Gay Marriage Rights

[Yao]

i might wear a t-shirt that has ""hi, im seansightless, i like to have sex with women" out this weekend.

the only things i "dislike"(not the best word) about the gay society are those few standouts that do nothing to help out there "group"(can't think of a better term, im not calling gays a society, they are part of our society). people like the "queer eye" guys seriously go out and try to say " hey look at me, im gay and im changing the world to gay" , they intentionally give 100% to act different. my friend tom is gay, and he even says that outside of drag queens, there is nothing he cant deal withless than those cats. he says"they cant just be gay, they have to be flaming" i kinda understand him. :? touchy topic. have your opinions. just dont harm others.

Sightless, I damn well agree on that. My cousin is gay, and I have no problem whatsoever with that, but it does annoy me when he's at a party acting like some dumb blonde chick in overdrive waving his hand in every direction. Or when there's a gay parade in my hometown with men walking around in pink trousers split open up to the waist shaking their asses and stuff like that. Being gay is okay, but this flaming kind of being gay, no way. But most gay people I know (and I know a few, damn, a roommate of mine is gay and always saying I have such a nice ass...) really hate those guys. They are actually ruining it for all those normal gay people, just trying to live their life like everyone else. That kind of behaviour will only stunt the process of acceptation.

[thesightless]

i didnt mean it in the way of how certain gay people act or dress, more in the sense of when they intentionally and repeatedly call attention to themselves and try to sell it.

i dont run around saying "" hey why dont you dress like a white kid from long island, listen to techno and house music, play video games, wear clothes from bloomingdales, banana republic and guess, and comb your hair like me."

[thefncrow]

Re: Gay Marriage Rights

As always, people who want to push a proposition in order to get it passed do not ask for everything all at once. They get the primary bill or 'right' passed, and then start tacking benifits and other rights on top of it. For example, Hillary Care. Hillary was an idiot, and tried to write her Universal health care package that involved TONS of benifits, and it didn't pass. If she wanted it, she should have passed a small package that would inevitably grow in size.

... Your logic here is baffling. Let me try to reconstruct this argument for you.

1. Sowell says that people should have rightfully voted for the anti-gay marriage amendments, because they may confer these rights through a set of legal contracts.
2. Nine of the gay marriage amendments which have passed include clauses barring gay couples from entering into contracts which confer any rights which come from marriage.
3. This is OK because you can't ask for everything at once. (?)

Are you actually trying to argue that he hasn't contradicted himself here? He wants the gay marriage amendments passed to force gay couples to use means of conferring rights which were banned by the gay marriage amendment?

Actually, it seems you're even backwards here. Most of the gay marriage amendments weren't attempts to pick up one thing or the other, they were an entire package of ideals. They ban gay marriage, civil unions, and any other sort of contract which would confer any of the things conferred by marriages. They were aimed at making any sort of legal conferrence of any sort of union for gay people illegal, including simple contracts to confer simple things that couples living together should have.

Sowell sets up a strawman so he can feel really proud about knocking it over. The idea that homosexuals are seeking approval with marriage is a joke. They're no more seeking approval than straight couples are. Anyone has the right to hold opinions about other people in whatever way they wish.

He is not using a strawman. That's why he singled out the 'activists'.

No, you've missed the point. He picks out an unnamed group 'activists', who are supposedly arguing a point never heard in the public discourse, without any evidence that anyone is arguing this, and then proceeds to pick apart 'their' argument piece by piece. Its the very definition of a strawman.

2) Sowell mistakenly assumes that extending a set of special privlidges that one group enjoys upon another group is some sort of favoritism, and not what it really is, destroying a system of favoritism that already exists.

No, you are looking at it as something that is supposed to be there in the first place, when it isn't. What he's saying, is that when special groups start seeking social justice and special rights, other groups will have to seek their justice as well in other areas. When that justice is reached, it starts all over again, and the rule of law will be ever-changing, and will contain no foundation. Considering how many different groups have how many different sets of values, that road leads to anarchy.

