Coming out: anti-gay harder than gay?

that is where the govt has gotten it all wrong.

You are correct that choosing the homosexual lifestyle is akin to being a vegan or nudist.

The issue is the govt for some reason, determined that those who engage in gay-sex will receive special accords.

How many restaurants have you seen the govt force the owners to allow in naked people and if they didn't, severely punish them and close down the business?

I can go out tomorrow and if I want, insert jimmy into where it was never intended to go.

On the flip side, I will never ever be a white male no matter how hard I try.

 

There is a HUGE and decisive different between not discriminating against gays in government matters, versus private matters.

A person in the USA has a right to be a satanist. But is a farmer who sells chickens required to provide chickens for satanic rituals as a condition of having and income and allowed to have a right to participate in our capitalistic economic system?

That is the issue of providing products and services for an SSM wedding ceremony. This is the fact. A marriage ceremony does NOT make a person married in the eyes of the government. A marriage ceremony is only an ideological/religious ritual of no legal effect whatsoever.

Why is a business person required to provide goods and services to facilitate religious and ideological rituals? This is a horrific violation of freedom from religion.

But PCism isn't rational and is grostesquely hypocritical by its nature.

 

Some years ago, on a wimp we headed out for Key West on one of the busiest holiday weekends with no reservations. Key West is at the end of nearly a 2 hour drive over bridges on a two lane road over small islands with small cities and towns. We came in at night. Lazy ass motel owners had not turned on the "NO" in front of their neon vacancy signs, so over 2 dozen times we stopped and I went in and asked. So 2 hours to Key West turned into 4 hours.

Finally, just at midnight, with no luck we were at the last island, Key West itself. There aren't a lot of motel rooms there to begin with and they book out first.

Florida has no anti-discrimination law, but Key West is as gay-friendly as it gets. They literally have what is essentially a nude (body paint only) gay parade each year down the main street. Overall, very PC! As a last chance, there was a small hotel that had no sign of vacancy or no vacancy sign. A high fence around the small location, I noticed a few vacant parking spots. Maybe? That or we're sleeping in the car.

I went in and was told a room was available. Then I came back in with my wife to register, pay and get the key. The clerk, an older woman, got an odd look on her face and then said she made a mistake. She booked the last room a little bit before and is so very sorry. As I looked around it was clear what the problem was. The small lobby was extremely "gay." So tired I had not noticed either the words on the bottom of the signage. It said "LGTB Exculsive Resort" or the BIG sign beside the door that said the same thing. Yet this was the only room in town and at least 2 hours off the islands to Miami to TRY to find a motel room, dead tired across 2 lane bridge after bridge.

So, what do you think happened next? What should have happened? What should have happened if Florida law outlaws discrimination on sexual orientation/practice/relationship? Was this a hate mongering, heterophobic owner of this tiny old hotel entirely fenced for privacy in the pool and courtyard, but not a members-only club. The pool area was nudist, with certain times for ONLY lesbians or ONLY gay men, so there seemingly a reason for exclusiveness? A public gay swingers resort maybe?

But after 12 hours on the road we NEEDED that room. Make your best calculated guess.

 

You know, everything in your rant applies to you as well. I don't care what YOU believe as long as you don't try to pawn your beliefs off on me, which you (the collective you) have already done.

Actually, I signed up to care for the poor, the widow, and the orphan. I didn't sign up to be part of this drama.

But I don't have the "right" to disagree with you, do I, unless I want to be called a "bigot", isn't that right?

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, I did, you weren't listening, which is pretty typical.

- - - Updated - - -

You really need to grow up and get out more.

 

This is so nonsensical I don't even know where to begin. Let's start with the obvious:

No, the definition of civil marriage has changed, and I, as an authorized agent for the state (as an ordained minister of the Church), am obliged to abide by that definition. All of you haters on the left just despised Kim Davis but she was exactly right - he job description had changed without her consent or advice.

I have finally realized what the problem is - most of you are too ignorant to recognize the ramifications of this, and as long as you get "your way" (which to most of you consists of poking the eye of your political opponents or the Church) you don't really care about the consequences, intended or unintended, which I guess should be okay with me, even after you have screwed up marriage the way you screwed up the health insurance business.

I know, you don't see the connection, people like you never do. I'll explain: people who simply want things their way sometimes get what they want only to find out that what they get is not what they wanted at all. Some of the ones who voted to get "free" health insurance are paying more than ever for less coverage because they didn't bother to read the fine print. They just thought it would be "free".

Or when you get into a SSM only to find out that you can't get out of it because there is no law covering such a "marriage" in the first place. I can't wait for straights to start marrying their own sex because they found a way to make money off it.

I know, these are all just minor inconveniences for the reality impaired, they will just snap their fingers and cause some other miracle to occur or find a way of thinking about it that is reality proof.

 

Pssst. Job descriptions change. It happens all the time and guess who never gets asks first? You are not entitled to a veto over a job description change because it makes you unhappy or uncomfortable. Stop your whining.

 

No you didn't. You made something up and when asked about it you said it wasn't your argument. Pretty typical, when one whines and someone asks why they're whining and the only answer they can give is because.

 

If Florida has the same laws as Oregon or other states against discrimination. You have a case. Take em to court. You should win.

 

Nope. Disagree all you want. But if you show hate or intolerance, then you can be called a bigot.

