Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/non_aviation/read.main/1095969/

Topic: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-01-31 18:15:58 and read 2887 times.

In view of some of the fears expressed by some Americans as to a recent sea change in American political values, I would like to make sure that our foreign friends do not develop the misimpression that this country has metamorphosed into the positively medieval in its social value system.

If one is concerned with gay marriage, the truth is that this country is not friendly to that concept. However, on a social level, the acceptance of gays is now wider than ever before.

In fact, it is possibly because of that acceptance that some conservative activists have used the issue of marriage as a "stopgap" against further "encroachment" of the "gay lifestyle" on American society.

In my view, there has been far too much polemic, on both the left and the right, concerning gay rights. To some significant degree, the issue of gayness is as much a biomedical fact as it is a legal concern, and hence it is in the interstices of law and medicine that the rights of gays are implicated.

The Constitution does not enshrine any particular view of genetic dispositions, but it does prevent certain forms of invidious discrimination, and a strong argument can, and has been, made, that neither homosexual predisposition nor acts should be the province of public regulation. Nevertheless, that this is so, and that the courts have supported the legality of homosexual conduct, is increasingly obscure, particularly in the eyes of some of our foreign critics.

To those who fear that the United States is on its way to a Puritan way of life, and that soon the dystopia of Atwood in The Handmaid's Tale will afflict all manner of private conduct, I say: Let's get real. There is rhetoric, and then there is reality. One should not be mistaken for the other.

[Edited 2006-01-31 18:19:57]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-01-31 18:19:47 and read 2878 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
the truth is that this country is not friendly to that concept. However, on a social level, the acceptance of gays is now wider than ever before.

In another thread, you've stated that liberalism has failed, and the country has become more conservative.

So which is it, or are these topics just copy/pasted from all over the internet without any regard to how they appear to lack any cohesion of voice?

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-01-31 18:21:42 and read 2868 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):
Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
the truth is that this country is not friendly to that concept. However, on a social level, the acceptance of gays is now wider than ever before.

In another thread, you've stated that liberalism has failed, and the country has become more conservative.

I did not say in that thread that liberalism in general has failed, and when attention was brought to the question of whether I claimed that it had, I specifically stated the opposite. I stated, and reiterated, that it is strange to me that conservatives accuse the educational system of being liberal, and yet the country has become more conservative. I further stated and reiterated that it may be a specific failure of liberalism to propagate itself that is of at least tangential interest -- a fact that belies conservative attempts, incidentally, to demonize our educational system.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):
So which is it, or are these topics just copy/pasted from all over the internet without any regard to how they appear to lack any cohesion of voice?

All statements I post here without attribution to others are written by me -- no one else. I do not "cut and paste" the words of anyone else and claim them to be mine.

[Edited 2006-01-31 18:23:49]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-01-31 18:26:00 and read 2859 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
yet the country has become more conservative



Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
the acceptance of gays is now wider than ever before.

How do you reconcile these two statements?

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pope
Posted 2006-01-31 18:26:20 and read 2859 times.

IMO gay rights are simply a matter of civil rights and should be analyzed under the same scrutiny as any other fundamental right. While I don't believe government should force churches to recognize marriage between any individuals they don't want to (be that gay, divorced, too tall, fat, etc. . .) I believe that the equal protection clauses of the 5th and 14th amendments should protect the legal rights of homosexuals on bar with heterosexual.

I see no compelling government interest in denying a citizen a tax deduction or the right to make health care decisions for their partner on the basis of whether or not the partner has a penis or a vagina.

All the rest is just noise that the right and left throw up there to obfuscate the issue.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Falcon84
Posted 2006-01-31 18:26:38 and read 2859 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
I would like to make sure that our foreign friends do not have the misimpression that this country is becoming positively medieval in its social value system.

It is not a misimpression, my friend. In many areas of the nation, it is fact-the religious right wants to take this nation back 300 years in it's social value system. They want their faith to be the law of the land; they want to keep gays as second-class citizens; they want to invade the privacy of others and put the government in your bedroom and private lives (but not in your wallet, which is fine with me).

It is medieval, in my view.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
If one is concerned with gay marriage, the truth is that this country is not friendly to that concept. However, on a social level, the acceptance of gays is now wider than ever before.

If that were true, then you and the right wouldn't be so afraid of gays marrying. We are not a nation that has the Holy Bible as our law-it's the Constitution that guides us. Maybe the Bible says being gay is a sin, but again, I do not take my civil orders from the Bible. Another sign of them wanting to take us back in time-making the Bible in national affairs superior to the Constitution, and I don't buy that.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
To those who fear that the United States is on its way to a Puritan way of life, and that soon the dystopia of Atwood in The Handmaid's Tale will afflict all manner of private conduct, I say: Let's get real. There is rhetoric, and then there is reality. One should not be mistaken for the other.

The reality is you seemingly can't tell the difference.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: SATX
Posted 2006-01-31 18:27:35 and read 2847 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
I stated, and reiterated, that it is strange to me that conservatives accuse the educational system of being liberal, and yet the country has become more conservative.

Even now, as they control all three brances of the federal government, the conservatives still find time to blame the liberals. Just like all these Christians find time to blame the non-Christians.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Falcon84
Posted 2006-01-31 18:27:50 and read 2847 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 4):
IMO gay rights are simply a matter of civil rights and should be analyzed under the same scrutiny as any other fundamental right. While I don't believe government should force churches to recognize marriage between any individuals they don't want to (be that gay, divorced, too tall, fat, etc. . .) I believe that the equal protection clauses of the 5th and 14th amendments should protect the legal rights of homosexuals on bar with heterosexual.

I see no compelling government interest in denying a citizen a tax deduction or the right to make health care decisions for their partner on the basis of whether or not the partner has a penis or a vagina.

All the rest is just noise that the right and left throw up there to obfuscate the issue.

Best post you ever made, Pope. I agree with you 100%. Well said.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-01-31 18:30:05 and read 2836 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 3):
How do you reconcile these two statements?

With great delicacy, said the cook to the lobster.  Wink

The country has, indeed, become much more conservative, but acceptance of gays has risen. It is, to use a much-abused phrase, the exception that proves the rule.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-01-31 18:32:17 and read 2836 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 8):
The country has, indeed, become much more conservative, but acceptance of gays has risen.

You can invalidate either or both of your arguments. Pick one.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pope
Posted 2006-01-31 18:33:48 and read 2828 times.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 5):
If that were true, then you and the right wouldn't be so afraid of gays marrying.

