Defending the Truth

Articles | Interviews | Politicians | Groups | Arcade | Experience | Donate
  Defending the Truth > Political Issues > Gay Marriage
Marriage Equality Safe in MA!!!

Gay Marriage Debate and defend your political beliefs as to whether or not marriage should be only defined as a union between a man and a woman.

Reply
Page 5 of 7 < 1234 5 67 >
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-16-2007, 07:42 PM   #41 (permalink)
Congressional Representative
 
CrazyFlamingos's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Alabama
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,390
Points: 11,711, Level: 71
Points: 11,711, Level: 71 Points: 11,711, Level: 71 Points: 11,711, Level: 71
Level up: 16%, 339 Points needed
Level up: 16% Level up: 16% Level up: 16%
Activity: 34%
Activity: 34% Activity: 34% Activity: 34%
CrazyFlamingos is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher View Post


How can "straights" be covered by legislation aimed only at homosexuals??


Please give an example of hate crime legislation aimed only at homosexuals.
Right now America spends $700 billion every year on foreign oil. That's our money going overseas when it could be staying here. We have to stop this.
That's why I support the Pickens Plan. Check out the website at www.pickensplan.com. If you like what you see, please join me as a Pickens Plan supporter.

Sponsored Links
Old 06-16-2007, 08:02 PM   #42 (permalink)
Partisan
Premium Member
 
garysher's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,981
Country:
Points: 31,280, Level: 100
Points: 31,280, Level: 100 Points: 31,280, Level: 100 Points: 31,280, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
garysher is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyFlamingos View Post


Please give an example of hate crime legislation aimed only at homosexuals.
[/color]
Legislation that states people who criticise homosexuals are guilty of "hate speech" and that assaults on homosexuals are somehow worse than assaults on anybosy else
Old 06-16-2007, 08:05 PM   #43 (permalink)
Congressional Representative
 
CrazyFlamingos's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Alabama
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,390
Points: 11,711, Level: 71
Points: 11,711, Level: 71 Points: 11,711, Level: 71 Points: 11,711, Level: 71
Level up: 16%, 339 Points needed
Level up: 16% Level up: 16% Level up: 16%
Activity: 34%
Activity: 34% Activity: 34% Activity: 34%
CrazyFlamingos is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher View Post
Legislation that states people who criticise homosexuals are guilty of "hate speech" and that assaults on homosexuals are somehow worse than assaults on anybosy else

Please present the text and source of said legislation.

I have never seen any such legislation and I do not believe that it exists.


.
Right now America spends $700 billion every year on foreign oil. That's our money going overseas when it could be staying here. We have to stop this.
That's why I support the Pickens Plan. Check out the website at www.pickensplan.com. If you like what you see, please join me as a Pickens Plan supporter.

Old 06-16-2007, 08:07 PM   #44 (permalink)
Senator
 
foundit66's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,844
Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Level up: 9%, 456 Points needed
Level up: 9% Level up: 9% Level up: 9%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
foundit66 is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher View Post
How can "straights" be covered by legislation aimed only at homosexuals??
How many times do people have to tell you the same thing over and over again before it sinks in?
Hate crime legislation IS NOT aimed only at homosexuals.
It covers ANYBODY who has certain crimes committed against them BECAUSE OF their sexual orientation.

In other words, when a guy is beaten up BECAUSE he is straight, that's a hate crime.


Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher
So now you stopped supporting special hate crime legislation for homosexuals??
No.
You just can't comprehend simple English.
That's okay. We have come to expect that from you, and we try to overcome your shortcomings in our own ways...
"(Gay marriage) is a debate about whether you think gay people are part of the human condition or just a random fetish."
-- Jon Stewart
"Please don't judge others by your own standards."
-- Garysher
Old 06-16-2007, 08:09 PM   #45 (permalink)
Senator
 
foundit66's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,844
Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Level up: 9%, 456 Points needed
Level up: 9% Level up: 9% Level up: 9%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
foundit66 is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher View Post
Legislation that states people who criticise homosexuals are guilty of "hate speech" and that assaults on homosexuals are somehow worse than assaults on anybosy else
Show me any state that has such legislation.

Oh wait. You don't answer questions or challenges proving you are wrong, which means virtually any question or challenge.
There is no state legislation that says that.
"(Gay marriage) is a debate about whether you think gay people are part of the human condition or just a random fetish."
-- Jon Stewart
"Please don't judge others by your own standards."
-- Garysher
Old 06-16-2007, 08:09 PM   #46 (permalink)
Partisan
Premium Member
 
garysher's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,981
Country:
Points: 31,280, Level: 100
Points: 31,280, Level: 100 Points: 31,280, Level: 100 Points: 31,280, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
garysher is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
How many times do people have to tell you the same thing over and over again before it sinks in?
Hate crime legislation IS NOT aimed only at homosexuals.
It covers ANYBODY who has certain crimes committed against them BECAUSE OF their sexual orientation.

