The Gay Fray

They're exactly as equal as any other male ...no male, hetero or homo can marry another male. That's the law, it's that simple, there is no discrimination at all under the law.

But same-sex couples are NOT married couples, so they shouldn't get the same benefits. Married couples are man and woman, simple as that.

What gays and lesbians want is special treatment under the law! They want the law(s) changed because they think that they're special somehow. And that ain't right ...not in these great United States of America.

The reality and the legality are two different things! Yes, they are harassed and fired, etc, but it's not legal, it's against the law!

But just remember, I'm also one who believes in the essential freedoms afforded by the Constitution ....and that freedom also means that no one be FORCED to hire or deal with someone they don't like or want to hire or deal with!

On one hand, ye're crying for the freedoms of gays, while on the other hand, ye're yelling that employers be FORCED to hire people they don't want or like. Which is it? Freedom or force?

Gays can do the same things ....they just can't do it as Husband and Wife!

And lest you forget, it is NOT "the same thing" ....a male fucking a female in the ass is NOT, repeat NOT, the same as a male fucking a male in the ass. It ain't the same ....and no amount of words that you type is gonna' make it the same. Live with it!

Well, ye're wrong. I did read it ...painfully, I might add, but I did read it. You said nothing that I've not read/heard a thousand times before.

Gays are exactly as equal as any other male ...no male, hetero or homo can marry another male. That's the law, it's that simple, there is no discrimination at all under the law.

Baron Max

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You didn't read my post.

It is legal to harrass, fired and evict people because of their sexual orientation.

It's one thing to be an ignorant pig-headed prick... it's quite another to bullshit your way through trying to respond.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Where??? Please tell me ....I might move there permanently!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Well, the first one comes naturally, but I really have to work at the second one ...sorry to disappoint you.

Baron Max

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

another note on this completely bankrupt "special treatment" banter. If laws were not already written to specifically target homosexuals, either through specific language or limiting terms designed to target them through omission then there would simply be no problem. By default we must have the same rights, it is only when special laws are thrown into the mix which are made specifically to deny us these equal rights that there becomes a problem. It is these laws which the gay-rights movement targets for repeal or revision.

Gays hate special treatment and would like to do away with it just as much as you.

 

Most of the US. Come on over to sunny Phoenix for example, all of the things she just described are completely legal and acceptable. Very few states have anti-descrimination laws which cover sexual orientation.

 

No! It's a FEDERAL law which covers discrimination laws ....and federal law supercedes state law. If there's blatant discrimination going on, it's because no one has complained and/or brought it before the courts.

Baron Max

 

Yes, there are federal anti-descrimination laws as well, but guess what, they don't include sexual orientation either. Please do a little reasearch before you go shooting your mouth off like you're some kind of God damend expert.

 

You do have the same rights!!! Gay males can't marry males AND straight males can't marry males. That is the same law ....and it's the same for gays as it is for normal males. How is that so fuckin' difficult for you to understand or to comprehend??

STRAIGHT MALES CAN'T MARRY MALES, GAY MALES CAN'T MARRY MALES.

Thats the SAME law for both straights AND for gays!! But y'all want SPECIAL TREATMENT under the law .....and that ain't nice of you.

Baron Max

 

And that seems fair to you? Your needs are addressed while those of others are specifically ignored and repressed? This is equality to you? This is a society which values and trys to work for its members? What if a law were passed which makes it illegal for anyone to menstruate? Who do you think this law targets? Even if it's still illegal for men to menstruate, don't you perhaps think that this is nothing but a measure taken against Women? Why might one think this? I know you're old and senile, but this isn't very hard to think through.

 

Ahh, such are the laws of humankind, huh? Fair? When did that ever, EVER, enter into the enactment of laws? ...LOL!

But "equality"? Yes, and in my last post, I explained it fully and see no reason to type it all again or copy it.

Well, then I'd suggest that women figure out how not to do it! ..or end up in jail for a day or two each and every month! ...LOL!

But none of the rest of your post is relevant to the discussion on marriage laws in the USA.

STRAIGHT MALES CAN'T MARRY MALES, GAY MALES CAN'T MARRY MALES.

Seems perfectly equal to me.

No, you'd be quite surprised how difficult it is for me, being old and senile, to think through some of these responses .....it takes great effort and tremendous concentration. I have to take a nap after almost every post.

Baron Max

 

Max I beleive that I've adressed your bold written cross posted argument about a dozen different times, perhaps you'd like to start responding, or shall we just say that I've got the last word?

 

Well, Mystech, you might have addressed it, but you sure didn't answer it! There's a difference, you know? Just giving your opinion is not the same as providing adequate answers.

STRAIGHT MALES CAN'T MARRY MALES, GAY MALES CAN'T MARRY MALES.

Seems perfectly equal to me. Ain't no discrimination against gays in that law.

Baron Max

 

There is NO Federal Law against discriminating against people based on sexual orientation. The Supreme Court has upheld those laws in several cases.

Gay males can't marry the person that they love, and straight men can. Gay men cannot leave their hard earned social security benefits to their lifelong partner, and straight men can. Gay males do not have a right to visit their significant other in an intensive care unit because they are not considered family. So, the gay male is truly alone, despite loving someone deeply. They are not afforded the same rights everyone else has. They are not asking for more rights, they are asking for equal rights.

I know you don't/won't/can't understand that. But as many times as you repeat your mantras does not make them true. The fact is that you are wrong, and the laws are in your favour. That's the sad thing.

 

A lot of time, straight men can't either!! They have to settle on some woman who'll have them! ...LOL!

But again ...marrriage laws are NOT about love. Love ain't got nothin' to do with it. Marriage is between a man and a women who want to get married - whether they love each other or not. There are many marriages for financial or convience reasons - not love at all.