Fear is used to manipulate people. I'm a Catholic who respects my God and my religion, however I disagree with my church when it comes to this issue. The smoke screen of the sanctity of marriage disappeared for me once the Catholic church granted someone I knew an annulment after 20 years of marriage and three kids. I'm happily married to my wife an I assure you that we drawn neither strength nor support from the fact that our next door neighbors are married. If they were gay, more power to them but it simply doens't affect me.

Fear is used by the those on the right like Rove to manipulate voters (quite effectively) into course of action that favor his cause. Fear can only exist in the absence of information. I think many more people would be willing to educate themselves about the issue if the positions were presented in a less confrontational manner. The extreme left ruins it for everyone as does the extreme right. I really believe that the middle 70% of this country believes in the same fundamental things.

Every father I know wants a better life for their children than the one they had. Every father I know wants clean air, clean water, and safe streets. Every father I know wants their children to grow up with opportunity. Instead of allowing ourselves to be polarized by our difference in how to accomplish those goals, we should focus on the goals themselves.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pope
Posted 2006-01-31 18:34:56 and read 2828 times.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 7):
Best post you ever made, Pope. I agree with you 100%. Well said.

Alito confirmed and Falcon agrees with me. Hell must be about to freeze over.  Wink

Just kidding. Thanks.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-01-31 18:37:20 and read 2815 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 9):
You can invalidate either or both of your arguments. Pick one.

That's a simplistic and erroneous argument.

There is evidence that global warming causes extremes in weather, including colder winters. Does the existence of colder winters invalidate the existence of global warming?

Neither, then, does wider acceptance of gays implicate the lack of a wider trend toward conservatism in general.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-01-31 18:40:53 and read 2808 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 12):
Neither, then, does wider acceptance of gays implicate the lack of a wider trend toward conservatism in general.

Oh boy, this is going to take an entire team of psychiatrists to work out.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-01-31 18:47:48 and read 2793 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 13):
Oh boy, this is going to take an entire team of psychiatrists to work out.

Well, if you can suggest one....

 Wink

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-01-31 18:49:01 and read 2791 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 14):
Well, if you can suggest one

I wouldn't be so unkind ... to the psychiatrists.  Wink

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: WhiteHatter
Posted 2006-01-31 19:00:26 and read 2767 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
In view of some of the fears expressed by some Americans as to a recent sea change in American political values, I would like to make sure that our foreign friends do not develop the misimpression that this country has metamorphosed into the positively medieval in its social value system.

you are too kind to us cave-dwelling socialists.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
If one is concerned with gay marriage, the truth is that this country is not friendly to that concept. However, on a social level, the acceptance of gays is now wider than ever before.

could have fooled me.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):

To those who fear that the United States is on its way to a Puritan way of life, and that soon the dystopia of Atwood in The Handmaid's Tale will afflict all manner of private conduct, I say: Let's get real. There is rhetoric, and then there is reality. One should not be mistaken for the other.

and how many more of these lead-lined American domestic politics speeches are you going to make?

Here's a little tip. Airliners.net is NOT a US site. Johnny Foreigner is not here on sufferance, so for the love of God enough with the dirges already.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-01-31 19:05:01 and read 2763 times.

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 16):
Here's a little tip. Airliners.net is NOT a US site. Johnny Foreigner is not here on sufferance, so for the love of God enough with the dirges already.

 checkmark  Hear, hear!

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-01-31 22:39:04 and read 2682 times.

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 16):
Here's a little tip. Airliners.net is NOT a US site. Johnny Foreigner is not here on sufferance, so for the love of God enough with the dirges already.

WhiteHatter, as you may realize, there are many topics here that might be considered parochial to one particular nation, and yet this does not stop people from other countries from posting concerning them. If I recall correctly, you recently expressed some doubt in the Military Aviation and Space forum on this very site as to whether Members were being fair to denials of the American landings on the Moon in the 1960's and 1970's. As I recall, you posted a number of messages saying that we should be open minded concerning such rather ludicrous claims concerning, I might add, a largely American effort, although you did not say that you believed any conspiracy theory against the reality of those landings. (See: Did Nasa Put Men On The Moon? (by Thowman Sep 20 2005 in Military Aviation & Space Flight) )

And, likewise, we've seen here a friendly reception to topics concerning football (European style -- e.g., Robbie Fowler Signs For Liverpool! (by Cornish Jan 27 2006 in Non Aviation)#ID1090464 ), the Australian flag, and so forth -- all as it should be.

Finally, I ask that you do not consider me in the category of critics of European countries for being "socialist", as I have the utmost respect for Europeans' ability to determine for themselves what government services they desire, and how to pay for them.

[Edited 2006-01-31 22:44:59]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerorobNZ
Posted 2006-01-31 23:03:19 and read 2649 times.

It is illegal in Kenya and a number of other places. I saw it on several Foreign Affairs websites while looking for visa information.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-01 00:28:01 and read 2609 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 4):
IMO gay rights are simply a matter of civil rights and should be analyzed under the same scrutiny as any other fundamental right. While I don't believe government should force churches to recognize marriage between any individuals they don't want to (be that gay, divorced, too tall, fat, etc. . .) I believe that the equal protection clauses of the 5th and 14th amendments should protect the legal rights of homosexuals on bar with heterosexual.

I see no compelling government interest in denying a citizen a tax deduction or the right to make health care decisions for their partner on the basis of whether or not the partner has a penis or a vagina.

All the rest is just noise that the right and left throw up there to obfuscate the issue.

Not a word here I disagree with, and you've put it in some of the most succinct terms I've seen. For what it's worth (not much) welcome to my RU list.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
However, on a social level, the acceptance of gays is now wider than ever before.

While I think the majority of Americans really don't care about my sexual orientation one way or the other, I think the 'acceptance' you refer to is more an overshadowing of the debate on our basic rights by the mega debate of gay marriage. If the focus wasn't on preventing and/or rolling back any kind of gay unions, the far right policy makers that are currently shaping so much of our public policy would be hacking away at the current or proposed non-discrimination laws on the books. A perfect example is the state of Washington. After a 29 year fight, sexual orientation was finally added to the law banning discrimination in Washington. Before the bill was even signed by the governor, a petition for both a referendum AND an initiative was submitted, to not only repeal the amendment, but to ban further consideration. That doesn't feel like acceptance to me.

