can someone explain to me why Gay marriage is an issue?

So you like being looked down upon just cause you are part of a racial group?

And you don't like having personal liberty to do with your private business as you will?

 

No.

Are you suggesting that businesses should be allowed to discriminate against any ethnic group(s) they decide to? (I would not suggest that, for many very good reasons.)

 

Or he could be a true libertarian at heart and support their platform

Section 1.3 "Personal Relationships":
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_LGBT_rights

 

What about wanting the government to treat same-sex couples equally conflicts this view pray tell?

 

Thats part of the civil rights act.

Why not? It is their business. If they chose to not serve someone, the chose to lose business. If (speaking in todays atmosphere now) people hear about discrimination from a business, then for the most part, there will be boycotts that would probably lead to that business closing down. The wondrous free market would take care of it. Does the government have the right to make the private citizen go buy from a store they don't like? So why should a store be subjected to the government force of selling to someone they don't want to?

Like I asked, if you are a restaurant owner, and a KKK group wanted to hold a rally, civilized even, in your business, wouldn't you want the RIGHT to deny them the space on your PRIVATE property?

 

Sorry. I can't agree with that one iota. If you're serving the PUBLIC (or claim to be doing that), you should not be able to single people out just as you please.

Go do business elsewhere, if you can't handle that.

 

If it was 'natural' our bodies would have been constructed with the appropriate physical structure. Sounds very simple to me and not very difficult to comprehend.

I wouldn't marry a frog or a donkey either. Altough I did read somewhere that a certain prince did kiss and then marry a frog!

 

You are not serving the public, you are a private business with a total control of that business. The Jim Crowe laws were public laws that allowed discrimination in public areas, the civil rights act went and forced PRIVATE businesses from being private.

I do notice you are ignoring my hypothetical question about the KKK. Wonder why?

 

So the fact that over 100 species on earth partake in homosexual activities isn't natural? Only 1 species discriminates their own when they do these activities. So which one is unatural?

Ah, the breath of fresh air. Comparing bestiality to homosexuality, you stay classy diligent.

 

Maybe not exactly what you're looking for, but I'll tell you exactly why it's an issue:
Politicians and pundits make it an issue so we'll argue over silly (*)(*)(*)(*) instead of coming to an agreement on the stuff that actually matters.
It's called a "wedge issue" for a reason; it's designed to divide.

 

Homosexual activities. All the procreation and caring for offspring is heterosexual activity.

 

same sex sex is common in over 100 species of animals.

 

In any case, there are (and should be) limits upon how individuals or businesses can discriminate in this society. And it is the type of society that I would prefer to live within.

It doesn't seem relevant to me.

 

You're correct about that. But Americans are practically 'neurotic' about the topic of gays or homosexuality. The amount of political maneuvering and religious hypocrisy about that topic, is incredible.

Really, it's mental.

 

Not at all.

Pair bonding, looking after eggs, hatching them and caring for young have all been observed as a joint venture between same-sex "couples" in nature.

 

So forget personal choice and personal freedom, do as your master tells you right?

You are still dodging the question. That is why it was hypothetical. Give you a little introspective into why taking away the personal freedoms and freedom to chose who you serve is wrong.

You said you are a minority, that is why I gave you the KKK.

 

Ever heard of Speed Limits? Yeah, that rule and other rules of the road which make driving more safe and orderly. Well, the same goes for society; YOU and no one else can do just anything they wish. If you have a problem with that, just try to convince a significant majority of Americans, that we need something like a separate "Walmart"... just for "Black" people.

The idiocy of those who want this nation to go backward, is always astounding to me.

Look, I don't care about you little manipulative question. If YOU have something to say, then say it; I promise that I will.

What you're advocating is (to me) ludicrous. Personal freedom to inject racism into large components of this society, makes little sense to me. Again, it is just like letting people do whatever they want to on the roadways. The potential damage to this nation is insurmountable.

If you can make ANY sense of the KKK, then have at it. As far as I'm concerned... the organization is evil and living on the fringe of civilization.

 

So you want to compare Homo Sapiens to the beasts of the world do you? What's next I wonder, snails perhaps?

 

"Americans" in general don't really care one way or the other according to the polling. It's the small minority that gets to set the narrative that make a big deal about it, and even then most of them will confide in private that they don't really care either.
At some point, everybody will come to the realization that it's a stupid thing to argue over and it won't be an issue anymore.

 

H'm. I'm glad you never prepared the stats for the coy I used to work for!

 

Some people do not see further then their own nose.
Once special rights are given to homosexuals, the next demand will be
special treatment for homosexuals
special school courses for homosxuality
special government education grants for homosexual youth
literally any special program you hear about will be applied to homosexuals.
That is law of the land.
That is why many people against special rights for gays.

 

What part of slippery slope fallacy are you not getting?

Most people do not believe marriage to be a special right but a civil right, and therefore view SSM as equality. You claim something "special" when 97% have the option of marrying who they love.

 

If that is really the problem, then why are you not in favor of exterminating gays. Would that not be more efficient in preventing this inevitable social decay?

 

Not 97% but about 67% do not have ability for abstract thinking.
Yes, they do not realize what the are supporting, or may be they are slaves by nature so they like to serve their new owners.

 

Umm... WTF?