When you show me someone actually asking for a law requiring people to accept their lifestyle, I'll join you in shooting them down. What is being asked for is not approval, but simply equal legal footing, which is supposed to be guaranteed.

Here we go again with 'guaranteed'!! I don't see how a small group of individuals with a different lifestyle can claim special rights out of the clear blue sky. That will always be the case. It's not about holding someone down, it's about Anarchy. Maybe it seems to be 'a bit of the norm' for you, because the debate is always present, but I tend to block that out, because I see it for what it is.

An equal opportunity is afforded to all, and that's only, oh, THE BASIS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Its the reason we have things like equal protection. You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. The situation is either one of the following:

1) Marriage is a special right. Gay people lack this special right. They are asking for the special right to marriage. Straight people already have the special right to marriage.

2) Marriage is not a special right. Gay people lack this right. They ask for a right extended to most of the country to be extended to them, or for an actual compelling state interest as to why they should be denied this right. Neither side has special rights, and neither side is asking for special rights.

If marriage is a special right, then we already have an existing system of favoritism which may either be destroyed or extended. If marriage is not a special right, then we're denying basic rights to people based on sexuality without a compelling state interest. Which is it?

A quick hint for you, so you can see the way the US judiciary sees it. In Zablocki v. Redhail[US Supreme Court, 1979], the court ruled that marriage is a fundamental right. I'm going to assume you know what a fundamental right is in a legal manner, and why this is important.

Then, Sowell digs himself a hole halfway to hell with the entire line about AIDS. Thomas Sowell, are you aware that the segment of the population which is seeing the highest rate of infection of HIV is women, and not men? I'm sure its just because all those women are muff-divers, right? Close to half the world's population of AIDS victims are women, but I'm sure its just all dykes, right? Give it a fucking rest already.

Did you even read what he said about the Aids issue?

I certainly did. Here, I'll even reprint it for you, so you don't have to go back up:

What the activists really want is the stamp of acceptance on homosexuality, as a means of spreading that lifestyle, which has become a death style in the era of AIDS.

They have already succeeded to a remarkable degree in our public schools, where so-called "AIDS education" or other pious titles are put on programs that promote homosexuality. In some cases, gay activists actually come to the schools, not only to promote homosexuality as an idea but even to pass out the addresses of local gay hangouts to the kids. There is no limit to what people will do if you let them get away with it. That our schools, which are painfully failing to educate our children to the standards in other countries, have time for promoting homosexuality is truly staggering.

The entire point stems from two things:
1) Being gay is going to kill you(AIDS/Deathstyle/I really really want to write for Metallica)
2) School-sanctioned gay people hanging out at schools directing kids to gay hangouts and encouraging them to be gay. I'd have a problem with this, if Sowell could actually prove it was occurring. Without some sort of cite, or news article, or some sort of evidence whatseover, it is not a credible claim. Its really just an offshoot of his earlier strawman about forced homosexual acceptance.

Its a boogieman and an insult all wrapped up into one, and its so laughable you're lucky even half a moment to respond to that joke of an argument.

As to the issue of single parents getting benefits for child rearing, I agree that's an issue, but it was an extraneous piece of information when I was dealing with the issue of "marriage benefits = child-rearing benefits", though its certainly a good point as to why that argument does not hold.

Sorry about the novel length essays here, I'm just used to another debate board, where a reply of the length of most of these replies gets you laughed at, or, worse, gets words shoved in your mouth because you didn't address every facet of the issue in the initial post.

[thefncrow]

Then, Sowell digs himself a hole halfway to hell with the entire line about AIDS. Thomas Sowell, are you aware that the segment of the population which is seeing the highest rate of infection of HIV is women, and not men? I'm sure its just because all those women are muff-divers, right? Close to half the world's population of AIDS victims are women, but I'm sure its just all dykes, right? Give it a fucking rest already. Stick to economics, I hear that you actually make halfway decent arguments in that area that don't crumble to pieces the minute logic enters the arena.