 

Holy moly. More nonsensical whining.
Job descriptions change on a daily basis, especially in private industry. Companies are bought and sold. New owners, new managers. For crying out loud, no job description stays the same. If one doesn't like the new job description, then leave the job. People do it all the time, either by choice or sometimes by force, ie fired.
Kim Davis is one of the biggest hypocrites the earth has ever seen. 4 marriages, some back to the same person, and she whined like a baby about gays.

You don't think there are people today making money off of marriage, straight or gay?
Surely one is not that naive?

 

But you're not obliged to perform same-sex weddings unless you are working in a governmental capacity.

Not all people who support SSM are "haters on the left". And yes aspects of her job description changed but she wasn't acting in the capacity of minister of god, she was acting in the capacity of an agent of the state. Leaving aside that she wasn't compelled to perform any ceremonies, she could have just let one of her willing clerks do that instead. But oh no, she just had to dictate the terms to everyone else. Typical of the "haters on the religious, socially conservative, far right". They can't stand that they, increasingly, don't get to do that anymore.

But there is law and it's exactly the same as the law for exiting an opposite sex marriage. Same sex married couples have to file for divorce in exactly the same way as opposite sex married couples.

I imagine all sorts of couples have done this (including gay guys marrying lesbians for tax breaks and green cards etc.) but I think Joe probably wants to think twice before marrying Jack if it means Jack gets to own half of his Camero?

I don't think the people you're taking to task are impaired of these realities. That's just something you're projecting without due basis.

 

Is someone now forcing you marry same gender couples? Or Jews?

How exactly is the law forcing you to listen to crap from anyone? Hell if you don't want to read about this 'crap' on these boards- well don't sign on.

Clearly the Orthodox Church has lowered it standards.

 

The definition of civil marriage didn't change. It merely got expanded to be more inclusive, that's all.

While you are an authorized agent of the state, as an ordained priest, you are not obligated in any way to perform a marriage ceremony in your church that runs contrary to your religious beliefs. Kim Davis, on the other hand, is not just an authorized agent for the state who can perform marriage ceremonies. She's also the official state representative in that county that is responsible for issuing marriage licenses to couples who wish to get married. She acts for the state, and represents the state in an official capacity. And since the state has to be neutral with regards to religion, she can't hide behind her religion and refuse to issue a license to a couple who meet the criteria for getting a license. If she had simply said that she personally didn't want to issue marriage licenses or perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples, but allowed her clerks to do so, then it wouldn't have been an issue.

If a same-sex couple got married, and later wanted to get divorced, they will be able to do so. There is no SSM. There's just marriage. The restrictions on the gender composition of the couple have been removed, that's all. And you are correct, there's nothing to stop straights from marrying eachother. Just as there was no restriction on a gay man and a gay woman from marrying eachother for appearance's sake back in the day.

 

Please cite evidence of anything changing for you.

By anything, I mean ANYTHING.

 

Perhaps his degree of butt hurt?

 

No, YOU made something up (as usual), and I told you that you were wrong (as usual).

 

Surely you can't be this ignorant and uninformed, to think that the only place you will hear this crap is on a forum populated by millennials. Or can you?

We've raised our standards, too bad you can't reach them.

 

By your evasiveness I will take it you aren't being forced to marry gays or Jews- and that no one is forcing you to listen to anything.

Apparently the only thing harmed by this is your butt.

 

Then you should have no problem showing what I made up. But you didn't and you can't.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=437000&p=1065673586#post1065673586
This is your argument. When I asked for further information, then you claim it is not your argument. So you made it up.
And you still have not said how SSM has changed your life. You won't because it hasn't.
So you resort to making things up. As a claimed ordained minister. LOL.

 

Of course he isn't being forced to listen to anything. Nor is he being coerced into having to perform marriages that he doesn't agree with.

He is just playing victim. It's called an appeal to emotion and it's a logical fallacy

 

By your ridiculousness I take it that you don't know what you're talking about. Marry Jews? What kind of idiocy is that? And since you don't have the faintest idea of who I am you can't possibly know what I have or have not heard, you are just another windbag millennial. Aren't you?

 

You are the one whining and carrying on about how your poor little self has to be on guard all the time against some boogeyman you can't name, blathering on about how you are some orthodox priest and how the world is out to get you poor little pea picking self.

Yet you become cagey when asked about what injustices you truly face.

The only logical conclusion is that your complaints are mostly hyperbole and lies.

I'm willing to have an adult conversation with you if you are capable.

 

Why people believe they need to back up their rantings with unprovable bologna I'll never understand. Why even claim this stuff?

 

The similarities between homo and heterosexual relationship are
1. people are capable to receive same benefits from the government.
2. people have sexual activities.
Since number of living arrangements types between two people that are capable to receive government benefits is greater then homo and heterosexuals couples, we can only conclude that government pays benefits for sexual activity.
Sexual activity between man and woman is strictly regulated while sexual activity between two people of the same sex is absolutely unregulated.
So we have two fundamentally different types of relationship but both types receive the same benefits.
That means that one type of relationship get benefits as part of regulation while other type get benefits just for fun.
When someone gets benefits for amusement and fun it can be called special accommodation.

 

I am beginning to wonder what perverted 'orthodoxy' would have someone who is unable to make an argument or speak a truth as a priest?

You have made claims- you can't back any of them up- the only thing harmed by Americans being able to marry- regardless of their gender- is your butt.

- - - Updated - - -

So you think that the only thing that distinguishes marriage is sex and receiving government benefits?

How very sad for you.