Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Among 60 Companies to File Statement with U.S. Supreme Court Backing Gay Marriage
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
I apologize. I looked over my posts and you are right I didn't make the case. So my case is as such. Lets assume that the majority votes on something and the courts overrule this vote. In this case the minority way is the ruling way.
If the courts decision is constitutionally correct then we are where we should be according to the constitution. If it is not constitutionally correct then we are where we shouldn't be according to the constitution. Regardless of the side we land on in respect to the constitution due to the courts we are still following the minority view as supported by the courts (because the majority voted the other way in the first place). Right or wrong we are still following the minority rule because the courts say we have to and not because the majority voted for it.
"Differentiated" is basically the same thing as "separate but equal" (when we had different services such as schools for whites and blacks, but they were "equal").
You're missing my point. I only oppose (a little) government recognition of gay marriage because gay rights organizations have that as their goal, and gay rights organizations try to force their beliefs on others. If anyone famous says anything even remotely considered "homophobic" (extremely inaccurate term), they get sued.
Same goes for scientology. Other churches do not do this. As much as religion-haters like to think, the Christian, Jewish, etc groups do not try to force religion on others (except for the terrorists).
Otherwise, I would not care what the government does. Personally, I think the best thing to do is leave it alone and not recognize any marriage and instead focus on issues that are actually important. The church and state are supposed to be separate. And anyway, I only care a little bit. If you asked me yes or no, I'd just choose no rather than yes.
And protecting sallie mae private high interest student loans from ever being eligible for bankruptcy...
Rocketman probably sees nothing wrong with have separate schools for whites and "n*****" as he likes to call them. You're arguing with a troglodyte. I wouldn't bother.
The dictionary just calls it offensive, and if you used it publicly, you would be pursued legally. Sadly, "retarded" appears to be heading that way.
Well, now we know you're an equal opportunity bigot. I'm always amused at religious people who are my idea of what the devil would be like (if I believed in all that silliness.) One of the reasons I stopped being religious was the rampant hypocrisy. Guess that's why you have to go to church all the time. The priest tells you the same things over and over again but it just doesn't stick.
Well, if he is up there, it would actually be considerate of him if he came down and cleared things up.
The last time he "talked" to anyone was a few thousand years ago to some guy alone on a mountain who saw a bush on fire.
And what's funny is that this also applies to the quotes from other parts of scripture saying being gay is a sin: Jesus didn't write those other verses either!
"...and that you love your neighbor as yourself." That quote from Jesus is all I need to hear to know to that my gay friend has a right to marry just like I do.
The dictionary calls it offensive? Gosh, that's shocking. I guess that's because it's offensive to most decent people.
Nope.
Woa, where did that come from? All I say is that people should not be prosecuted for expressing their opinions, and you call me a bigot? Well, glad I made you so angry for whatever reason
Yes, but not outright bigotry. Some folks are just not going to agree with homosexuals, just like some folks are just not going to like people of another race or from another country. They have their reasons.
It's their beliefs which they have a right to just as much as I have mine.
The hard part, and the part we are all fighting, is making sure their beliefs don't press upon others that don't share the same ideals.
Someone can not like black folk all day long so long as they don't support gentrification.
And it may surprise you, but most of the people I know are atheists, don't like gays, and voted for gay marriage.
Yep. Imagine if Romney called his opponent that. It's offensive to most decent people, and we're in a democratic government. He wouldn't get away with it.
Unless it is similar but not equal.
I can present the debate better than you can present the debate (propaganda).
Seriously.
I don't think I'm missing your point. I think opposing gay marriage because of the reasons you outline above has nothing to do with actual gay marriage. Would you vote against rights for black people because people get metaphorically lynched if they say something perceived as racist? Do you think that people should be able to say racist things without backlash?
No. It is not a banned term. Romney would have lost the election if he had used that term because of public opinion, not because the term is "banned" in any legal way.
Can you honestly not see the difference? He has the right to call Obama whatever he wants, but he doesn't have the right to be president. You have the right to be a bigot if you want, but you shouldn't have the right to deny others their rights. It's so simple, but somehow it's just not getting through...hmm.
Last edited:
Gay right organizations are boycotting Chick-Fil-A. This means they are refusing to buy Chick-Fil-A products. Do you feel they should be forced to buy Chick-Fil-A products? Obviously, no one is stopping you or anyone else from buying them if you so choose. Buy you seem to feel people should be forced to do business with them, and should face death for not doing so.
I don't know what kind of world you would like this to be, in which people are executed for not buying chicken sandwiches.
I'm just a straight woman with a lot of gay friends and acquaintances. Most of them in committed relationships that have lasted a lot longer than most straight people, btw. People who aren't bigots aren't inclined to pine away about the loss of a racial slur (or any kind of slur). So it follows that someone who does is probably a bigot. Do you wish you could freely use fa**ot, too?
I think people should be able to say racist things without legal punishment as long as it is not actually harmful slander. Sure I'd totally disagree with a Nazi and call him retarded, worthless, and ignorant, but why should anyone be prosecuted for just choosing their own beliefs?
- Status