Jake Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Jul 29, 2012 -> 11:10 PM) dude read the rest of the thread before you post. it's bigoted to hate someone for something they can't control. it's a whole 'nother animal to hate someone for an attitude they hold, that they have every ability to change when it's been proven time and time again (blacks/women) to be the immoral and ignorant position. No, you hate southerners for the circumstance that they are from the south since by your standard they all are bigoted. I have to wonder how many places you've been. I grew up in a part of the "liberal" never once slave-owning state of Illinois that was more pathetically bigoted and behind the times than most places I've been to in the American South. Let's just take every person on a case by case basis instead of deciding that an entire region is useless. I don't think you'd like people thinking things about you because of silly circumstances like where you're from or your skin color, your height, or any random thing you had little to no say in. Also, the south is home to the best fried chicken ever (Chick Fil A) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjshoe04 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) Reddy sounds like me when I was 17. The constant comparisons to the civil rights with blacks is laughable. I'm about as liberal as it gets but seriously Gays have very nearly the same rights as you or I. I'd love to see them be able to get legally married and all but I have never seen anyone openly discriminate against someone because they are gay. The government should just make everything civil unions and let the churches call what they do marriage if you ask me. Edited July 30, 2012 by kjshoe04 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 29, 2012 -> 11:22 PM) Dude...its not just the south. The majority of this country still doesn't support gay-marriage. It was recently voted on in a very liberal state (the one I live in) and it didn't pass. I think its a shame but to say the south should be succeeded. Give me a break man. You are being just as bigoted and stereotypical yourself. FWIW the polls have been rapidly shifting over the past decade or so such that what was the majority in 2008 is now the minority in 2012. Nationally, there's a slight majority in favor of same-sex marriage, though state-by-state breakdowns are still against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 01:37 AM) I have never seen anyone openly discriminate against someone because they are gay. I have. It's not exactly uncommon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 02:37 AM) Reddy sounds like me when I was 17. The constant comparisons to the civil rights with blacks is laughable. I'm about as liberal as it gets but seriously Gays have very nearly the same rights as you or I. I'd love to see them be able to get legally married and all but I have never seen anyone openly discriminate against someone because they are gay. The government should just make everything civil unions and let the churches call what they do marriage if you ask me. Then either you don't know anyone who is gay or you're not paying attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmteam Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 29, 2012 -> 09:23 PM) One doesn't choose to be a southerner either! Wait... Depends how Reddy was defining "southerner" here. If it's just "live in the south" then sure, that's a choice. But given some of these last few posts, I'm confident in saying that if I walked up to Reddy and asked in a southen accent for directions to US Cellular, he would automatically assume I'm against gay marriage. That accent isn't a choice, and it's that ridiculous stereotyping he's being called on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 06:55 AM) Then either you don't know anyone who is gay or you're not paying attention. You should ask a group of college baseball players if they'd like to be friends with some gay folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 01:37 AM) Reddy sounds like me when I was 17. The constant comparisons to the civil rights with blacks is laughable. I'm about as liberal as it gets but seriously Gays have very nearly the same rights as you or I. I'd love to see them be able to get legally married and all but I have never seen anyone openly discriminate against someone because they are gay. The government should just make everything civil unions and let the churches call what they do marriage if you ask me. It's just semantics. Civil Unions are a way of pleasing the folks that are against gay marriage. This makes America look stupid. "Sooo, let's be clear. If a gay couple enters into a civil union, they will receive all the rights and privileges bestowed upon an opposite-sex marriage?" "Yes." "But, it's not marriage, right?" "No, it's a civil union." "Whew...and I thought it was a marriage." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Where they've been tried, like NJ, we've seen that "separate-but-equal" civil unions are not, in fact, equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:35 AM) Where they've been tried, like NJ, we've seen that "separate-but-equal" civil unions are not, in fact, equal. At the end of the day, you have to go to one extreme or another. Either the government needs to get out of the marriage business, or it needs to quit discriminating. It doesn't need to be making a religious statement. If churches want to restrict marriage, that is their prerogative, not governments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:05 AM) It's just semantics. Civil Unions are a way of pleasing the folks that are against gay marriage. This makes America look stupid. "Sooo, let's be clear. If a gay couple enters into a civil union, they will receive all the rights and privileges bestowed upon an opposite-sex marriage?" "Yes." "But, it's not marriage, right?" "No, it's a civil union." "Whew...and I thought it was a marriage." There's a difference for those folks (the majority in the country) that view marriage