Coming out: anti-gay harder than gay?

Unless it conflicts with that baseline. And you're wrong about nobody wanting murder. If no one wanted it, no one would do it.

Certain kinds of killing are illegal because the majority of us decided to make them a prohibited act. That same majority chose to prohibit states from denying to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. We set that baseline at a national level.




​

 

Unless a person is suicidal, nobody wants to be murdered, therefore there is a law which creates a deterrent against people killing other people. That's pretty universal, its in a wide array of cultures over all of recorded human history. I'll give your argument some benefit and say that 99% of people are against murder, that's pretty universal and solid common denominator.

I figured you would reject the community argument and default to a national majority as the ruling power - the tyranny of the majority. A simple majority is not a baseline, it is not sufficient to create a national consensus or a "least common denominator".

And in the current state of the USA, the national majority merely created a framework, a minority has taken control of the administrative and regulatory organizations of that framework and use it to impose their beliefs on everyone. Do you really think the nation supports LGBT "equality" so that men who think they are women (or maybe are just women for that day, gender is such a personal decision and not based on anatomy after all, so say the LGBTs) can go into the restroom with little 8 year old girls? And obviously gay marriage is not accepted by a significant part of the population even now.

 

Christians are not a minority

 

Yeah, being an anti-gay bigot has become increasingly tough. Their absurdity is being scoffed at and they are being looked down on as being small minded and hateful. So, yes, life has become tough for the bigot because people are more adamant about stating they do not approve. However, I agree, to compare the condemnation of the bigoted, hate filled people against the people that bravely decide to come out can be hard to compare.

 

That is a hard issue to be in the middle of. I mean, they are not against one engaging in the act of being gay, they are simply against one being gay, period. It almost sounds like being in Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Seriously, it does.

 

Murder is illegal killing. It's only murder, after it has been determined to be illegal. Before that it's just killing. And while most of us don't want to be killed, it is not true that 100% of us don't want it to be illegal to kill.

Certain types of killing are prohibited, not because all of us don't want to kill, but because enough of us want that type of killing to be prohibited.




​

 

The majority have established a framework which protects the rights of even minorities within our community. We believe our laws should apply equally, even if the couple in question has a racial, religious, or gender composition that is different than the majority.

Equality under the law is accepted by a significant part of the population. It's part of our baseline.




​

 

As "progressives" always point out, its not about numbers but power. Even where white people are less than half the population, they are not considered the minority because of the imbalance in power. That's the "progressive" argument.

In Oregon, the gays have the power, the Christians do not. The Christians are the minority.

 

Its easy to say everyone supports a very general concept such as "equality under the law", its the details that cause the problems. Its like saying that nobody wants a murderer to get a gun, everyone agrees with that sentiment, but when you say the way to do that is to ban all guns you lose so many people there is no possibility of claiming its a national baseline.

The concept of equality under the law has been as abused as the commerce clause, its every busy body's excuse to impose their will on people.

 

Haha, I'm sorry that it's hard being an (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*). Seriously?! Being a bigot IS a choice.

 

not being allowed to discriminate against gays or blacks,,,, sorry, not feeling their pain, believe what they want, just do not use your public business to discriminate

Christians are not a minority, Christian bigots maybe are a minority in the same way racists are though

.

 

That "not being allowed to discriminate against blacks and gays" is such a worn out retreat it does not work anymore. All it does is highlight the ignorance of the person making the claim, just like "its Bush's fault" or squeeling "racism" or "homophobia" are now nothing more than jokes.

 

removing gender restriction from the institution that is based on gender restriction is only mean that institution has been abolished.
New sex based benefit program is very bias and make accommodation only for homosexual orientation, ignoring all other manifestations of human sexuality.

 

If you believe the law is bad, propose different details. *shrug*

... and most murderers want to be able to get a gun. So some folks want murderers to be able to get guns and will likely disagree with your proposal to ban all guns.




​

 

Propose different details? You mean trade one tyrant for another? Just remove the bad law.

I thought this discussion was getting ridiculous, now it definitely is getting absurd.

 

*shrug* If you think that is best — propose that.




​

 

That isn't even close to being right.

Equal rights does not equal 'special' rights.

 

not sure what your talking about, I do not approve of a business discriminating based on race, religion, gender, ect.... this is common sense and everyone should agree, and that also applies to the gender of the couple buying a cake, if one has such a had time selling an item without discriminating, don't sell that item or open a private club

 

Since we are dealing with institution that is based on human sexuality, equal means equal accommodation for sexuality of any type.
Current accommodation, that has been recently delivered by non-elected federal lawyers isn't even close to being equal.

 

Who knew that being a bigot is "harder" than being the object of such bigotry.

 

Who told/convinced you, that is what marriage is based upon (solely or primarily) as you suggest?

If you believe that, I can see where you might have a problem with gay marriage.

 

I do not have to believe or not believe in something, I am looking at the facts.
That facts are that special benefits had been delivered to gay couples because they are homosexuals, i.e. involved in homosexual activities.
Moreover the sole purpose of the special accommodation was to equalize homosexual and heterosexual sex.
As you probably know, the other aspects of relationship between man and woman stays unequal in comparison to relationship between two gays.
That leads to conclusion that marriage (government benefits) is based solely and primarily upon sexuality.

 

This is over-argued.

People don't all have the same FACTS or views related to marriage; that is purely obvious.

Later.

 

Nope. The institution remains unchanged.

Demonstrably false as sex isn't now nor has it ever been a requirement to,get married.

 

The only change is that the institution is ever so slightly more inclusive. No change in marriage has ever been contemplated without the support of straights, including this one. Not only were the clear majority of federal and state appellate judges straight who ruled , over 50 % of straight voters supported this before the final SCOTUS ruling. I don't know what the newest polling will suggest.