That's not to say we haven't come a long way. Twenty years ago I was very careful to play the 'pronoun game' at work, making sure I never referred to my partner by gender or name. But now I don't think about it, in either social or work situations. I cherish that change. But in the last few years (six to be exact) there has been a concerted effort to role back much of what we have gained. Unfortunately we've served up the specter of gay marriage as the perfect weapon for the far right to scare the masses with. As Pope noted above, fear is used to manipulate, and right now its being used masterfully.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 01:38:20 and read 2581 times.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 20):
Before the bill was even signed by the governor, a petition for both a referendum AND an initiative was submitted, to not only repeal the amendment, but to ban further consideration. That doesn't feel like acceptance to me.

I think that such referenda are the work of special interest groups on the right, rather than reflective of a broad societal sentiment against gays today.

In most cases, I am a libertarian when it comes to what consenting adults do, regardless of their sexual orientation, and within reason, within their own homes. An extension of that is that public instances where the corollaries of such behavior should be -- again, subject to the rule of reason -- tolerated if irrelevant to any legitimate purpose of society. By this I mean, for example, that if two gays want to emulate the role of mother and father in public with their adopted child, there should be no particular offense taken by such behavior.

I would add, however, that public displays of affection between gays is still somewhat beyond what society is prepared to tolerate, for now.

None of this is to say that there does not remain a deep-seated prejudice against gays on the part of many individuals, and particularly traditional, older people, who were raised in a different era.

[Edited 2006-02-01 01:44:32]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-02-01 01:44:43 and read 2579 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 21):
I would add, however, that public displays of affection between gays is still somewhat beyond what society is prepared to tolerate, for now.

Maybe you should consider whether it is "you" or "society" when defining mores for the global "we".

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 01:47:03 and read 2574 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 22):
Maybe you should consider whether it is "you" or "society" when defining mores for the global "we".

There is no "global 'we'", however. Even Canada is far different from the United States when it comes to official attitudes toward homosexual marriage, although the difference is less pronounced when it comes to their respective societies.

Thus, your asking whether it is in fact my prejudices that I project upon society is somewhat misplaced; I do not claim to speak for society, but only myself in observing what I see of it.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-02-01 01:51:48 and read 2563 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 23):
your asking whether it is in fact my prejudices that I project upon society is somewhat misplaced

No, I can read. You made a statement, not an opinion. (Now qualified after you were called on it.) You didn't say "I don't believe society is ready ...", for example.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 01:55:28 and read 2559 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 24):
No, I can read. You made a statement, not an opinion. (Now qualified after you were called on it.) You didn't say "I don't believe society is ready ...", for example.

Then let me clarify that it is indeed, my opinion of what society is prepared to tolerate.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-01 02:03:37 and read 2549 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 21):
I think that such referenda are the work of special interest groups on the right, rather than reflective of a broad societal sentiment against gays today.

And yet the expectation is that they will get the measures on the ballot, which takes the signature of a significant number of the state's voters. That takes a lot more support than just 'special interests groups to the right'

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 21):
I would add, however, that public displays of affection between gays is still somewhat beyond what society is prepared to tolerate, for now.

Sorry bud, all your words of tolerance go out the window when you say things like the above. You personally may not be ready for it, but in my experience (and in this case I'd say it's more than yours), society hasn't had an aneurism when I hug my partner or give him a peck on the cheek. Sure I'd be risking my health doing that in some neighborhoods, but I'd risk my health just being in some neighborhoods.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Ctbarnes
Posted 2006-02-01 02:11:37 and read 2545 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 4):
I see no compelling government interest in denying a citizen a tax deduction or the right to make health care decisions for their partner on the basis of whether or not the partner has a penis or a vagina.

A partner can make decisions on your behalf provided you fill out and sign a durable power of attorney for healthcare form, nominating your partner as your surrogate decision maker.

Charles, SJ

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-01 02:28:48 and read 2529 times.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 27):
A partner can make decisions on your behalf provided you fill out and sign a durable power of attorney for healthcare form, nominating your partner as your surrogate decision maker.

Its a fact that for single sex couples, almost all the rights and privileges enjoyed by married couples can be gained by other legal maneuvers. But why should I need to spend hours and hours (and many $$) with a lawyer filing document after document, when an official state acknowledgement of my union would suffice, as it does for everyone else. Additionally, many of the constitutional amendments that are being propagated attempt to ban even these agreements, usually for same sex couples only. Bottom line, separate but 'equal' was ruled false long ago. I'm not asking any church or religion to bless or even recognize my union. I do expect the state to treat me the same as every other citizen.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Nordair
Posted 2006-02-01 02:45:13 and read 2520 times.

I expect there is a certain A.netter who is currently on a brief hiatus and she is just itching to begin posting on this thread. The pearls of wisdom and benevolence that will flow from her keyboard will certainly set certain things, um...shall we say "straight".

 Wink

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: TG992
Posted 2006-02-01 03:20:45 and read 2501 times.

Verbosity and a thesaurus are no substitutes for intelligence.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Jmc1975
Posted 2006-02-01 03:22:53 and read 2498 times.

Quoting Nordair (Reply 29):
I expect there is a certain A.netter who is currently on a brief hiatus and she is just itching to begin posting on this thread.

I miss her!

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: PWM2TXLHopper
Posted 2006-02-01 03:32:28 and read 2489 times.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 5):
It is not a misimpression, my friend. In many areas of the nation, it is fact-the religious right wants to take this nation back 300 years in it's social value system

Nah, try more like 40 or 50 years....

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Jalto27R
Posted 2006-02-01 03:40:44 and read 2478 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):

Your opening post in this thread sounds like the end of my 10 page papers in US History Class. Just a bunch of BS, spread out in paragraph form to fill up the paper. You are trying to hard to sound smart....just get to the point!

Mike

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 03:59:17 and read 2459 times.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 26):
Sorry bud, all your words of tolerance go out the window when you say things like the above

Then your experience is different from mine. Differences of opinion based on different experiences of what society is likely to tolerate are to be expected.

I'm glad that you feel that society wouldn't have a meltdown based on your kissing your partner. However, invariably, where there are two men holding hands in public, I have observed strangers surrounding them exhibit some discomfort.

If you disagree, that is your right. But it is not correct to accuse me of bias simply because my observations are different from yours.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-02-01 04:03:12 and read 2453 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 34):
However, invariably, where there are two men holding hands in public, I have observed strangers surrounding them exhibit some discomfort.