In other words, when a guy is beaten up BECAUSE he is straight, that's a hate crime.
Why do we need special legislation for that??

If a guy is beaten up FOR ANY REASON the punishment should be the same

However you homosexuals seem to think you deserve special treatment
Old 06-16-2007, 08:13 PM   #47 (permalink)
Partisan
Premium Member
 
garysher's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,981
Country:
Points: 31,280, Level: 100
Points: 31,280, Level: 100 Points: 31,280, Level: 100 Points: 31,280, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
garysher is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyFlamingos View Post
Please present the text and source of said legislation.

I have never seen any such legislation and I do not believe that it exists.


.


You really should learn how to use google or some other search engine

Federal hate crime legislation: H.R. 1592 (2007)

Proposed federal hate crimes legislation:

On 2007-MAR-20, Representatives John Conyers (D-MI) and Mark Kirk (R-IL) introduced H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (LLEHCPA). 1 Its informal name is the Matthew Shepard Act, named after a gay male who died after being physically attacked and crucified in Wyoming. 2
If passed into law, H.R. 1592 would update the earlier federal hate crimes act of 1968. The latter act is restricted to only certain hate crimes. In addition, they must be motivated by the victim's race, color,religion, or national origin.1
LLEHCRA would expand hate-crimes coverage to include physically violent crimes in which the perpetrator was motivated by hatred of the victim's sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability.
In common with a companion Senate bill S. 1105, the bill notes that:
 "The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem." "Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive." "A prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that it devastates not just the actual victim and the family and friends of the victim, but frequently savages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected." "Federal jurisdiction over certain violent crimes motivated by bias enables Federal, State, and local authorities to work together as partners in the investigation and prosecution of such crimes." "The problem of crimes motivated by bias is sufficiently serious, widespread, and interstate in nature as to warrant Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes." If the bill is signed into law, it would only be applicable if:
 A crime occurs that includes an assault, aggravated assault, or shooting, and It can be shown that the perpetrator was motivated to commit the law because of hatred of one of the protected groups, and If the crime included: Travel across a state line or national border, or Used a "channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce," or A weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce, or An interference with commercial or other economic activity. A companion bill S. 1105 has been introduced into the Senate.
A serious deficiency in the bill:

One serious deficiency is the bill, and of the corresponding bill S. 1105 is in the "Definitions" section. It contains no definition for "sexual orientation." It is fairly common for fundamentalists and other evangelical Christians to define basic terms one way while mainline Christians, progressive Christians, secularists, members of other religions, medical professionals, mental health professionals, human sexuality researchers, and others define them differently.



Sexual orientation is no exception.
The nearly universally accepted definition is related to the gender of those whom a person finds sexually attractive: people with a homosexual orientation are attracted to the same gender; heterosexuals to the opposite gender; bisexuals to both genders -- although not necessarily to the same degree.



Some conservative Christians define it very differently, and include gender, age, species, and living/non-living status. As a result, the latter claim that protecting people on the basis of sexual orientation will protect heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals as well as pedophiles, hebephiles, necrophiliac, and persons into having sex with animals.


By not defining the term "sexual orientation" the sponsors of the bill leave it potentially open to some rather unusual criticisms that could have been prevented. According to commentary on Sirius Satellite Radio's OutQ program, a number of evangelical Christian activist groups have claimed that there are not three but thirty different sexual orientations, and the proposed bill would cover them all.
Old 06-16-2007, 08:18 PM   #48 (permalink)
Congressional Representative
 
CrazyFlamingos's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Alabama
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,390
Points: 11,711, Level: 71
Points: 11,711, Level: 71 Points: 11,711, Level: 71 Points: 11,711, Level: 71
Level up: 16%, 339 Points needed
Level up: 16% Level up: 16% Level up: 16%
Activity: 34%
Activity: 34% Activity: 34% Activity: 34%
CrazyFlamingos is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher View Post


You really should learn how to use google or some other search engine

Federal hate crime legislation: H.R. 1592 (2007)

Proposed federal hate crimes legislation:

On 2007-MAR-20, Representatives John Conyers (D-MI) and Mark Kirk (R-IL) introduced H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (LLEHCPA). 1 Its informal name is the Matthew Shepard Act, named after a gay male who died after being physically attacked and crucified in Wyoming. 2
If passed into law, H.R. 1592 would update the earlier federal hate crimes act of 1968. The latter act is restricted to only certain hate crimes. In addition, they must be motivated by the victim's race, color,religion, or national origin.1
LLEHCRA would expand hate-crimes coverage to include physically violent crimes in which the perpetrator was motivated by hatred of the victim's sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability.
In common with a companion Senate bill S. 1105, the bill notes that:
 "The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem." "Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive." "A prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that it devastates not just the actual victim and the family and friends of the victim, but frequently savages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected." "Federal jurisdiction over certain violent crimes motivated by bias enables Federal, State, and local authorities to work together as partners in the investigation and prosecution of such crimes." "The problem of crimes motivated by bias is sufficiently serious, widespread, and interstate in nature as to warrant Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes." If the bill is signed into law, it would only be applicable if:
 A crime occurs that includes an assault, aggravated assault, or shooting, and It can be shown that the perpetrator was motivated to commit the law because of hatred of one of the protected groups, and If the crime included: Travel across a state line or national border, or Used a "channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce," or A weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce, or An interference with commercial or other economic activity. A companion bill S. 1105 has been introduced into the Senate.
A serious deficiency in the bill:

One serious deficiency is the bill, and of the corresponding bill S. 1105 is in the "Definitions" section. It contains no definition for "sexual orientation." It is fairly common for fundamentalists and other evangelical Christians to define basic terms one way while mainline Christians, progressive Christians, secularists, members of other religions, medical professionals, mental health professionals, human sexuality researchers, and others define them differently.



Sexual orientation is no exception.
The nearly universally accepted definition is related to the gender of those whom a person finds sexually attractive: people with a homosexual orientation are attracted to the same gender; heterosexuals to the opposite gender; bisexuals to both genders -- although not necessarily to the same degree.



Some conservative Christians define it very differently, and include gender, age, species, and living/non-living status. As a result, the latter claim that protecting people on the basis of sexual orientation will protect heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals as well as pedophiles, hebephiles, necrophiliac, and persons into having sex with animals.


By not defining the term "sexual orientation" the sponsors of the bill leave it potentially open to some rather unusual criticisms that could have been prevented. According to commentary on Sirius Satellite Radio's OutQ program, a number of evangelical Christian activist groups have claimed that there are not three but thirty different sexual orientations, and the proposed bill would cover them all.
Please show me the phrase in the legislation that says persons who are not homosexual are not covered.

.
Right now America spends $700 billion every year on foreign oil. That's our money going overseas when it could be staying here. We have to stop this.
That's why I support the Pickens Plan. Check out the website at www.pickensplan.com. If you like what you see, please join me as a Pickens Plan supporter.

Old 06-16-2007, 08:21 PM   #49 (permalink)
Senator
 
foundit66's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,844
Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Level up: 9%, 456 Points needed
Level up: 9% Level up: 9% Level up: 9%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
foundit66 is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher View Post
Why do we need special legislation for that??
The American people want the legislation, and there is no constitutional reason preventing it, so that means it should exist.


Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher
If a guy is beaten up FOR ANY REASON the punishment should be the same
The MOTIVE for a crime is frequently considered in the SENTENCING phase of the trial.
It's been like that for centuries.

Are you telling me we shouldn't practice law that way?
How does Britain do it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher
However you homosexuals seem to think you deserve special treatment
Again, the law applies EQUALLY to homosexuals and heterosexuals.
You really do have memory problems, don't you.
"(Gay marriage) is a debate about whether you think gay people are part of the human condition or just a random fetish."
-- Jon Stewart
"Please don't judge others by your own standards."
-- Garysher
Old 06-16-2007, 08:24 PM   #50 (permalink)
Senator
 
foundit66's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,844
Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Level up: 9%, 456 Points needed
Level up: 9% Level up: 9% Level up: 9%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
foundit66 is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Quoted by Garysher:
Sexual orientation is no exception.
The nearly universally accepted definition is related to the gender of those whom a person finds sexually attractive: people with a homosexual orientation are attracted to the same gender; heterosexuals to the opposite gender; bisexuals to both genders -- although not necessarily to the same degree.
You know, it is a clear sign of your incapability to comprehend simple English when the stuff you post CONTRADICTS your claim.
It clearly defines heterosexuality as a sexual orientation, ergo, heterosexuals are covered.

YOU POSTED this.
How can you be so dense?
"(Gay marriage) is a debate about whether you think gay people are part of the human condition or just a random fetish."
-- Jon Stewart
"Please don't judge others by your own standards."
-- Garysher
Reply
Page 5 of 7 < 1234 5 67 >

Bookmarks

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:51 AM.

Defending the Truth - FAQ - Contact Us - Donate - Archive - Top

 Top Political Sites
Poltical Topsites 

Recommended Sites