Obama Administration to use foreign aid for gay rights agenda

Discussion in 'The Political/Current Events Coffee House' started by Kalalification, Dec 6, 2011.

Page 2 of 6

  1. The Shaw Rawnald Gregory Erickson the Second

    Member Since:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    5,426
    Likes Received:
    1,033
    Trophy Points:
    243
    Location:
    New York
    A few states still have homosexual conduct illegal. Texas is one of them, Oklahoma and Kansas might as well.
    The Shaw, Dec 6, 2011
    #21

  2. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Homosexual conduct? As in sodomy? Because heterosexuals can't do that either, if it's illegal.
    Kalalification, Dec 6, 2011
    #22

  3. The Shaw Rawnald Gregory Erickson the Second

    Member Since:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    5,426
    Likes Received:
    1,033
    Trophy Points:
    243
    Location:
    New York
    Yeah I got the states right. And no, not sodomy specifically, the supreme court ruled anti-sodomy laws unconstitutional(which didn't exclusively apply to gays), but those states still have anti-"homosexual conduct" laws. Which are vague and forgotten about.
    The Shaw, Dec 6, 2011
    #23

  4. Viking Socrates I am Mad Scientist

    Member Since:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    9,153
    Likes Received:
    1,487
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    In a cave,watching shadows (Plato reference)
    The only argument i would say against Kali is the issue of adoption and hate they get at the work place but your going to get that no matter what, so really its only the issue of adoption that has any headway.
    Viking Socrates, Dec 6, 2011
    #24

  5. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    These laws are illegal then, and would only exist on record because they haven't been put to a legal test. In any case it would still apply equally to heterosexuals and homosexuals, since it deals with conduct. It's no different than sodomy restriction.
    Kalalification, Dec 6, 2011
    #25

  6. The Shaw Rawnald Gregory Erickson the Second

    Member Since:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    5,426
    Likes Received:
    1,033
    Trophy Points:
    243
    Location:
    New York
    Right.
    The Shaw, Dec 6, 2011
    #26

  7. JosefVStalin El Presidente

    Member Since:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,867
    Likes Received:
    5,818
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    B.C. Canada
    How hollow, that's like saying "Both heterosexuals and homosexuals have the same rights because they both can't have sex with people of the same gender."
    JosefVStalin, Dec 6, 2011
    #27

  8. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's a true statement. There is no distinction made based on your sexual orientation, only your conduct (and even then, those laws have been illegal for a while). A law that prohibits the picking of apples is going to have a more profound impact on those who own orchards, but it doesn't mean that orchard owners are being treated unequally, as Dave Nobody also can't pick apples.
    Kalalification, Dec 6, 2011
    #28

  9. The Shaw Rawnald Gregory Erickson the Second

    Member Since:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    5,426
    Likes Received:
    1,033
    Trophy Points:
    243
    Location:
    New York
    I was confused until I realised that sodomy isn't just with gay guys, its any kind of non traditional sex, I guess you are correct.
    The Shaw, Dec 6, 2011
    #29

  10. JosefVStalin El Presidente

    Member Since:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,867
    Likes Received:
    5,818
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    B.C. Canada
    I can't tell if you are actually being serious here. I certainly hope not. Because if you take that as a legitimate argument then you have to accept all any law that could be justified through it. For example if we were to create a law banning video games that would going to have a profound impact on you and me. While you can still say that everyone has equal rights it's a misleading and unhelpful argument at best because our rights are still limited.
    JosefVStalin, Dec 6, 2011
    #30

  11. Viking Socrates I am Mad Scientist

    Member Since:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    9,153
    Likes Received:
    1,487
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    In a cave,watching shadows (Plato reference)
    It would appear that it implies that he is infact being serious.
    Viking Socrates, Dec 6, 2011
    #31

  12. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am. A heterosexual's rights are the same as a homosexual's rights in the US.
    Kalalification, Dec 6, 2011
    #32

  13. matthewchris Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm pretty sure that he's simply stating, within the context of the law, no discrimination is made based on your sexual orientation, and that any moral or exterior motive behind these laws is irrelevant, as everything is equal under said laws.
    matthewchris, Dec 6, 2011
    #33

  14. Viking Socrates I am Mad Scientist

    Member Since:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    9,153
    Likes Received:
    1,487
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    In a cave,watching shadows (Plato reference)
    What about adoption?
    Viking Socrates, Dec 6, 2011
    #34

  15. JosefVStalin El Presidente

    Member Since:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,867
    Likes Received:
    5,818
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    B.C. Canada
    Again that's a hollow argument. I repeat you can say that a heterosexual and homosexual person have the same rights because they both can't get married to people of the same gender but it's a misleading and unhelpful argument at best because our rights are still restricted.
    JosefVStalin, Dec 6, 2011
    #35

  16. The Shaw Rawnald Gregory Erickson the Second

    Member Since:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    5,426
    Likes Received:
    1,033
    Trophy Points:
    243
    Location:
    New York
    Daamn, niggy! It's gettin hot in here!
    I just have to say that I agree with Kal, though I do support gay rights. So don't say I don't.
    The Shaw, Dec 6, 2011
    #36

  17. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No matter your idea of how hollow it is, it's a true statement.

    Homosexuals are just as free to marry as heterosexuals. The dispute is on what constitutes marriage, not on who can be married.
    Kalalification, Dec 6, 2011
    #37

  18. JosefVStalin El Presidente

    Member Since:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,867
    Likes Received:
    5,818
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    B.C. Canada
    No they are not because if I wanted to marry you I would not be allowed to. This is a fundamental restriction of my rights.
    JosefVStalin, Dec 6, 2011
    #38

  19. CoExIsTeNcE LeonTrotsky in Disguse

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    255
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Your rights to marry, which, as stated above, id being debated.
    CoExIsTeNcE, Dec 6, 2011
    #39

  20. Viking Socrates I am Mad Scientist

    Member Since:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Message Count:
    9,153
    Likes Received:
    1,487
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    In a cave,watching shadows (Plato reference)

    I'm with Stalin on this one.
    Viking Socrates, Dec 6, 2011
    #40
Page 2 of 6

Share This Page