Perhaps you should define where this occurs. Ten years ago I planted a big one on a then boyfriend at the boarding gate in an airport in central Ohio, and nobody so much as flinched.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-01 04:09:04 and read 2451 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 34):
I have observed strangers surrounding them exhibit some discomfort.

Men showing affection still isn't common in many places, so yes, it draws attention. But guess what, as it becomes more common, fewer and fewer react. I have invariably observed some people become uncomfortable at many behaviors. It doesn't imply that society isn't ready to accept those behaviors, it means those people have issues that they are projecting onto others.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 34):
If you disagree, that is your right. But it is not correct to accuse me of bias simply because my observations are different from yours.

No its not - what I was calling you on was your statement. When made, and what I was responding to, was presented as a blanket statement of fact vs. an opinion. Since I posted, you've clarified that its just your opinion. And in this case we have differing ones - fair enough.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 04:09:23 and read 2450 times.

Quoting TG992 (Reply 30):
Verbosity and a thesaurus are no substitutes for intelligence.

It's a good thing, then, that I neither own nor use a thesaurus.  

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 35):
Perhaps you should define where this occurs. Ten years ago I planted a big one on a then boyfriend at the boarding gate in an airport in central Ohio, and nobody so much as flinched

It's not so much at airports, where, by the way, I haven't seen it done, but at such ordinary places such as a local mall, where there are likely to be children about. Parents are very protective of their children and do not want to expose them to what they fear -- yes, fear, rationally or not -- may be a "corrupting" influence on their impressionable minds. Note that I do not endorse the word "corrupting", but use it simply to denote what these parents may feel, rightly or wrongly.

[Edited 2006-02-01 04:10:31]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-02-01 04:11:40 and read 2450 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 37):
but use it simply to denote what these parents may feel, rightly or wrongly

How do you know what they're feeling? (Maybe they're jealous!)

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 04:13:18 and read 2440 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 38):
How do you know what they're feeling? (Maybe they're jealous!)

It's because I know several parents, from various socio-economic backgrounds, and from conversations with them, it is universally true that they wish to protect their children from certain influences.

There are also certain heuristics in which one can engage based on common sense, and it is rational to believe that, as children are precious to parents, parents will ordinarily act to protect them.

Incidentally, I think that the explanatory power of common sense is often undervalued. It is common sense that suggests most of the actions we take in ordinary life. It is common sense, for example, that one should bundle up on a cold day. One certainly doesn't have to indulge in a causal exegesis to reach for a coat when it's snowing outside. Nor does it seem proper to torture common sense and posit that parents who try to shield their children from what they deem "corrupting" influences are secretly jealous.

Is it possible that they are jealous? Yes. But that would be exceptional, from a common sense point of view. Possibility is as possibility does.

[Edited 2006-02-01 04:16:23]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-02-01 04:16:57 and read 2435 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 39):
It's because I know several parents, from various socio-economic backgrounds, and from conversations with them, it is universally true that they wish to protect their children from certain influences.

(I realize from past experience this will take 20 questions, but what the hell, it's worth a try again.)

Define geographically where (not a mall, city or state would work), and in what capacity did you converse with them about their interests in protecting their children from "certain" influences, presumably seeing two men or two women holding hands in public.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: TG992
Posted 2006-02-01 04:18:25 and read 2423 times.

Just out of interest - do you happen to write the VCR programming manuals on the side? Big grin

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 04:19:54 and read 2423 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 40):
Define geographically where (not a mall, city or state would work), and in what capacity did you converse with them about their interests in protecting their children from "certain" influences, presumably seeing two men or two women holding hands in public.

Just to take an example, any of the malls in suburbia, in Ventura County, for example. If you want a specific example, The Oaks mall in Thousand Oaks, just as an example.

As far as the parents, they are friends and neighbors, and conversations range from casual all the way to formal. For example, at a recent dinner party, the point was made that children are exposed to untoward influences in popular culture, that public displays of affection are far too common, and that "children grow up too quickly". This is purely an example; there are others, of different kinds, but of the same general sentiment.

[Edited 2006-02-01 04:23:03]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Nordair
Posted 2006-02-01 04:22:19 and read 2418 times.

Quoting Jmc1975 (Reply 31):
I miss her!

Of course you do. *pats you on the noggin* I'm sure had you known she'd be gone for a bit, you would have saved the photograph that was posted of her last week.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-02-01 04:23:18 and read 2418 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 42):
they are friends and neighbors, and conversations range from casual all the way to casual.

Oh well, you didn't say! Casual to casual! Now it's all perfectly clear.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 42):
at a recent dinner party, the point was made that children are exposed to untoward influences in popular culture, that public displays of affection are far too common, and that "children grow up too quickly".

There are 100 other "influences" out there these days beyond Frank and Johnny holding hands at the mall that contribute to the end result you cite.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-01 04:24:39 and read 2411 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 37):
It's not so much at airports, where, by the way, I haven't seen it done, but at such ordinary places such as a local mall, where there are likely to be children about.

Ah, so its not so much society as select places - where you've personally witnessed it? Well guess what, I've committed PDA in those as well, and not so much as one Gladys Cravits, shielding her child's a innocent eyes, has ever confronted me. It's only my opinion, but I do in fact think you are projecting your biases into this statement. Like I said, there will always be some that are uncomfortable, but I've travelled all over this great big world, and there are very few places in what we consider the western world where I've felt any discomfort or unease for me showing affection to my partner.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 04:24:41 and read 2411 times.

Quoting TG992 (Reply 41):
Just out of interest - do you happen to write the VCR programming manuals on the side?  Big grin

No, but years ago, I helped with a project to write a certain piece of proposed legislation. That's almost worse.

 Wink

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-01 04:27:23 and read 2407 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 42):
the point was made that children are exposed to untoward influences in popular culture, that public displays of affection are far too common, and that "children grow up too quickly".

And from this you concluded that the problem is same sex hand holding in malls?

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2006-02-01 04:36:18 and read 2397 times.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 47):
the problem is same sex hand holding in malls?

(Notice how AF has to keep editing his posts? I think all this hand-holding is making him nervous.)  Wink

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Ctbarnes
Posted 2006-02-01 04:46:18 and read 2389 times.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 28):
Its a fact that for single sex couples, almost all the rights and privileges enjoyed by married couples can be gained by other legal maneuvers. But why should I need to spend hours and hours (and many $$) with a lawyer filing document after document, when an official state acknowledgement of my union would suffice, as it does for everyone else.

