gnasher729 said:
He was saying that to these cops a law "no beating people" evidently wasn't enough to stop them from beating up gay people, even though it stopped them from beating up non-gay people.
So the answer is to make up another, redundant law in the hopes that they will follow THAT one- instead of enforcing the current laws? Does the law have to list every minority group for police not to beat them up, along with every possible permutation of anybody they might just not like? (Don't beat up the young guy that looks like a punk either!)
If I go beat up an old lady down the street, the county/city/etc. won't say "Shucks, we forgot to add 'don't beat up old ladies' to our law saying 'don't beat people up'- we're going to have to let him go, maybe give him some sensitivity training!"
No, I'll be arrested (and rightly so) for assaulting another human being. That's how the law works for most of us, and its how the law needs to work for the government's musclemen. What's the use in making more laws if the current ones aren't even followed?
apple_iBoy said:
The right to seek and hold gainful employment that is decoupled from your employer's sense of propriety concerning your sexual preference or your employer's sense of rectitude regarding the (consenting, adult, human!!!) individual you choose as a mate.
Again, how do you prove this either way? I agree that an employer should not discriminate based on your private life, but how will legislation help this at all?
apple_iBoy said:
The right to have your legally performed marriage be recognized, no matter what community or state you are in
As far as I understand it, marriage has always been a state-by-state matter. It might be a good idea to change it to a purely voluntary contractual affair, not involving the state, but why take the matter up to the federal government?
apple_iBoy said:
The right to equal and fair access to all benefits and privileges afforded to married couples including but not limited to the right to file taxes as a single entity, the right to bequeath and inherit property as married spouses do, the right to access to an ill or injured spouse in a hospital (no matter what state the illness or injury might occur in), etc.
I agree that you should have all those rights! BUT why beg the federal government for them? Why give them MORE power over your life decisions? Why should the state (especially on the federal level) get to decide who you give your property to or not? Why the HELL should a hospital be able to control yor access to a loved one, whether you are his friend or his lover?? An why are you begging the government to take your money?
apple_iBoy said:
The right to raise and nurture a family without impingement of other's religious and moral objections to your family's composition.
Separation of church and state I agree with, but the law can only go so far if we accept the principle of free speech.
Binarymix said:
Quoted from the Article:
"The legislation would prohibit many civilian, nonreligious employers in the United States from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity for the purposes of hiring or other employment practices."
It won't affect religious organizations.
I missed that. So, at least it won't affect religious institutions (for now). But it shouldn't affect ANY independent organization.
Binarymix said:
Rest assured there is rampant discrimination against gays still taking place. I witness it all the time. In fact I am a recent victim of it; losing my job after coming out.
Luckily in Canada these laws are in place, and I am pursuing action with Human Rights Canada.
Yes, I've also been a victim of discrimination. But I don't feel I have any "right" to be hired by anyone. Unless its a government issue, I simply go elsewhere and I don't insist on being hired by people who already don't like me based on superficial qualities.
Being gay is part of nature i.e. normal so it's not a deviation, hence you are undeserving of my or anyones respect.
The entire reason gays are a minority is because their sexuality deviates from normal reproductive behavior. It's not in fact, reproductive. And no, you're not going to change biological reality just because its not "politically correct".
Homosexual behavior has been both demonized and glorified throughout human history. It looks like its on its way to the latter now, as all these cycles go. I'm not going to judge what is good for others, but I am not going to twist the facts of the world just to be politically correct now.
It's okay though- we're complex creatures and we all have our quirks and deviations from the norm. As long as its not harming anyone or violating their rights, it's okay. But just because something occurs in nature doesn't mean its "normal". Feel free to feel deep offense, but none is intended.
Regardless of how others may judge me, even hate me, based on my thoughts, I will always take a stand with human rights, whatever the peculiarities of the person or group.
I do worry about these intolerant attitudes coming not only from "conservatives" but from "liberals" who want to militantly force their views and behaviors onto everyone. More government is usually not the answer to the question of freedom. Of course, in the end, we're all being played just the same.
BTW, for an LGBT person who really got screwed because he did the right thing see Bradley/Chelsea Manning.
