19
votes

Gays: The New Blacks

posted May 29, 2008 - 4:40pm
Gays: The New Blacks

Last week gay marriage was legalized in California. Today New York's Governor has given the okay for gay marriages from other states and countries to be recognized in New York state.

Now the conservative nutcases are out in full force to deny this very important equal right to gays and lesbians in our country. The Human Rights Campaign is reporting that the right-wing lawmakers have gathered a petition of one million signatures to put a gay marriage ban on the ballot in California in November.

Isn't this the same discrimination that reminds one of the former law where a black person could not marry a white person?

If the majority of white people wanted to keep that ban would that be "right"? When will our government just say "This is it! Gays should have the right to marry like any other person and it doesn't matter what the majority says."? If the majority says it's okay to kill someone, does that make it right?

This issue is just crazy. Equal rights for everyone. That's what this country should stand for. It's time for some strong individuals to say just that. Let's not let gays be the new blacks.

mrbronco's Xombyte

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

Author: mrbronco
-A +A


Comments

Congratulations Are In Order

Free Cracker 4 Jack - Sat, 2008-31-5 5:30 am
Hey Mr. B. Congratulations on a really hot topic. A Big +1 Also, congratulations Publius on a well made argument and counter arguments to the topic. However a bit of bad form in getting angry and resorting to name calling. But, everyone does get angry now and again. My $0.02 on this mess: 1) Homosexuality is not a race and although homosexuals have suffered their cause, they have never done so on a level equal to the sufferings of racial prejudice. It is just a bad comparison. 2) I agree that homosexuals do share the same civil rights that we all have available to us. It is not legal for anyone (heterosexual nor homosexual) to marry someone of the same sex. We all have the same rights. 3) Have we considered why Homosexuals want to marry? Marriage is founded in a religious setting. A setting which has strictly pointed out homosexuality is a sin against God and rejected it. So, it is unlikely that they want it for a Godly purpose. 4) A state recognized union at a justice of the peace would only be beneficial to those who are seeking a different tax status & health care coverage. Most anything else can be accomplished by legal contract. 5) Some employers have changed their policies for health care coverage (such as mine), they have now made provision to cover everyone living under the wage earners roof, having lived there for greater than 1 year. Granted this broad policy is not only a boon for any homosexual couples that can now suddenly provide for their significant others, but also allows for people like myself to offer my parents better medical coverage if they are willing to move in with me. 6) Being that there are ways around tax preparation and health coverages, what other grounds is it sought for? 7) An overall wide spread acceptance of the teachings and practices of homosexuality will likely strike a serious blow to the average family unit. Forcing the homosexual agenda to be addressed with children as young as 2yrs old to explain to them and instruct them with a focus on family values and Godly principles. After they are subject to witnessing homosexual displays of affection. 7a) If only it stayed behind closed doors. I instruct my children with biblical principles and upright morals, foremost by example and complimented with discussion and studies. I do this behind closed doors and do not exhibit my religious beliefs, nor practices on perfect strangers of any orientation. I am a God fearing Christian and I pursue my right to my religion and to raise up my family to serve the Lord. I do not force others into my beliefs nor to witness my practices. Exposure to homosexuality at a young and impressionable age may compromise these goals and beliefs. 7b) What about non-religious families. They may have high moral values of right and wrong but no spiritual strength. Their children would be the most vulnerable to confusion and conversion. Regardless of their parents wishes. In the words of Forrest Gump: "That's all I have to say about that." FreeCracker4Jack Would you like to earn money writing similar articles? CLICK ME! Read more great articles: http://www.xomba.com/xombyte/free_cracker_4_jack?p

FreeCracker4Jack Join the ranks of starving amateur writers competing for your attention and praises! SIGN UP HERE

Perhaps I'm an idiot

kjhack - Sat, 2008-31-5 2:30 am
But I have fewer hang-ups than you. For that, I'm eternally grateful. Join Xomba!

 
 

kjhack... Only someone with

Publius - Sat, 2008-31-5 2:07 am
kjhack... Only someone with a complete lack of reading comprehension would accuse me of claiming that children were being "indoctrinated" at their public schools by homosexual advocates. I was making the point that the "gay rights" movement was not about privacy and "being free to do what they want in their own bedrooms" - as you suggested. They are trying to teach that homosexuality is an acceptable alternative form of sexual behavior in schools. Is that "indoctrination"? No, it is not. But it certainly is not keeping their sexual behavior in their own bedroom...just like "gay pride" parades is not. "What I don't understand is why you all are so obsessed with the topic." I only discuss the topic when people who are incapable of using reason bring it up and try to force their entirely uninformed and inept opinions on others. If you'd like an explanation, see my article and the comments I've left here...then read the responses. If you can't figure out why my counter-argument is necessary, then I'm afraid we have come to a dead end. I suppose other people discuss this topic when they are told that they must accept what is abnormal and destructive to individuals and to society in general. Maybe they're fed up with the same inept arguments. "You're right, murder and slavery have been around since the beginning of time, as well. What's your point? Are equating homosexuality with murder and slavery? Give me a break." Nice debating skills...you're an idiot. "Fine, my opinions are nonsense. I guess that ends the conversation." Yes. Until you are able to acknowledge what is, and until you are capable of making logical arguments - it does end this conversation. *If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.

Who is Publius?

What is Rational Liberty?