A Durable power of attorney for Healthcare (DPOA) does not need a lawyer to fill out and sign. The forms are downloadable, or are available from any number of sources. They are a good idea to have filled out regardless of whether you are a married or an nonmarried couple, because they concretely affirm your wishes regarding treatment and whom you want to have make healthcare decisions for you if you cannot make them yourself.

Charles, SJ

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-01 04:59:29 and read 2372 times.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 49):
A Durable power of attorney for Healthcare (DPOA) does not need a lawyer to fill out and sign.

You're right, and I agree with you actually. It's just your statement was a good segue into my rant!  Wink

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Ctbarnes
Posted 2006-02-01 05:43:33 and read 2351 times.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 50):
You're right, and I agree with you actually. It's just your statement was a good segue into my rant!

Glad I could be of service.  thumbsup 

Charles, SJ

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Wukka
Posted 2006-02-01 06:21:03 and read 2338 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 21):
I would add, however, that public displays of affection between gays is still somewhat beyond what society is prepared to tolerate, for now.

I would also add, however, that public displays of affection between the hetero crowd is still somewhat beyond what society is prepared to tolerate. I (a male) had what one would call a "very aggressively affectionate" girlfriend of 3 years that got us more looks of disgust and comments of "get a room" than I can count on any number of fingers. It's not only a gay thing here, so you might as well get over it. From what I've seen, most people don't want to see people making out in public, whether it be M/M, M/F, or F/F.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 39):
Possibility is as possibility does.

What the hell does this mean? You're either the most philisophical genius to ever post in this forum, or you're Forrest Gump.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 06:40:05 and read 2328 times.

Quoting Wukka (Reply 52):
I would also add, however, that public displays of affection between the hetero crowd is still somewhat beyond what society is prepared to tolerate.

Agreed.

Quoting Wukka (Reply 52):
What the hell does this mean?

It means that one can always posit that something is possible when, indeed, it is possible, on a technicality. But what concerns us is not mere possibility; it is what is likely and reasonable.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: DLPMMM
Posted 2006-02-01 06:46:07 and read 2322 times.

I for one would prefer to see the abolition of marriage in it's governmental form in total. If you want a religious marriage, fine. If you want to live together, write a contract (even if in a religious marriage). If you want to leave something to someone, write a will. If you want DPOA for healthcare or anything else, write one.

No married filing status, only single, head of household, and dependents.

I'm sick of the hyperbole from the far ends of the spectrum. The whole argument is stupid, and primarily designed to raise money from the politically rabid nuts from both sides by disingenuous hacks for their own benefit.

Think about it.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Solnabo
Posted 2006-02-01 06:47:53 and read 2322 times.

Maybe bit off topic, are gays accepted in Japan?? What about the rest of Asia? Thailand etc.

Curious.

Micke//SE  Confused

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 06:51:15 and read 2317 times.

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 54):
I for one would prefer to see the abolition of marriage in it's governmental form in total.

I could live with that. I think many people are fed up with government regulation of their lives, and marriage licenses can very well be seen as one aspect of that.

Government does have an interest to regulate against incestuous relationships, for example, for health reasons, and against underage sexual relationships. But a free people shouldn't be required to get the approval of government to be married, nor should all relationships be deemed equally qualified for government approval merely because the participants consider themselves marriage.

As far as governmental entitlements, however, I sometimes wonder who gave the government the right to give tax benefits to certain couples as opposed to others. On the face of it, it doesn't seem to make much sense. And yes, I say this even knowing that the government may have a sufficiently compelling interest in promoting the existence of family units.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Seb146
Posted 2006-02-01 07:08:40 and read 2312 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
The Constitution does not enshrine any particular view of genetic dispositions, but it does prevent certain forms of invidious discrimination

So what about women? They are genetically disposed to being women but that is protected under the Constitution. Those with dark skin are genetically disposed to having dark skin and they are protected under the Constitution.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
If one is concerned with gay marriage, the truth is that this country is not friendly to that concept. However, on a social level, the acceptance of gays is now wider than ever before.

Ummm... how is it wider than every before? Matthew Sheppard ring a bell? That sort of thing happens. Gays still get beat up. Gays still get harrassed. My boyfriend and I get heckled even in Portland.

I don't think this question has been asked in this way but: Why does the government not allow same gender couples to form a civil parntership when marrige is a religious ceremony and there is supposed to be separation of church and state?

GO CANUCKS!!

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 07:14:28 and read 2310 times.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 57):
So what about women? They are genetically disposed to being women but that is protected under the Constitution. Those with dark skin are genetically disposed to having dark skin and they are protected under the Constitution.

You can say that, but what I had in mind was more along the lines of Constitutional preference of one genetic disposition over another. Genetic dispositions are not, in any event, protected over other kinds of differences.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 57):
Ummm... how is it wider than every before? Matthew Sheppard ring a bell? That sort of thing happens. Gays still get beat up. Gays still get harrassed. My boyfriend and I get heckled even in Portland.

I don't think this question has been asked in this way but: Why does the government not allow same gender couples to form a civil parntership when marrige is a religious ceremony and there is supposed to be separation of church and state?

GO CANUCKS!!

Incidents do continue to occur. However, I think it's fair to say that acceptance of the gay lifestyle is far more prevalent today than it was, for example, twenty years ago. The number of gay-themed television shows and domestic partner laws in 2006 as compared to even as recently as ten years ago is one indicator of such changes in society.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: DLPMMM
Posted 2006-02-01 07:15:01 and read 2310 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 56):
Government does have an interest to regulate against incestuous relationships, for example, for health reasons, and against underage sexual relationships.

The existence or non-existence of a government sanctioned marriage status does nothing in reality to affect either incestuous or underage sexual conduct. Both of these occurrences either are or could be outlawed without reference to any type of marriage status.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 56):
As far as governmental entitlements, however, I sometimes wonder who gave the government the right to give tax benefits to certain couples as opposed to others. On the face of it, it doesn't seem to make much sense. And yes, I say this even knowing that the government may have a sufficiently compelling interest in promoting the existence of family units.

At this point, I think the government has already done as much to destroy the family unit as it has to promote it.

With the current statistics on divorce, I think it is a better idea just to abolish the whole marriage thing. Everyone living together must fill out a co-habitation contract (much like a pre-nup.) Imagine all the divorce lawyers that would have to find new employment in the long run!. Co-hab contracts could be very cheap and cookie cutter for the most part, covering most all of the "contentious" subjects brought up earlier.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 07:16:51 and read 2310 times.