That's because the "lifelong partner" is not a female AND they aren't married! I love my goats and sheep very much, and we've been together a long, long time ....But when I die, my social security checks won't be given to my goats and sheep. The marriage laws won't let me marry my goats and sheep, either. Such is life.

They can have a legal, court-approved document to permit such visits. It's simple and painless .....and few people would object to it, too. Marriage is not necessary.

Oh, I don't know about that! Many, many hetero couples are opting to live together without marrying .....and they don't consider themselves ...alone!

Bullshit! Gays and lesbians are asking that laws be changed based on who and what they like to fuck and suck!! That's all it is ...special interests based on deviant sexual desires and abnormalities!
*
*
And are you absolutely sure that Federal Law doesn't condemn discrimination for sexual preference??? If that's true, how can we have hate crimes against gays??

Baron Max

 

Gays and lesbians are asking for the SAME rights that heterosexuals have in marriage and spousal laws based on the fact that they are human beings capable of being loving adults... just like everyone else.

And no, the Federal Laws do not condemn discrimination based on sexual preferance. They do condemn attacks and crimes against any people that are different from another set of peoples, be it for religous, sexual, racial, or any other reason. There are hate crime laws to protect the mentally handicapped as well... are they asking for "more" rights as well? You are comparing apples and oranges.

 

Well, they already have that!

STRAIGHT MALES CAN'T MARRY MALES, GAY MALES CAN'T MARRY MALES.

It's exactly, perfectly the same ....no discrimination at all in the marriage laws between gays and straights.

Baron Max

 

One word: MORON.

 

Every state is required to recognize contracts, which are recognized by other states as valid. If marriage is a contract then homosexual marriages in states that have legalized homosexual marriages must be recognized in states where it is not legal. This does not mean that Texas has to legalize these marriages. It does seem to be a bit obtuse to make them leave a state to be married. It also seems backward to have multiple laws governing the same contract procedure but that is the law. It does mean that they have to be given the same rights at a state level. I do not believe that this holds at the federal level. Personal ethics aside when one philosophical group decides to ignore the law because they do not agree with the law they endanger every one in society. Both sides have and are engaged in a gorilla warfare effort to see their side “win”. I dislike the gay lifestyle partially from my background and partially because from personal observation I find most homosexuals to be extremely self-indulgent hedonist. It is their right to live however they wish to live as long as their lifestyle does not harm me. If the extremist on the right manage to make discrimination legally sanctioned. Who will be their next target? I have witnessed casual harassment of a homosexual friend/associate of mine and it aggravates me to the point of anger that it is not illegal to deny them access to living areas and adoption. Why shouldn’t gays be allowed to choose to live with whoever they decide to live with and be allowed to raise children and have health insurance and the power to make health decisions and child care decisions like normal people are allowed to, because for a bunch of freaks they are pretty normal.

 

Rods and Cones

Source: TheStranger.com
Link: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=207067
Title: "Savage Love: Slow 'Mos", by Dan Savage
Date: April 26, 2007

I wanted to use this particular column for a certain consideration that treads from the Gay Fray into broader politics. As Savage wrote:

The publisher and editor of a magazine for African-American gays and lesbians recently came out as an ex-lesbian. The news was splashed all over the cover of the most recent and, without a doubt, final issue of Venus ("Redeemed! 10 Ways to Get Out of 'The Life' if You Want Out!"). Charlene E. Cothran has found Jesus and we're encouraged to conclude that she no longer has any desire to bury her big stupid face in Halle Berry's smokin'-hot crotch.

The American Taliban, predictably, are ecstatic about the news. They're also annoyed that Cothran hasn't received much attention from the national media. "Imagine a prominent conservative Christian publicly announcing that he has renounced heterosexuality and will henceforth and forever be homosexual," writes Kelly Boggs, editor of the Baptist Message. "Try as I might, I cannot, for the life of me, imagine the mainstream press failing to report such news. Instead, there would be a media firestorm."​

I want to look at some of those statements:

First, if Cothran hasn't received much attention from the media, it's because it is a non-story. As Savage notes, her prominence is questionable, but that's beside the point. More revealing is an interview Cothran gave to a freelance journalist. The high points from Savage's citation include:

So, what about you now really makes you heterosexual?

Nothing ....

Are you saying that you are not heterosexual?

I am saying that I am celibate right now ... I will go on record and say--I will never be entangled with the bondage of lesbianism again ....

Are you physically attracted to men?

I am physically attracted to the spirit of Christ right now ....​

And that's all there is to it. Celibate and determined to never have lesbian sex again does not equal "heterosexual" in the analogous sense put forward by Boggs: "... a prominent conservative Christian publicly announcing that he has renounced heterosexuality and will henceforth and forever be homosexual."

Thus, in addition to helping Ms. Cothran out herself as a Christian celibate--which does pertain directly to the Gay Fray--I would also like to take this opportunity to remind that it's not always a "liberal media conspiracy". Sometimes it's just not that big a deal.

Or, as Savage wrote:

The celibate Cothran hasn't been liberated from her homosexuality, just from the possibility of an intimate adult relationship. Getting right with her fictional bogeyman of a savior didn't make Cothran straight. She's still a 'mo--a slow 'mo, but a 'mo.​

It's not so much that we need to actually see her in the throes of penis-passion, but a celibate lesbian is no more a heterosexual than a celibate heterosexual is gay.

 

The reason these measures look overwhelmingly in favor of keeping gays out of the mainstream is because about 15% of the people in the states vote. The ones that make damn sure to vote against the gays are the rightwing church ladies and baptist types. It isn't a barometer on the popularity of legalizing gay people's lives, rather it is proof the right is threatened by our very existence and use voting to keep us from saying "I Do."