How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

mrbronco... I'm making a

Publius - Sat, 2008-31-5 1:47 am
mrbronco... I'm making a fool out of myself? This coming from the guy who is equating the civil rights of black people with homosexuality. You're right. I don't know what it's like to be gay. Does that mean that what I wrote in my article and what I've written here is inaccurate? Have you shown me any evidence that homosexuality is genetic? Have you proven your ridiculous point that being homosexual is the same as being black? That the civil rights of black people are to be equated with those of homosexuals wanting to marry? Have you even bothered to try to refute any point I've made, other than your feeble attempts to claim that homosexuality is not a "choice"? (Which I happened to mention in my article.) I think there are quite a few people here that are "speaking of what they do not know." But I'm certainly not one of them. *If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.

Who is Publius?

What is Rational Liberty?

How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

Oh Please!

kjhack - Sat, 2008-31-5 1:16 am
Don't give me this boring old crap about schools "indoctrinating" children with homosexuality. I know plenty of educators and recent graduates from the school system. This is utter BS. I have had plenty of conservations with people like you thought the years. What I don't understand is why you all are so obsessed with the topic. If you could explain that, I'd be grateful. You're right, murder and slavery have been around since the beginning of time, as well. What's your point? Are equating homosexuality with murder and slavery? Give me a break. Fine, my opinions are nonsense. I guess that ends the conversation. Thanks for playing, and don't forget to pick up a version of the home game on your way out. Join Xomba!

 
 

The end

mrbronco - Sat, 2008-31-5 1:04 am
All I have left to say is: Publius, speak only of what you know. You are making a fool out of yourself. You have no clue what it's like to live a gay life. Adrienne, you are bi. Therefore you DO have a choice, to be gay or straight. That doesn't apply to people who are either gay or straight. They are one or the other, no choice. Equal rights for all. That's the bottom line. Someday you Publius will love someone who is gay. And maybe then you'll see their plight.

mrbronco's Xombyte

Well, that's a good

Publius - Sat, 2008-31-5 12:12 am
Well, that's a good rebuttal... The problem is, the "gay rights" movement is not about keeping what you do in your bedroom private. They like to make big spectacles out of their sexuality and force their beliefs into the public realm, especially in places like public school curriculum. (They do the same thing that most people complain about when it comes to religious groups.) It's not enough for them to "just be left alone" or to do what they want "in the privacy of their own bedroom." If that was the case, there wouldn't be the controversy we have today. They have the same rights as everyone else in this country. Unfortunately for them, marriage is not a right. But that doesn't matter anyway. They are free to get married whenever they feel like it. They can do exactly what every other married couple has done: They are free to marry someone of the opposite sex. That's the law. Because they don't want to marry someone of the opposite sex, it does not mean they are being denied a "civil right." They have the same opportunity as you or me - they choose not to take advantage of it. Homosexuality has been around since the beginning of time? Big deal. So has murder and slavery. What's your point? Does that justify it? Does that mean everyone ought to accept it? What's your definition of "normal"? Length of existence? If you honestly believe the nonsense that you write, perhaps you should check your premises. Your analyses are devoid of reason. Your arguments are devoid of merit. Your view of the topic is devoid of rudimentary factual understanding. Growing up is a good idea. But what do you intend to grow into if reason will not be an integral part of your mind? *If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.

Who is Publius?

What is Rational Liberty?

How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

I disagree

kjhack - Fri, 2008-30-5 10:47 pm
Homosexuality has been around since the beginning of time, and looking at it from that perspective can be considered a "normal" part of the human sexual landscape. It amazes me that we still have such discussions in the 21st century. What other people do in the privacy of their bedrooms really shouldn't concern anyone else. It's really time to grow-up as a society and move-on. Join Xomba!

 
 

kjhack... How or why is it

Publius - Fri, 2008-30-5 9:53 pm
kjhack... How or why is it "ridiculous" to point out what is? To dismiss this very relevant fact about all life is to dismiss the notion of existence. As a species, we do exist and if we expect to continue to exist, we must survive and perpetuate our existence. That is done through procreation. To deny procreation is to deny survival, and in essence, to deny existence. The logic is easy to follow if reason is your method of thinking. Only the unreasonable can argue that self-destruction is normal or acceptable to life. This does not mean that everyone must procreate. Simply stated, if you refuse to accept that natural procreation is normal (as in fertilization through heterosexual sex), then you have lost your sense of reason and are incapable of continuing the discussion. Furthermore, I did not make the argument that we are in danger of "dying out" because homosexuality exists. That's absurd. My point was that to call homosexuality "normal" or to accept it as a normal/practical alternative to heterosexuality is not only logically flawed, but the former is an incorrect use of terminology. Homosexuality cannot be and is not normal. On a side note... How do you feel about the government bestowing benefits on people simply for getting married or having children? Should that be the responsibility or the business of our government? *If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.

Who is Publius?

What is Rational Liberty?

How do I join Xomba and get PAID to write?

Yeah, well...

kjhack - Fri, 2008-30-5 8:32 pm
Many people aren't normal, but they still get married. How many of us are really "normal', anyway. And who wants to be? Your point about the main objective of any species is "to survive and perpetuate its existence" is a little ridiculous, don't you think? Do you honestly believe that we are in danger of dying out because of lack of "procreation?" We may die out sooner than we think, but it certainly won't be because not enough babies are being popped into the world. Join Xomba!

 
 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You can use BBCode tags in the text. URLs will automatically be converted to links.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <br> <b> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <span> <object> <param> <embed> <table> <tr> <td> <div>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

Join Xomba Today

Do you like to write? Would you like to make a little extra money on the side? These people do. Join the Xomba community today.
Become a Member