We need to respect with each others view because as human, we are all the same. Either you are in Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Moslem, Bah'ai, Taoism, Buddhist or other.... we are all the same...
PJK, I think the reason some strait guys think of Lesbians as attractive is that they then get to imagine a sexual act without having to think of the guy in the act, and get to think of two attractive women at the same time. Personally, I don’t see the point in fantasizing about Lesbian women as they would never be attracted to me. Now… BISEXUAL women on the other hand, might be. *glances down, then back up* If I hit the Gym more often.
No it wasn't. Back in the Hellenic era it was far more acceptable than it currently is. Of course, so was pedophilia and bestiality, but whatever. Shameful or not, there's no reason why gay couples shouldn't be afforded the same rights as heterosexual couples.
I would like to make a small note here on Constitutional Issues in the United States. The 16th Amendment affords each individual citizen equal protection under the law, and equal privileges. AMENDMENT XIV Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868. Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. That does not, however, grant equal privileges to any given pairing of citizens. Thus, as each citizen has the legal ability to marry a member of the opposite sex, the laws and privileges of each individual citizen are being protected equally, even if the privileges of couples is not. This message was not meant to advocate allowing or banning gay or lesbian couples from marrying, it was simply to point out a constitutional issue somewhat on topic but somewhat tangential to the topic of discussion.
In order to answer a question that popped up in the last part of this thread (sorry, I can't remember the name of the poster,) why does everyone hate homosexuals? You're being a little general saying *everyone* hates homsexuals, and I do not, for one, hate gay people. I have a gay cousin, a gay best friend, and a gay uncle and I believe that they have just as much right to the same privileges same sex couples are afforded. People have a tendency to hate/fear what they don't understand, so a controversial topic such as homosexual marriage, for example, can and will be talked about profusely.
well, i think my reply was very simple to understand.. if you don't get it, then its not my problem anymore
Sorry, I think you were referring to my post. I guess I exaggerated a bit. It's just that there's this "code" that almost everyone follows and I guess in this code, being gay just makes you uncool and hated. I mean, if I was straight, I think I'd fit much more into society and everyone would like to actually be around me without having to feel ashamed that they around a gay individual. I'm not very good at expressing my thoughts, but hopefully it's understandable. I guess this leads to the stupid LABELS issue that everyone puts on people. Yeah, I hate them. Labels = gay.
Yes, it was you I was referring to. Sorry, I just couldn't remember the name of the person I was directing my reply towards. People feel uncomfortable around those who they don't understand. It's not just homsexuals -- the same thing can be said about anyone who a "label" has been applied to. Goths, punks, preps, hippies, whatever -- if a person doesn't understand why someone is the way they are, a lot of the times their next reaction is to hate that person without knowing anything else about them aside from the label placed upon that person. So, you're right -- a lot of this so-called hatred stems from labels society imposes on those who are different from the "norm." Rather than try to conform to some non existent code, I'd say be proud of who you are -- there are always going to be people who hate you for being different and "uncool." If you're true to yourself though, you're always cool regardless of what others might think.
The US Constitution can be changed at the will of Mr Bush. He's already removed the right to a fair trial for criminal suspects.
personally I think there's a bit more to irrational homophobia than being afraid of what they don't understand. perhaps I have a skewed viewpoint because I live in a liberal city or something, but I really haven't met that people that adamantly hate gays. I have a rather large family on one side, and a lot of them live out in the middle of nowhere. a few even referred to themselves as "basically being rednecks." I recently came out to them and things for the most part went fine. again, could be skewed perspective, but in my day to day life things like it being harder to meet other gay women are a lot more frustrating than homophobia is. about the only outright examples of bigotry I ever experienced or witnessed was kids being dumb in middle school and things along those lines. what religion would that be? if it's christianity, it's not
My pleasure: Habeas Corpus is the common law right not to be improsoned without a fair trail to ensure such imprisonment is not unlawful. This is a simplification, read in full here. Article 1 of the US Constitution states that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." On 29 September 2006, the U.S. House and Senate approved the Military Commissions Act of 2006, a bill which would suspend habeas corpus for any alien (noncitizen) determined to be an "unlawful enemy combatant engaged in hostilities or having supported hostilities against the United States"[2][3] by a vote of 65-34. (This was the result on the bill to approve the military trials for detainees; an amendment to remove the suspension of habeas corpus failed 48-51.[4]) President Bush signed the Military Commissons Act of 2006 into law on October 17, 2006.
MisterMix: Thank you. I was previously under the understanding that rights under the constitution were only guaranteed to citizens. I see now that I was mistaken about this applying to the writ of habeus corpus, since it is a concept of common law, and it specifically says that it shall not be suspended. I am sure that the house and senate members that voted for this bill would either justify the terrorist attacks as a form of ‘invasion’ or argue that it is the job of the supreme court to judge on the constitutionality of a law. My only note here is that it was not bush alone that passed this apparently unconstitutional law, he could have vetoed it, but it was the congress which passed it originally.