Should homosexuality be illegal?

This is a question for the conservatives out there who are still droning on and on about gay marriage. We get it, you don't want gay people getting married. My question is should we just go back to when being gay was illegal in the US? Some countries still outlaw homosexuality, are they on the right track?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Really? A question for conservatives? A question that should or even needs to be asked? Why? What point could it possibly serve other than to inflame and incite the intolerance, hate and bigotry that 'we' as supposedly intelligent and caring compassionate human beings should be above? It isn't worthy of an answer other than to call it out for what it is.

 

I agree, it would be like asking if Slavery should be reinstated since it represents a loss to Slave owners from the past Era when it was legal.

 

I think it is a reasonable question.

As recently as just a few years ago Lousiana refused to change their sodomy laws, even though they were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

It is only a Supreme Court decision which prevents Louisiana from prosecuting gays for having sex.

 

No you don't.

This conservative doesn't have a bit of a problem with homosexual men marrying women and lesbians marrying men - which is, after all, the only way either can have a marriage that isn't a sham on its face.

Definitely.

If you're thinking of Islamic countries, no. The American legal system is, at least in principle, about freedom, whereas the legal system in Islamic countries is about slavery, so it can't dispense real justice.

 

So yes to illegal.

So if the American legal system is about freedom, why does it make sense that it should be illegal? If it's about freedom, why should gay marriage still be illegal? Shouldn't people have freedom of choice in this matter?

 

The reason I asked was because there are obviously a lot of people still anti gay marriage. I find that confusing because we live in a free country, shouldn't people have freedom of choice? It wasn't long ago that anti sodomy laws were still on the books, so if I ask the same question about gay sex in general, should it be legal I bet even the anti gay marriage people would say yes. It's a free country after all. So why is the logic any different with marriage? Freedom is freedom right? Why are we hung up on marriage?

 

And you think 'freedom' in the United States is best represented by the government making homosexuality illegal.

Because Conservatives believe 'freedom' is the government telling Americans how and with whom they can have sex- and putting those Americans who don't follow the Conservative rules in prison.

 

Understand there are a LOT of Ultra-Religious whack jobs out there.

And then you have the Homophobes and you know what they say about them....In their own fantasies Behind every Homophobe is a Homosexual banging them!! LOL!!!

Ahhhh...man!

I really never understood why some people are such idiots that they would fear gay's.

What are they afraid of?

That they might get Gay Coodies and develop a sense of style and then work well with color? LOL!!!

AA

- - - Updated - - -

Not all Conservatives are like this.

Just the Ultra-Right Wing Religious.

I am a Fiscally Conservative and Socially Liberal MODERATE who usually votes GOP in Presidential elections.

AA

 

Do you really think that just because the laws have been changing to decriminalize homosexuality and things like sodomy and to allow same sex couples the right to marry that suddenly those who have held their intolerant, bigoted and hateful attitudes toward those of the LGBT community are suddenly going to change? Hopefully some might, but seriously I doubt that most wouldn't ever. But I hope those that would, would do it out of a sense of understanding and compassion for their fellow human beings.

I just find that questions posed such as this open it up for those who hold the types of anti LBGT attitudes to once again spread their hateful message of intolerance, bigotry and hate against their fellow human beings.

 

`
I know Christians who have expressed the belief that homosexuality is a sin, however, they are not full of hate, rage, animosity and hostility towards them. I may not agree with them but will not discount the sincerity of their faith. Christian extremists, such as the evangelicals, have bastardized their religion to a point where it is unrecognizable.

 

Certainly there are those who identify as Christians who actually follow the teachings of the Bible and leave the judging of others to their God and instead of expressing intolerant, bigoted and hateful attitudes and rhetoric towards those of the LBGT community. And the same can be said of Conservatives as well. But without 'lableling' segments of those groups, there are those of those groups who do judge and exhibit intolerance, bigotry and hatred attitudes and relish in expressing themselves in threads and forums such as this.

 

About a quarter of respondents with the 2015 Gallup Survey believe homosexuality should be criminalized in the US, which is slightly lower than the percent of people that support full rights for homosexuals. When you remove the >65 age bracket gay-rights support skyrockets. This is an issue of age. The marriage issue - as well as the refusal of services issue - have nothing to do with freedom or religious rights, it is simply because they dislike gay people.

Thankfully this is becoming a non-issue. The marriage issue is settled, service denial will be struck down, their are zero candidates fighting for anti-gay legislation.

 

How can you talk about arresting people for consentual acts then refer to it as freedom?
You people have never taken a rational assessment of your own views have you?

 

No it should never be illegal. Just like owning a gun should never be illegal. Just like women driving should never be illegal.

This question you asked should be though. It's clear your agenda was going one way with that question. Why not just sack up and say how you really feel?

 

Because there is no real freedom in the indulgence of one's own lusts.

Again, there is no question of that, since people of the same sex can't marry.

The law doesn't affect freedom of choice, only the consequences.

 

as long as the parties can legally consent, of course there is.

demonstrably false, as people of the same sex can, have and do marry.

there are no consequences to same sex marriage.

 

**********************************************

And in those highlighted points you are wrong, SSM has nothing whatsoever to do with lust,
lust involves simply sex and one night stands.

Marriage is about commitment and care and protecting and providing for one another, this exists in all marriage unions, called the bonds of matrimony.

Bigots need a device to minimize the value of a hated minority, and dehumanization has always been a popular method of disenfranchisement of people and relationships outside the so called mainstream societal norms.

 

Wrong as usual, between consenting adults they are free ro indulge in pretty much what ever lusts they want.

I understand that some strange people live with their heads stuck in the sand, but just to let you know SSM is now legal in ALL states.

The only consequence of SSM is that two consenting adults regardless of their sex can now legally marry, I understand that your blinkered view doesn't comprehend that but that is the price you pay for being a religious zealot.

 

'yguy'. I think the moniker really says it all. Although you know what they say about those who overly 'boast' and 'puff up' about their 'preferences'.

 

People are free to marry anyone they like. The only issue is whether government recognizes those marriages. The exercise of freedom doesn't require a marriage license.

 

Matrimony, late Middle English: via Old French from Latin matrimonium, based on mater, matr- ‘mother.’
"matrimonium was then an institution involving a mother, mater. The idea implicit in the word is that a man took a woman in marriage, in matrimonium ducere, so that he might have children by her."

ONLY women become mothers and only men are responsible for them doing so. BY DEFINITION "Matrimony" excludes gay couples of the same sex.

 

I have said how I feel. I'm confused by people who are all about freedom, but are still angry about losing the same sex marriage fight. How can one be for freedom, then turn around and say gay people shouldn't be able to get married? I purposely worded the question to an extreme to highlight how silly the "yay freedom! But don't do that!" argument is. People can live freely or not and I am puzzled by the party of "smaller government" wanting laws restricting personal relationships between consenting adults. Are those things in direct conflict win one another?

 

By Definition- matrimony includes all marriage
Merriam Webster:
Matrimony
the state of being married : marriage
Marriage
the relationship that exists between a husband and a wife

: a similar relationship between people of the same sex

: a ceremony in which two people are married to each other


Since couples- straight or gay in the United States can marry- by definition matrimony includes couples same gender or opposite gender.

 

You are making my point for me and contradicting yours.