Although a lot of your comments are logical and your arguments I can even respect, this is where I just have to chime in. Its evident that your spouting statistics without any real knowledge of the situation. The HIV rate in women isn't even close to that of men, and is barely growing at all. In fact its pretty much the same in women diagnosed with it every year, and growing exponentially in men. To think that AIDs doesn't grow, MAINLY, because of Gay men is a naive statement to say the least.

http://www.avert.org/statindx.htm

Statistics there from around the world. But I will be using only the statistics for here in the United States.

Read those numbers and then spout off some more of your liberal rhetoric. The highest rate of infection is women not men?? Your opinions may be valid, but when you try to back them up with facts I think its you thats falling down the hole, or reaching the bottom of the barrel there.

And then you have male to female comparissons in the AIDs exposure category (obviously different then HIV diagnoses)

2003 diagnoses - 31,614 male to 11,498 female, where as (as stated above) well above 50% of that is from male to male intercourse. There there are the cumulative numbers. 749,887 male to 170,679 female 440,887 of that 749,887 were from Gay intercourse.

These stats speak for themselves. You should be aware that I am GoogleMan, and none of your blatent statistical lies will sneak past everyone around here.

Where did I ever say anything about "in the US"?

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/womenhiv.htm

Worldwide, 19.2 million women have HIV or AIDS, and, out of a population of 40 million with HIV or AIDS, that's nearly half.

Worldwide, the transmission of HIV/AIDS from heterosexual sex accounts for 90% of infections. So, once again, my point about how its not just homosexual men stands firm.

Even using your US statistics, while the claim I made doesn't hold fast, 35% of HIV diagnoses in 2003 were from heterosexual sex. 45% was from homosexual sex, so it does not hold, but its still close enough that you cannot solely blame gay sex for HIV still being around.

I will withdraw my claim about being the fastest growing population, because I read it elsewhere, however, I did not notice that a link was not included, so it could be some stupid geocities site or something and I just never knew. My guess is that they used the statistics for sub-saharan african women, where the infection rate actually is higher.

If you look at the US, sure, a lot of my claims seem invalid. However, since there are other places in the world where people contract HIV/AIDS, I'm looking globally. After all, if the problem is with the disease, like Sowell is definately trying to imply, those trends should bear out worldwide, which they don't.

[Civic_Zen]

Re: Gay Marriage Rights

2) School-sanctioned gay people hanging out at schools directing kids to gay hangouts and encouraging them to be gay. I'd have a problem with this, if Sowell could actually prove it was occurring. Without some sort of cite, or news article, or some sort of evidence whatseover, it is not a credible claim. Its really just an offshoot of his earlier strawman about forced homosexual acceptance.

This is true, just research it. I'm not about to google since there is nothing in it for me. Before I was proving you wrong. Which BTW, there is a lot to be said about EU and Canada and why their HIV rates for women are rising much more steadily then ours in the US. Personally, those are the only numbers that are really relevant since its blatently obvious that gay men in this country are the reason for AIDs distributing itself more then anything else. Surely gay men have sex with women too, Bi men are in abundance, and I believe more so in more liberal countries.

Regardless, maybe just ask someone you know that is in HS. I mean sheesh, how old are you?? I am 24, and they were doing this back when I was in High school 6-7 years ago.

[Yao]

Which board? pm me if you don't wanna spam.

[thefncrow]

Re: Gay Marriage Rights

This is true, just research it. I'm not about to google since there is nothing in it for me. Before I was proving you wrong. Which BTW, there is a lot to be said about EU and Canada and why their HIV rates for women are rising much more steadily then ours in the US. Personally, those are the only numbers that are really relevant since its blatently obvious that gay men in this country are the reason for AIDs distributing itself more then anything else. Surely gay men have sex with women too, Bi men are in abundance, and I believe more so in more liberal countries.

Regardless, maybe just ask someone you know that is in HS. I mean sheesh, how old are you?? I am 24, and they were doing this back when I was in High school 6-7 years ago.

I'm 20, and I have friends that are still in high school, and in various high schools through the area, and no one has ever heard of anything like this. Shit, at my school, the only time homosexuality was mentioned, ever, was one class in health class. That was it. A quick survey of my friends via AIM shows the same results. If you want to present evidence that gay people are going into schools with an official sanction to tell students where gay people hang out and to convince them to become gay, and say that the evidence is so widespread that I should obviously know that it happens, then I'd imagine you can pull up, say, some sort of news article on this, yes? A google search brings up a lot of biased non-journalism sites.

To be technical, gay men don't have sex with women. Bi men, yes.

To say gay sex is the leading reason for the spread of AIDS in this country would be accurate. To say gay sex is the reason AIDS is spreading in this country is inaccurate, because gay sex is not the reason that the majority of people in this country contract AIDS(there is not a majority reason if you separate gay and straight sex). Sex, in general, is the reason, gay sex is more than half of that, but not all of it.

Yao, PM is sent.

[Civic_Zen]

Re: Gay Marriage Rights

If you want to present evidence that gay people are going into schools with an official sanction to tell students where gay people hang out and to convince them to become gay,

Dude calm down. :wink: Nobody, any where, from Cosmo to whoever wrote this article, nobody is saying they are trying to CONVINCE them to become gay. That is just ubsurd. What they had at my school was an assembly, which had the counselor telling any gay people to come see her if they ever had any questions, or what not. And I happen to know that after going to see her, they would get pamphlets with all kind of societies and the like. Which are really good in and of themselves, but led to a lot of places where they "held" meetings. Obviously I was never at those meetings, I don't know what goes on there, and I could care less. I could care less that they would designate the 16 and up night at the local club a gay night, but this info was only told to the gay people. I actually don't think its a problem personally, I could care less. Your the one that said if I could prove this, then you would have a problem with it. I don't have to prove it, because I know its true and I'm not out to google this today, I'm too busy digging up dirt on Jacques Chirac and doing a little work too.

But seriously, most of this information you can get from your high school counselor. You can get all kinds of info, all of which is good in the long run, becaus they also lecture on AIDs, not just that you can go here to hook up with other gay guys. What about girls, ages 13-14 even who get an abortion through their high school and the parents aren't even told. That is a real situation and one thats been all over the news. I think thats pretty messed up personally.

and say that the evidence is so widespread that I should obviously know that it happens, then I'd imagine you can pull up, say, some sort of news article on this, yes? A google search brings up a lot of biased non-journalism sites.

Like I said, its so obvious that information on gay meeting places is passed out in schools, that this is a waste of my time. Where do you live then? Because if any of your friends new anyone who was gay, or les, then all you would have to do is ask if they ever went to the school counselor. And Like I said, I think its a good thing they got that info because they get lectured on safety as well. Its the same kind of ignorance that people preach against teaching safe sex in schools, safe sex should be taught regardless of who the sex is with. No scratch that, its A LOT more important for gay men to be scoured with this information.

To be technical, gay men don't have sex with women. Bi men, yes.

Bi men are gay. There is gay, and there is strait, there is no bi with men any way. Women can be bi though. IMO.

To say gay sex is the leading reason for the spread of AIDS in this country would be accurate. To say gay sex is the reason AIDS is spreading in this country is inaccurate, because gay sex is not the reason that the majority of people in this country contract AIDS(there is not a majority reason if you separate gay and straight sex). Sex, in general, is the reason, gay sex is more than half of that, but not all of it.

This is what cosmo was saying though, and what I was saying. its the LEADING CAUSE. Yes, it is, no debate. And there is also no debate that it became what it is today because of gay men, and heroin and coke users.