Defending the Truth

Why did you vote for sodomy to be a crime then? If you do not care about what homosexuals do in there own homes, than why did you vote to make it a crime in the poll?

What are you gonna do to me for saying homo? Nothing.

Because I have the right to do, say, or vote whatever way I choose. I'm a free American.

You seem mistaken in a general situation classification.
If I could "do" something to you for saying "homo", I wouldn't. I just don't care.

I just use it to point out how much of a blatant bigot you are to homosexuals, and that's all that's important about it to me.
So please. By all means. Continue to prove my point.

There is no point to prove other than showing Hevusa what a moronic stupid little punk he is. Thanks for providing me the opportunity.

Here is the true answer. I contradict myself. I wasnt aware of the 4th amendment before, and now I dont think sodomy laws are constitutional, and therefor I tip toe around the question.

Techinically they have the same general rights as we do if you think about it. We can only marry someone of the opposite sex, so why exactly should they be any different. They say the want to be treated equally, but moan and groan when we give them the exact same marriage restrictions that we have.

That's because giving us the exact same marriage restrictions you have is not the same thing as giving us equality. Saying that gays have "the same" rights as straights is a red herring: that doesn't mean gays and straights are equal.

For example, if I said, "You can worship whatever religion you want, except for Christianity," then technically everyone would have the same rights. But this wouldn't be equal: I'd be treating Christians unfairly. Though Christians have the same rights I do, I've banned the only form of worship they'd ever want to use, while I've allowed myself the form of worship that I want to use. It's not fair to Christians, even though everyone has "the same" rights.

Yeah, everyone has the same marriage restrictions, but realistically, we've banned every marriage a gay person would want to engage in, and we've allowed every marriage a straight person would want to engage in.

To tell the truth, I find it a bit ridiculous that someone can't see what's unfair about this: marriage is totally designed so that only the straight person will be able to use it. Straight people have marriage in every form they'd ever want it, and gay people have marriage in none of the forms they'd ever want it. Who could possibly call this fair? It is obviously not fair.

So think twice the next time you say that "the same" rights means "equal" rights. Those are two completely different things.

It's not about "rights". Marriage is between a man and a woman. That is the way it is, always has been, and hopefully always will be.

I could just as easy holler "equal rights" because that doggone coach in Seattle will not let me kick field goals. He is violating my rights to kick for his team. Why can't I kick for his team? Because I am not qualified to be called a professional football kicker. Nothing about rights. It's about qualifications. A man and a woman qualify to be married. Two men or Two women do not.

That is your argument and it doesn't hold water.

A civil right is something the government allows you to do. The government allows you to enter an institution called marriage. Thus, this is indeed about "rights".

That past government and traditions have considered only opposite-sex couples married does not make that the right thing to do, nor does it mean we aren't talking about rights.

You're right: that isn't about rights. For something to be a "right", it has to involve the government allowing or disallowing something through law. In this case, we are not talking about the government, and thus we are not talking about rights. It isn't a law which prevents you from kicking for his team, it is the owner of the team choosing who he wants on that team.

On the other hand, with same-sex marriage, we are indeed talking about a right.

I understand that. Obviously, I am trying to change it. The government has created these qualifications without any good reason, and these qualifications are unfair and harmful. The qualifications for marriage should change.

Your attempt to portray my argument was innaccurate, and your argument is based soley on terminology. Marriage is a right, just as anything the government allows or disallows is a right. But who cares whether it's a "right" or not?

The facts are simple. The lives of gay people and their families are made worse because same-sex marriage is banned, and no one's life is made better. Banning same-sex marriage is unfair to gay people. Banning same-sex marriage denies the freedom to choose your marriage and the freedom to choose your own religious beliefs about marriage.

These facts make it abundantly clear that there is no reason to ban same-sex marriage. There isn't even a shred of logic or reasoning which suggests otherwise.