as a religious thing, not just a government benefits thing. That's the problem with this issue. Gay people want something that's against religious belief, instead of being satisfied with civil union benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:42 AM) At the end of the day, you have to go to one extreme or another. Either the government needs to get out of the marriage business, or it needs to quit discriminating. It doesn't need to be making a religious statement. If churches want to restrict marriage, that is their prerogative, not governments. Agreed 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:44 AM) There's a difference for those folks (the majority in the country) that view marriage as a religious thing, not just a government benefits thing. That's the problem with this issue. Gay people want something that's against religious belief, instead of being satisfied with civil union benefits. Gay people want access to the same secular government institutions as straight people. They currently do not enjoy that access in most states, and as we all know, separate-but-equal doesn't work. People should never be satisfied with lesser rights than others. Edited July 30, 2012 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:49 AM) Gay people want access to the same secular government institutions as straight people. They currently do not enjoy that access in most states, and as we all know, separate-but-equal doesn't work. People should never be satisfied with lesser rights than others. What don't they have right now? If they're considered to be a spouse what are they missing out on? Edit: you added the link. I guess I agree with ss2k5 - the government needs to get out of the marriage business and leave that up to private institutions (the marriage question). Of course you know when that happens they'll be a lawsuit because gay people would be refused the "right" to marry where they want to. Edited July 30, 2012 by Jenksismybitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:52 AM) What don't they have right now? If they're considered to be a spouse what are they missing out on? I think it was 29 states that it is still legal in to discriminate against someone for their sexual orientation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:52 AM) What don't they have right now? If they're considered to be a spouse what are they missing out on? They're not legally considered married. Read the article for some examples, and there are many more. It needlessly complicates everything and adds a huge layer of confusion when dealing with any company or institution that has policies for married people but not for civil-unioned people. Benefits get denied, wills get complicated, hospital rights get denied, etc. etc. Edited July 30, 2012 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:54 AM) I think it was 29 states that it is still legal in to discriminate against someone for their sexual orientation. That's a violation of federal law. Do you mean discriminate in the marriage context? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:52 AM) What don't they have right now? If they're considered to be a spouse what are they missing out on? Edit: you added the link. I guess I agree with ss2k5 - the government needs to get out of the marriage business and leave that up to private institutions (the marriage question). Of course you know when that happens they'll be a lawsuit because gay people would be refused the "right" to marry where they want to. Sally Ride's partner of 27 years gets absolutely NO benefits, because they weren't able to get legally married. That's what they're missing out on. And no, I know a lot of southerners who are great people. I actually love country music. And no, it's also not confined to the south - there are gay-haters in every podunk town in America - however, the percentage of folks who discriminate against gays IS much higher in the south than in the north because of religious profiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 11:00 AM) That's a violation of federal law. Do you mean discriminate in the marriage context? Sexual orientation isn't a protected class. It's perfectly legal to fire someone for being gay in a majority of states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 03:48 PM) Agreed 100%. But it's a legal contract. How do you have a legal contract without the resources of the state to enforce it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 12:00 PM) That's a violation of federal law. Do you mean discriminate in the marriage context? No, and it's not a violation of federal law unless you're being hired for a government job. You can deny housing to people because they're gay in those states. You can refuse to hire someone because of sexual orientation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 04:03 PM) But it's a legal contract. How do you have a legal contract without the resources of the state to enforce it. Marriage wouldn't be a legal contract. People could still create contracts for power of attorney/wills/etc that the government would enforce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 11:01 AM) Sally Ride's partner of 27 years gets absolutely NO benefits, because they weren't able to get legally married. That's what they're missing out on. And no, I know a lot of southerners who are great people. I actually love country music. And no, it's also not confined to the south - there are gay-haters in every podunk town in America - however, the percentage of folks who discriminate against gays IS much higher in the south than in the north because of religious profiles. I have a friend who is black, I can't be a racist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 11:06 AM) I have a friend who is black, I can't be a racist! worst shade of green ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 12:07 PM) worst shade of green ever. There you go, making everything about color again. Is there nothing you won't discriminate against?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts