Is homosexuality a choice or is it genetic?

[Mare Tranquillity]

Feel free to point to ANY law that "condemns people for innate qualities". And I'm an atheist ya freak.

All the science done in THIS century indicates that sexual orientation is an innate quality, in US law gay people are denied the equal protection guaranteed under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution by being the only consenting adults denied the right to enter into the legal contract of marriage as it is set forth in US law. Therefore, gay people are condemned to second classs citizenship for an innate quality. They are denied marriage based on religious dogma since there is no compelling reason to deny them legal marriage otherwise.

All the same arguments from the first paragraph can be applied to transsexual people as well. Being trans has nothing to do with sexual orientation, it's a birth defect and in many places transsexuals are denied marriage, medical care, jobs, and homes because they are not mentioned as a protected class in US anti-discrimination laws, therefore we don't exist in the eyes of the law. The legislature in Oregon just passed a comprehensive anti-discrimination law that does cover us, but the Christian community is rallying to collect signatures to put a referendum on the ballot to repeal the law. They really, really want to preserve their right to discriminate against us. Jesus should be proud!

You may be an atheist but you are singing the Christian song, wearing the uniform, and marching in lockstep with them. Too bad for you, most of the atheists I know are smarter than that--and more egalitarian too. If you aren't on the religious bus, then where does your antipathy towards gay people come from... ya freak?

 

[jb_1430]

All the science done in THIS century indicates that sexual orientation is an innate quality, in US law gay people are denied the equal protection guaranteed under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution by being the only consenting adults denied the right to enter into the legal contract of marriage as it is set forth in US law. Therefore, gay people are condemned to second classs citizenship for an innate quality. They are denied marriage based on religious dogma since there is no compelling reason to deny them legal marriage otherwise.

Hyperbole dont you think. "Condemned"??? because they dont get a license.
And the glaringly obvious reason is Hetero sexual couples can produce children, gay couples cannot. And court precedent shows that the 14th amendment isnt offended by limiting marriage to heterosexuals.

 

[palerider]

Hyperbole dont you think. "Condemned"??? because they dont get a license.
And the glaringly obvious reason is Hetero sexual couples can produce children, gay couples cannot. And court precedent shows that the 14th amendment isnt offended by limiting marriage to heterosexuals.

Mare has no interest at all in the truth, mare is a hysterical handwringer who bloviates incessantly about the "injustice" and "denied rights" of homosexuals while being completely unable to provide a credible example of either.

 

[jb_1430]

Too bad for you, most of the atheists I know are smarter than that--and more egalitarian too. If you aren't on the religious bus, then where does your antipathy towards gay people come from... ya freak?

"Antipathy"??? Because I think its silly to license and regulate a human relationship without any rational purpose for doing so? Because I think government needs to have some rational basis for doing so in the first place?

 

[Coyote]

The meaning of "marriage" has changed many times over the course of human history. The ideal of "one man/one woman" as the only acceptable form of marriage is relatively modern.

Raising children was not by any means the only reason for marriage or for government sanctioning of marriage - much of it had to do with property and title.

I fail to see why - all of a sudden - it is decreed that it shal not change again and this current model is the only acceptable model.

 

[jb_1430]

The meaning of "marriage" has changed many times over the course of human history. The ideal of "one man/one woman" as the only acceptable form of marriage is relatively modern.

?????? In some kind of weird, alternate universe that you dwell in. Throughout the course of Human history, it has almost universally been men and women as the only acceptable form of marriage. The fact that in some cultures men had many women, or vice versa, doesnt really do anything for your gay marriage arguement. The institution likely would have never even evolved BUT FOR the fact that when men and women are in an intimate relationship, they frequently produce children. Some kind of pathetic self loathing of the gays that have them clamoring for a chance to pretend they are just like heterosexual couples. Elevating the fact that they help get each other off to that of procreation and the continuation of mankind. Weve declared unconstitutional the laws that criminalized the diddleing of Billy in the but by Bob, there just isnt really any purpose in the government even being involved in such things. What you do in your bedroom is of really no importance to society as a whole, and certainly isnt something I think the government has any business promoting.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Hyperbole dont you think. "Condemned"??? because they dont get a license.
And the glaringly obvious reason is Hetero sexual couples can produce children, gay couples cannot. And court precedent shows that the 14th amendment isnt offended by limiting marriage to heterosexuals.

At one time court precedent showed that slavery was acceptable too. Courts are made up of people.

There are tens of thousands of gay people who have children and yet are denied the more than 1000 legal rights and privileges granted to couples who can legally marry. If children are the issue and you aren't just another hypocrite, then I challenge you to come out against allowing heterosexual people to marry if they aren't going to have children, or to have their marriages taken away from them if they don't have children within a specified time limit. Sterile couples should be denied marriage catagorically. Old people should have their marriages annulled after menopause. Similarly, any gay person who has children should be allowed to marry--if children are the issue. But children aren't the issue are they? You are simply using that as an excuse to promote discrimination because... well, I don't know why and when I have asked you have refused to answer. The only reasons for denying gay marriage are religious, if you're not religious then... you aren't a religious bigot you are just an ordinary bigot. How nice for you.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Mare has no interest at all in the truth, mare is a hysterical handwringer who bloviates incessantly about the "injustice" and "denied rights" of homosexuals while being completely unable to provide a credible example of either.

My position then, vis a vis gay rights is analogous to yours on abortion. You never provided an example that was more credible than mine are. What does that make you? By your own terms I guess that makes you a bloviating liar, doesn't it? Anybody who thinks torturing people on the suspicion of them being guilty is hardly in a position to do anything but bleat like one of the sheeple at me.

Bloviating, what a great word, applied to you it conjures up a picture in my mind of a small, pale, bad-tempered fish swollen up with self-righteousness lurking under a rocky outcrop glowering at life as it passes him by.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

"Antipathy"??? Because I think its silly to license and regulate a human relationship without any rational purpose for doing so? Because I think government needs to have some rational basis for doing so in the first place?

No, antipathy because you would deny to others legal rights that you can enjoy, and you would do so for no compelling reason that you have yet presented.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

?????? In some kind of weird, alternate universe that you dwell in. Throughout the course of Human history, it has almost universally been men and women as the only acceptable form of marriage. The fact that in some cultures men had many women, or vice versa, doesnt really do anything for your gay marriage arguement. The institution likely would have never even evolved BUT FOR the fact that when men and women are in an intimate relationship, they frequently produce children. Some kind of pathetic self loathing of the gays that have them clamoring for a chance to pretend they are just like heterosexual couples. Elevating the fact that they help get each other off to that of procreation and the continuation of mankind. Weve declared unconstitutional the laws that criminalized the diddleing of Billy in the but by Bob, there just isnt really any purpose in the government even being involved in such things. What you do in your bedroom is of really no importance to society as a whole, and certainly isnt something I think the government has any business promoting.

What weird alternative Universe do you live in? Marriage has not been restricted to just hetero people in all kinds of cultures. Mostly the restrictions have come from the desert religions, patriarchal religions. You need to study more history.

 

[jb_1430]

There are tens of thousands of gay people who have children and yet are denied the more than 1000 legal rights and privileges granted to couples who can legally marry. If children are the issue and you aren't just another hypocrite, then I challenge you to come out against allowing heterosexual people to marry if they aren't going to have children

There are tens of thousands of people who have children and yet are denied the more than 1000 legal rights and privileges granted to couples who are married. If children are the issue and you aren't just another hypocrite, then I challenge you to come out against this pathetic attempt by the gay community to secure special rights just because they are gay, and secure them for all people acting as parents.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

There are tens of thousands of people who have children and yet are denied the more than 1000 legal rights and privileges granted to couples who are married. If children are the issue and you aren't just another hypocrite, then I challenge you to come out against this pathetic attempt by the gay community to secure special rights just because they are gay, and secure them for all people acting as parents.

All people acting as parents are able to access all the rights guaranteed under the law simply by getting married--EXCEPT gay people--and they are not allowed to get married. I think all consenting adults should be allowed to marry, I'm not asking for any right for myself that I wish to deny to anyone else. I'm inclusive, you're the one who is defending exclusivity.

 

[jb_1430]

Raising children was not by any means the only reason for marriage or for government sanctioning of marriage - much of it had to do with property and title.

Yes, women and their property both became the property of the man. Much of marriage law was enacted for the protection of both women and children.

 

[jb_1430]

All people acting as parents are able to access all the rights guaranteed under the law simply by getting married--EXCEPT gay people--

I know a father and daughter who live together raising her child. A brother and sister raising her children since her husband died. Both cant get married. Long time room mates sharing the parenting duties who dont want to get married. What in the world makes you think a gay couples should be given special recognition above ANY other possible group of unmarried adults that might raise children?
And like Ive always said. Government encourages intimate heterosexual couples to get married because they frequently produce children. Its just NEVER going to happen in the case of a gay couple.

 

[jb_1430]

What weird alternative Universe do you live in? Marriage has not been restricted to just hetero people in all kinds of cultures. Mostly the restrictions have come from the desert religions, patriarchal religions. You need to study more history.

I didnt say in ALL kinds of cultures. I said Throughout the course of Human history, it has almost universally been men and women as the only acceptable form of marriage. Almost precludes "all" from being the case.