Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

U.S. Senate Approves Anti-Discrimination Bill Endorsed by Tim Cook

yg17 said:
Because gay people don't choose their sexuality, and no one should be discriminated against because of something they have no control over.
Click to expand...

You always have control and if you say you don't, what do you say about the people who are attracted to little kids? Are you willing to make an exception for them and say that is wrong or are you going to explain how they can't help who they are and we should accept them and stop being hateful?
 
phillipduran said:
You always have control and if you say you don't, what do you say about the people who are attracted to little kids? Are you willing to make an exception for them and say that is wrong or are you going to explain how they can't help who they are and we should accept them and stop being hateful?
Click to expand...

Kids can't legally consent. They're not adults.

Gay people don't choose to be gay any more than you or I choose to be straight.
 
phillipduran said:
You always have control and if you say you don't, what do you say about the people who are attracted to little kids? Are you willing to make an exception for them and say that is wrong or are you going to explain how they can't help who they are and we should accept them and stop being hateful?
Click to expand...

Children can not legally consent to a relationship - sorry that is a red herring, you are comparing apples and oranges.
 
calvin2006 said:
You do realize that the founding fathers intentionally created roadblocks in our constitutional system of government, right? The other option is tyranny. Tyrannical leaders who share your opinions are still tyrants.
Click to expand...

They created "roadblocks" so that there would be COMPROMISE in our government and for both sides to work together efficiently. The roadblocks we face today are legit roadblocks, because hardly anything at all gets done, and our politicians in DC hate working with the other side. Our system is not running as efficiently as it should be.
 
phillipduran said:
You always have control and if you say you don't, what do you say about the people who are attracted to little kids? Are you willing to make an exception for them and say that is wrong or are you going to explain how they can't help who they are and we should accept them and stop being hateful?
Click to expand...

So you made a conscious decision to be attracted to the opposite sex?
 
joeshmo2010 said:
They created "roadblocks" so that there would be COMPROMISE in our government and for both sides to work together efficiently. The roadblocks we face today are legit roadblocks, because hardly anything at all gets done, and our politicians in DC hate working with the other side. Our system is not running as efficiently as it should be.
Click to expand...

Absolutely false. They created roadblocks to prevent tyranny. They created roadblocks to make sure power could not be centered in one branch of government. Their issue was not compromise. People who fight wars of independence are not typically your compromising types.
 
yg17 said:
Kids can't legally consent. They're not adults.

Gay people don't choose to be gay any more than you or I choose to be straight.
Click to expand...

And that is my point, I guarantee with the social degradation of our society that bar will get lower and lower. Where does it stop? What is off limits? What do we use to guide us?

Are there any books out there that lay out a model of how society and people should interact?
 
phillipduran said:
And that is my point, I guarantee with the social degradation of our society that bar will get lower and lower. Where does it stop? What is off limits? What do we use to guide us?

Are there any books out there that lay out a model of how society and people should interact?
Click to expand...

So the only thing you have to counter gay rights is the slippery slope argument?

Those books you're hinting at are written by people, 1000's of years old, etc.
 
joeshmo2010 said:
They created "roadblocks" so that there would be COMPROMISE in our government and for both sides to work together efficiently. The roadblocks we face today are legit roadblocks, because hardly anything at all gets done, and our politicians in DC hate working with the other side. Our system is not running as efficiently as it should be.
Click to expand...

I more often see statements from the founding fathers warning of halting and preventing tyranny than I do about encouraging compromise.

They were HYPER focused on creating a system that kept tyranny at bay.
 
phillipduran said:
Are there any books out there that lay out a model of how society and people should interact?
Click to expand...

This is where you lost me. I can't think of anything worse than an absolute morality; one based around some dogmatic, outdated morals that have no place in modern society.

To paraphrase Dawkins, I want a morality that is thought out and reasoned. Women's rights, kindness to animals, abolishing slavery -- these are all things that are entirely recent and have come about from logical discussion, not from Bible-bashing and verse-quoting.
 
I'm one of Obamas biggest critics, but I couldn't disagree more with the religious right one this one. This is one of the reasons the Republican party is imploding.

I hope they come to terms that this is 2013 and most Americans are for workplace protection. Boggles my mind that they are making this about religion.
 
phillipduran said:
Those 32 are holding the line against societal degradation. It's homosexuality today. It will be pedophilia tomorrow. Sexual liberation for 13 year olds and up. Transgender, sexual identification are already being pushed into our schools now. It has no place there, but there it is. Pick the bathroom you want to use in middle school. Encourage kids to "figure out" what their sexual identity is. This is a historical calling card of the collapse of society. History backs this up.
Click to expand...

That's what they said about blacks and women not 100 years ago. Grow a pair and think for yourself rather then believing what a book over 2k years ago says.
 
I see astonishing hate and homophobia among small but vocal group.

Small and shrinking: bigots die off faster than new ones are born... Time is on the side of justice.
 
phillipduran said:
Loopholes or is it respect for the fact that we all don't think alike?

Let the business owners decide what they want to do. If the public is so outraged over these differences, they can take their business to the companies that are in step with their views.

I would oppose laws that say you can't open a business based on your race or sex. I also oppose a government telling a business who they can or cant employ.
Click to expand...

The business owners?? Sadly enough companies are still in private hands and this leads to nothing but problems.
Almost all people are dependent on these so called owners (I call them thieves and villains) and now they shall also dices about how easy or not someone gets a job for a life in dependency based on their sexuality?
No way.
We need to get rid of the "business owners" instead of strengthening them.
 
I can see the reasoning for these laws but at the end of the day they really don't do anything to prevent discrimination especially in the hiring process.

If I theoretically had 3 qualified people I was interviewing, a straight white person, a gay person and a minority. Now I really don't know that the person is gay but i'll pretend that my gaydar is pretty good. So I end up picking the straight white person. How on earth does anyone prove that I discriminated if I discriminated at all? I just ended up picking the person I felt was the best candidate.

I'm fine with the law but why do we need to keep adding groups of people to it? Why not just say you can't be discriminated against if your are a human being??? Much simpler i think.
 
shareef777 said:
That's what they said about blacks and women not 100 years ago. Grow a pair and think for yourself rather then believing what a book over 2k years ago says.
Click to expand...

Putting aside your religious slander for a moment, the "slippery slope" has nothing to do with imposed morality. It's an extension of the logic put forth by gay rights activists. By their own arguments, it is unlawful to prevent two men or two women from marrying. By what logical constraint do you limit other unions? The union of three men, the union of two women and a tree? When you throw out the biological underpinnings of natural marriage, what do you have left?
 
Some companies would hire gays if they are not the flamboyant obnoxious drama queens, those are hard to take. ;)
 
Why should this even be controversial?

I'm curious to hear the Tea Party arguments against this. What will they say "I is my God given right to hate people who are different from me."

I can't think of a way to oppose this and not sound like a bigot.
 
ChrisA said:
Why should this even be controversial?

I'm curious to hear the Tea Party arguments against this. What will they say "I is my God given right to hate people who are different from me."

I can't think of a way to oppose this and not sound like a bigot.
Click to expand...

They do have a right to believe that. They just can't act on it.
 
nagromme said:
I see astonishing hate and homophobia among small but vocal group.

Small and shrinking: bigots die off faster than new ones are born... Time is on the side of justice.
Click to expand...

Yea tell that to the Malaysian Slave laborers who make Apple products nice and cheap for you to consume. :roll eyes:

Where's the bill to stop that discrimination?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back