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 59):
Both of these occurrences either are or could be outlawed without reference to any type of marriage status.

Good points. I don't disagree.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pope
Posted 2006-02-01 10:23:59 and read 2281 times.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 27):
A partner can make decisions on your behalf provided you fill out and sign a durable power of attorney for healthcare form, nominating your partner as your surrogate decision maker.

Granted but statistics show that most people, regardless of sexual orientation, do not spend the time to set up these documents ahead of time. Therefore, by default, the partners of most same sex couples do not have this right.

Again I reiterate, that under our Constitutional framework, the burden is on the government to justify the infringement on a fundamental individual right or to justify discrimination on certain basis. If the right is not fundamental or the class is not protected, then the burden is on the individual to show the arbitrary nature of the government action.

Now I ask you, how can private sexual practices between consenting adults NOT be considered a fundamental right? Shouldn't the government have to justify any intrusion into our bedrooms? Furthermore, even if we accept the notion that the right isn't fundamental, what is the government's interest in limiting people's tax deductions or inheritence rights based on who they sleep with? This is just a backlash against homosexuality and we need to get past it.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 39):
It's because I know several parents, from various socio-economic backgrounds, and from conversations with them, it is universally true that they wish to protect their children from certain influences.

Well, I am a parent of a minor child and while I'd like to build a little bubble around my daughter and protect her against everything in the world, I've realized that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with homosexuals. Is it for me? No. But what they do in the privacy of their bedrooms has absolutely no impact on me, my wife or my daughter.

My daughter has plenty of friends whose parents are divorced or who are still married and fight all the time. Are these couples a better example to my daughter than a committed homosexual couple?

We were walking down the street the other day and saw a gay couple holding hands. My daughter asked me, Daddy why are those boys holding hands? My response, because they love one another. She asked, the way you love mommy? I said, yes, the way I love mommy. Issue resolved.

Would my daughter been better served by me saying that they're holding hands because they're doing something wrong? Because they're evil? Absolutely not. I've come to the realization that hate is a learned quality. Kids aren't born hating anyone. When kids play they are completely unaware of differences between them. It's only when adults point them out that they become conscious of them.

If my choice is between raising a daughter that feels that people who are in love are doing something wrong and raising a daughter that understands that people are free to choose who they love in this country, well then I'll choose the later every day.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Dw9115
Posted 2006-02-01 11:58:04 and read 2259 times.

There are a few states that have laws on the books that make it illegal to have sex with the same sex. But no laws preventing a person from being gay just if you have sex with some one of the same sex you go to jail.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Ctbarnes
Posted 2006-02-01 17:51:51 and read 2227 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 61):
Granted but statistics show that most people, regardless of sexual orientation, do not spend the time to set up these documents ahead of time. Therefore, by default, the partners of most same sex couples do not have this right.

Unfortunately that argument dosen't quite work. If I do not buy a dog licence, does that necessarily mean I do not have the right to claim it at the pound if it is picked up?

I think I know what you are getting at, though, insofar as a non-married partner ought be contacted first as a legally recognized person who can make decisions on your behalf should the forms not be filled out. Unfortunately we are not there yet, either for heterosexual or same-sex couples. This is why I tell people if there is someone outside your family you want to have make decisions for you, they need to fill out the DPOA. It is an imperfect solution, I know, but it does get that person a say in your treatment.

I want to see if I'm tracking this properly:

There is an argument which transcends civil legalism to suggest that whatever happens between two consenting adults, in private, is covered under constitutional guarantees to privacy (despite laws against sodomy still on the books in a handful of mostly Southern states).

In addition, there is also a separate parallel issue about whether a civil marriage is between two people, male and/or female, It is important not to confuse the two, or say because a marriage between two people of the same sex is not considered civilly valid, that does not mean living together or what they do in the bedroom is illegal.

Thirdly are questions regarding property, either after one's death or at disolusion of the partnership. I believe laws regarding non-married partnerships (so-called palimony) also apply to same-sex couples. This is an issue in civil law covered by precident, rather than statute. The former is covered by a valid will. If you ever saw the film "The Birdcage," one of the subplots was tension between Robin Williams and Nathan Lane over the signing of a document willing goods and posessions to the other in the event of death. The way this was handled (the film was made before the questions of marriage or civil unions arose) was to suggest that signing this form constituted a kind of marriage.

In terms of partnerships and how we legitimize them, things are changing. Too fast for some, not fast enough for others. I believe it can be argued that we need to give everybody the space to become comfortable with the change and so perhaps we are moving at the right pace. In the meantime, such legal circumlocutions will become necessary, but at the end of the day the central question is the strength of the commitment between the two individuals in question, regardless of what others (and I include the state) think of them and how they choose to live out that commitment.

Charles, SJ

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pope
Posted 2006-02-01 17:59:12 and read 2225 times.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 63):
Unfortunately that argument dosen't quite work. If I do not buy a dog licence, does that necessarily mean I do not have the right to claim it at the pound if it is picked up?

The difference is that owning a dog is not a fundamental civil right. As I've said before, discrimination is allowed under our constitution. The degree and the justification depends on (a) just how fundamental the right is and (b) the government's reason for the discrimination.

Surely you don't equate end of life decisions with owning a dog. I think everyone recognizes that there are differences between the two.

So far nobody's addressed the Part B of the problem - what is the government interest in the act causing the discrimination. Certainly protecting the institution of marriage is a false argument. The hetero divorce rate already exceeds 50%. Denying someone equal protection under the law based on whether they are hetero or homosexual just isn't consistent with Constitutional jurisprudence.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Ctbarnes
Posted 2006-02-01 18:05:48 and read 2221 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 64):
Surely you don't equate end of life decisions with owning a dog. I think everyone recognizes that there are differences between the two.

Of course not. I was merely pointing out a flaw in your argument.

Quoting Pope (Reply 64):
So far nobody's addressed the Part B of the problem - what is the government interest in the act causing the discrimination. Certainly protecting the institution of marriage is a false argument. The hetero divorce rate already exceeds 50%. Denying someone equal protection under the law based on whether they are hetero or homosexual just isn't consistent with Constitutional jurisprudence.

