "invalid" ones are the ones that would inconvenience the Christians themselves.

That one always cracked me up such as how people deem lust as a terrible sin, however many people I know who are highly religious are rather...large and lazy. They act in both gluttony and sloth, why should any of the sins be any less then another? But I agree that if you choose to follow a specific verse, you should follow all of them, rather then just picking the ones that are 'convenient' to you.

 

But I truly believe that whether you are 'gay' or 'straight' depends on the chemicals in your brain. Your body yearns for a specific thing, which is not something you can help. People don't penalize people with disabilities. In fact the government makes sure they get 'equal' treatment since they can't help that they are that way(most of the time). So why penalize someone for being attracted to someone of the same sex?

[Fuzzbucket]

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

John 13:34.

 

Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

Romans 13:10

 

God is love. The end.

 

Not that I am actually even SLIGHTLY religious but still, I do know my bible. I was brought up by a minister - who was entirely OK with gays and lesbians.

 

Oh my. How come I am not religious if my daddy was and so was my mummy... Could it be that our parents don't have that much influence over us ?

[Alpha1]

Which has zero to do with parenting, same-sex or otherwise. When it was written, sex-for-procreation-only was (and still is by Jews and some sects of Christianity) to be a sin. It also has zero to do with sex, actually. (At least according to every single rabbi I have ever talked too, including Orthodox.)

 

No one is going to budge on this.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/07/us/07jew...?pagewanted=all

 

Conservative Jews Allow Gay Rabbis and Unions 2006

 

"But in a reflection of the divisions in the movement, the 25 rabbis on the law committee passed three conflicting legal opinions — one in favor of gay rabbis and unions, and two against.

 

In doing so, the committee left it up to individual synagogues to decide whether to accept or reject gay rabbis and commitment ceremonies, saying that either course is justified according to Jewish law."

 

Including Orthodox? If the Conservative branch is divided, then why wouldn't Orthodox?

 

Statistics don't "depend". The statistics are out there. The only thing that "depends" is any one situation.

 

I meant that it depends on what study you look at. One analysis looked at 21 different studies.

 

www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/biblarz-stacey.pdf

 

"We know very little yet about how parents influence the development of their children's sexual identities or how these intersect with gender."

 

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/08/137057974/-i...arch-gaps-in-us

 

"LGBTs Are 10% Of US Population? Wrong, Says Demographer"

 

This is not unlike the rape statistics. I've seen percentages varying from 5%-25% of all women.

 

Actually I know a lot of gay and lesbian people, and strangely enough not one single gay/lesbian couple among them who has raised children has had even one of those children identify as gay/lesbian. And every last one of the gay/lesbian adults had parents who identified as straight.

 

Note: I posted before Noble saying that the vast majority are heterosexuals. I didn't disagree with her there.

 

Oh and by the way - if you are going to quote the bible as the ultimate authority - I hope you don't eat prawns. Or clam chowder.

 

Because at that point in time, it was likely that some of those foods could make you sick.

 

They don't just quote the OT. They also quote the NT. In the OT, bestiality was wrong. They still claim it is. They think it's the same case with homosexuality.

Edited February 27, 2012 by Alpha1

[skinst]

Had she said I dont perform marriages I would be cool with it, if that christian judge said I dont perform marriages I would be cool with that as well but if he says he's not doing so coz homosexuals are allowed to get married in that state, then no Im not cool with it, nor with what she's doing.

The point of my post is that people have only started getting up in arms about it because of the tacked on moral reasoning. Had you had read my post more carefully you'd understand that.

 

Yes Im getting up in arms over an optional part of her job and if Im not mistaken you are from Australia and one of the same people who got up in arms when that religious pharmacist chose to exercise rights based on his moral reasoning by not giving an afterpill to a girl so which one is it ? Follow your moral reasoning or follow your moral reasoning only when Skinst agrees with you ?

What does my country of origin have anything to do with the post I made?

 

As for the birth control pill debate, my opinion on that differs because of circumstance. This judge can send people next door to do the job she refuses to perform. I wasn't aware that dispensing pills is an optional part of a pharmacist's job. It IS their job. If there are two pharmacists there, one that doesn't dispense the pills and the other that will though? Got no problems at all.

 

The same way I don't have an issue with this judge for her own moral stance.

Edited February 28, 2012 by skinst

[EverAll]

Wow im suprised  u didnt say to everyone else here what i already told you.

this is what i said:

I say it's still grose for two ppl of the same gender to raise a child. What are gonna tell them when they ask who's mommy or something. AND NO YOU CANNOT SAY THAT THE MORE FEMININE MAN IS THE WOMAN OR SOMETHING. But you people are right about there being plenty of heterosexuals who dont deserve kids cause they mistreat them. But i still dont want a child to raised by 2 ppl of the same sex. That is supposed to by a man and woman uder the bible. I dont want a child to be influenced to date their same sex cause they were influenced or something. Its a bit easier for that not to happen when raised by heterosexuals.

The bible also says to stone a woman to death if she has sex before she is married.

 

Do you agree with that too?

 

My parents are both heterosexual, my brother is heterosexual, as is everyone else in my family that I am aware of.

 

Guess what? I'm a lesbian.

 

Where's your logic.

Edited February 28, 2012 by EverAll

[Skypool]

Here is an interesting article that carries my point of view better than I can:

http://carm.org/bible-homosexuality

 

 

Even though I haven't met many homosexual people in my life, I've never found the urge to condemn them for what they do, even if I believe differently. But in numerous places, the Bible explains that homosexuality is a sin. For instance, the wicked men of Sodom wanted to know the two angels that had come to warn Lot that God was going to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot had told them it was an abomination, which it is. Even though those words didn't come from the direct mouth of God in that period, they came from somewhere. And that somewhere is Leviticus 18:22.

 

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. (KJV)

 

That alone is proof enough for me, but then again, I'm a Christian, a Holy-Rolling Pentecostal at that. I'm entitled to my own beliefs, my own freewill, as any other person is. So please, if you are in ANY way offended by this, don't be. It's just own opinion in what I believe.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Skypool