This depends on how we define 'government.' It can be a little too easy to blame yonder politicians in Washington for not doing what we think ought to be done. The US government is, at its heart, a representitive democracy with polititicans who are supposed to be legislating to try and balance personal rights and the common good (note I say supposed to be). Where that balance lies is very tricky and is an inherently messy thing to try and determine. If you or anyone else thinks we are going in the wrong direction, find a way to get yourself heard.

Charles, SJ

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pope
Posted 2006-02-01 18:23:17 and read 2207 times.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 65):
Of course not. I was merely pointing out a flaw in your argument.

But by using a counter argument that is itself flawed, have you really pointed out a flaw in my argument or solidified it by establishing my premise which is, when it comes to fundamental rights, Constitutional jurisprudence requires the government to justify the reason for its discrimination.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 65):
This depends on how we define 'government.'

When the IRS denies a gay couple who is willing to get married or enter into a legally recognized union, it's pretty clear that government is involved. When Social Security payments are denied to homosexual widows government is involved. You can try to raise all the exceptions and obfuscate the issue in any number of ways, but the core issue remains, I don't see how under the 5th and 14th amendments, the government has ever shown a compelling interest that would sustain a disparate treatment of two couples based solely on sexual orientation.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Ctbarnes
Posted 2006-02-01 18:30:25 and read 2204 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 66):
But by using a counter argument that is itself flawed, have you really pointed out a flaw in my argument or solidified it by establishing my premise which is, when it comes to fundamental rights, Constitutional jurisprudence requires the government to justify the reason for its discrimination.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 65):
This depends on how we define 'government.'

When the IRS denies a gay couple who is willing to get married or enter into a legally recognized union, it's pretty clear that government is involved. When Social Security payments are denied to homosexual widows government is involved. You can try to raise all the exceptions and obfuscate the issue in any number of ways, but the core issue remains, I don't see how under the 5th and 14th amendments, the government has ever shown a compelling interest that would sustain a disparate treatment of two couples based solely on sexual orientation.

Sorry, but I'm really at a loss as to what you're getting at.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pope
Posted 2006-02-01 18:44:32 and read 2196 times.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 67):


Sorry, but I'm really at a loss as to what you're getting at.

Simply stated, What is the compelling government interest that would support denial of equal protection under the law for homosexual couples?

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Mt99
Posted 2006-02-01 18:54:47 and read 2192 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 68):
Simply stated, What is the compelling government interest that would support denial of equal protection under the law for homosexual couples?

Easy: Votes. Bringing into light "morals" distract from the other issues.

Galvanazing (an encouraging) population to see something as immoral will bring people behind a particular candidate that subscribes to this postion.

Its easier to sell "morals" than the War in Iraq. Thank Karl Rove for that one. The man is a genious.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Seb146
Posted 2006-02-01 19:19:28 and read 2181 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 58):
You can say that, but what I had in mind was more along the lines of Constitutional preference of one genetic disposition over another. Genetic dispositions are not, in any event, protected over other kinds of differences.

That line of thinking is what some people justify to keep gays down, so to speak. Since the Constitution does not say anything about discriminating based on sexual orientation, I could be fired right now for simply being gay.

Quoting Pope (Reply 61):
how can private sexual practices between consenting adults NOT be considered a fundamental right? Shouldn't the government have to justify any intrusion into our bedrooms? Furthermore, even if we accept the notion that the right isn't fundamental, what is the government's interest in limiting people's tax deductions or inheritence rights based on who they sleep with? This is just a backlash against homosexuality and we need to get past it.

Exactly. Why is the government trying to legislate what happens in our bedrooms? Has anyone read the fourth amendment?

Quoting Dw9115 (Reply 62):
There are a few states that have laws on the books that make it illegal to have sex with the same sex. But no laws preventing a person from being gay just if you have sex with some one of the same sex you go to jail.

Again, legislating into the bedroom. Why do some people think that is okay?

GO CANUCKS!!

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 20:45:12 and read 2163 times.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 70):
That line of thinking is what some people justify to keep gays down, so to speak. Since the Constitution does not say anything about discriminating based on sexual orientation, I could be fired right now for simply being gay.

Technically, if you work for a company in the United States, you can be fired for no reason at all if you do not have an employment contract with them. It would be up to the employee to prove that he was fired for an impermissible reason. So I think that the issue is broader than what could happen. It's part of the warp and wove of employment law.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pope
Posted 2006-02-01 20:48:59 and read 2156 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 71):
Technically, if you work for a company in the United States, you can be fired for no reason at all if you do not have an employment contract with them.

I think that depends on the state.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-01 20:50:38 and read 2156 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 72):
I think that depends on the state.

It's called "at will" employment. I think that all States recognize it, but I'd have to check.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-02 00:37:20 and read 2105 times.

Quoting Redngold (Reply 74):
Religious institutions should be allowed to make employment and volunteer engagement decisions based on their own moral codes - because of the same establishment clause that is so often used by those who wish to exclude religious ideas from state affairs.

Absolutely - as long as they are using their own money. The second that they begin accepting government funding, they must be bound by the same rules as other government funded entities.

Quoting Redngold (Reply 74):
the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed and the law still has restrictions on heterosexual marriage

I'm not sure what issues you are referring to, but it's a safe bet all of those laws and ruling have to do with issues of the public good (polygamy?). As Pope has so eloquently pointed out, at no time has the Government been able prove such based on gender, race, sexual orientation.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 71):
Technically, if you work for a company in the United States, you can be fired for no reason at all if you do not have an employment contract with them.

Incorrect, it's a convoluted set up, with many exceptions, but the best condensed explanation is from Wikipedia. Basically even in At-will states, if termination can be proven to be related to a protected class, with no other justification, it can be fought. Seb's point is that in many locales, homosexuals don't even have that option. I have in fact seen firings based on a picture of a man and his partner on the desk. Admittedly, the occurrence of such is declining, but it still occurs, and worse, there is little recourse in the majority of the nation.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-02 00:39:03 and read 2105 times.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 75):
Basically even in At-will states, if termination can be proven to be related to a protected class, with no other justification, it can be fought.

Please read what I wrote again:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 71):
It would be up to the employee to prove that he was fired for an impermissible reason.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: SKYSERVICE_330
Posted 2006-02-02 00:53:44 and read 2095 times.

Quoting Pope (Reply 61):
We were walking down the street the other day and saw a gay couple holding hands. My daughter asked me, Daddy why are those boys holding hands? My response, because they love one another. She asked, the way you love mommy? I said, yes, the way I love mommy. Issue resolved.

Would my daughter been better served by me saying that they're holding hands because they're doing something wrong? Because they're evil? Absolutely not. I've come to the realization that hate is a learned quality. Kids aren't born hating anyone. When kids play they are completely unaware of differences between them. It's only when adults point them out that they become conscious of them.

If my choice is between raising a daughter that feels that people who are in love are doing something wrong and raising a daughter that understands that people are free to choose who they love in this country, well then I'll choose the later every day.

 thumbsup  Good job Pope. If only more parents took this line of reasoning.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-02 01:23:32 and read 2083 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 76):
It would be up to the employee to prove that he was fired for an impermissible reason.

And please finish reading what I wrote:

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 75):
Seb's point is that in many locales, homosexuals don't even have that option. I have in fact seen firings based on a picture of a man and his partner on the desk. Admittedly, the occurrence of such is declining, but it still occurs, and worse, there is little recourse in the majority of the nation.

Even in at-will states, there are limits, no matter who has to do the legwork, to what an employer can do. In many cases, those limits still do not extend to homosexuals.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-02 01:31:41 and read 2077 times.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 78):
Even in at-will states, there are limits, no matter who has to do the legwork, to what an employer can do. In many cases, those limits still do not extend to homosexuals.

I think we're talking past each other.

If Employer says to Employee, "Thank you for your service. However, today was your last day here. Here is your last paycheck. Good bye, and good luck", by so doing he specifies no reason for the termination. As I recall, if he specifies no reason, then it is incumbent upon the employee in at-will employment situations to show that (1.) there was in fact a reason that he was fired that (2.) violated relevant provisions of federal and State law.

In an at-will setting, if the Employer fires people for no reason at all, and has made a habit out of it, I would say that it would be rather difficult absent significant evidence to the contrary to say that he must have fired any particular employee for any particular reason.

To the best of my recollection:

For example, suppose that newly fired Employee is handicapped and that discrimination against handicapped employees is illegal. To prevail in an action based on unlawful termination, he would have to show that he was fired not for no reason, but rather because of his handicap. (Certain other requirements also apply.) In theory, where the Employer gives no reason for firing, it is no easier for the handicapped person to show, ceteris paribus, that he was fired for being handicapped than for a gay person to show that he was fired for being gay.

This is separate from the issue of whether gayness is protected from discrimination. It's an issue of legal requirements relating to element and proof.

There is nothing wrong with firing someone who is gay under this at-will rubric, any more than there is anything wrong for firing someone who is handicapped (where such handicapped persons are part of a protected class), as long as it cannot be shown that the above-stated Employer fired that person for either (1.) being or acting gay, or (2.) handicapped, or both.

[Edited 2006-02-02 01:42:18]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-02 03:17:23 and read 2046 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 79):
I think we're talking past each other.

No, we're not talking past each other - you're missing my point. The ease of proof has no bearing on the situation. In the case of wrongfull termination, if the employer, even an at-will employer, terminated an employee not just because, but because of they were of a protected status, the employee has recourse. Yes, it's up to the employee, and yes it's difficult to prove, but it can and has been proven numerous times. A gay employee, even if they can prove they were fired because they were gay, has no such recourse. It's perfectly legal to terminate them specifically because they are gay. That's my point, and more importantly the point of all my posts - it is not only ok, but legal to discriminate against homosexuals in this country. Yes, socially we are more accepted in some quarters, and I can be more open about my life than in the past, but when it comes down to it, legally, I'm still in pretty much the same boat I was in 25 years ago.

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Luv2fly
Posted 2006-02-02 03:53:49 and read 2030 times.

I think this sums it all up....

"The bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals
and 362 to Heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God
doesn't love Heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision!"

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Ctbarnes
Posted 2006-02-02 04:56:18 and read 2013 times.

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 80):
"The bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals
and 362 to Heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God
doesn't love Heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision!"

Or to quote Winston Churchill:

The trouble with legislating against sodomy is that half the population think such acts are impossible, and the other half are alrady doing it.....

Charles, SJ

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2006-02-02 05:43:37 and read 1995 times.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 79):
A gay employee, even if they can prove they were fired because they were gay, has no such recourse. It's perfectly legal to terminate them specifically because they are gay.

No, I see your point, but it's not as powerful as you think, because much of the population already has the same problem that you claim gays have. And that's my point.

That problem is that there is very often no recourse -- not for gays, and not for anyone else who has been fired. In the sense I have stated, the problem that gays have is no worse in at-will, no-reason situations because in most such situations, it is extremely difficult to prove intent to discriminate.

Further, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is indeed unlawful in many jurisdictions.

[Edited 2006-02-02 06:08:48]

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Illegal
Username: Pdpsol
Posted 2006-02-02 06:02:18 and read 1991 times.

I have noticed no one, including Ctbarnes, has yet to provide a logical answer to the following question:

Quoting Pope (Reply 68):
Simply stated, What is the compelling government interest that would support denial of equal protection under the law for homosexual couples?

Topic: RE: Let's Be Perfectly Clear: Being Gay Is NOT Ill
Username: Searpqx
Posted 2006-02-02 09:12:47 and read 1970 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 82):
That problem is that there is very often no recourse -- not for gays, and not for anyone else who has been fired. In the sense I have stated, the problem that gays have is no worse in at-will, no-reason situations because in most such situations, it is extremely difficult to prove intent to discriminate.

And that is why we disagree on the concept of 'acceptance'. In Texas, an employer could walk up to me in front of my co-workers and say, "Duane, I heard you're gay - you're fired", and get away with it. Whereas if he substituted an adjective describing my race, gender, age or physical disability, I could fight the firing and at least win compensation, if not reinstatement. I don't consider that equal. If you do, then we'll simply agree to disagree.

Quoting Pdpsol (Reply 83):
I have noticed no one, including Ctbarnes, has yet to provide a logical answer to the following question:

Quoting Pope (Reply 68):
Simply stated, What is the compelling government interest that would support denial of equal protection under the law for homosexual couples?

Because there isn't one, and invariably this is where those that oppose equal treatment will resort to moral, religious or emotional appeals to make their point.

Oops - almost forgot this one:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 82):
Further, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is indeed unlawful in many jurisdictions.

And I'm thankful for every one of those jurisdictions. Its taken approximately 17 years for 16 states to pass gay civil rights laws. At this right, by 2050 we should be 'equal ' on a nationwide basis! Hooray!  sarcastic 

[Edited 2006-02-02 09:28:02]


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/