After nod from Obama, gay activists in Atlanta to tackle much work left to be done
By Moni Basu, CNN
Atlanta (CNN) - In his second inaugural address, President Barack Obama embraced gay rights as part of America's agenda, saying that "our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law."
Last year, he became the first president to endorse same-sex marriage, and polls showed that he was not out of sync with America. They logged a steep rise in public support for gay and lesbian marriages.
Several states approved same-sex marriage ballot measures. Wisconsin voters elected Tammy Baldwin, as their first openly gay U.S. senator.
The progressive blog Truthout wrote that the trends mean that "conservatives will soon no longer be able to use homophobia as a 'wedge' issue in elections."
But gay rights activists such as Michael Shutt say much work is left to be done, especially in more conservative Southern states that lack anti-discrimination policies and laws.
Georgia, for instance, does not have a hate crimes law. Nor are there laws to protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in employment or housing.
That's why Shutt, director of Emory University's Office of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Life, is glad the 25th National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Creating Change conference is taking place this week in Atlanta. The five-day gathering began Wednesday.
It's the largest annual gathering of LGBT rights activists - about 3,500 people are expected to attend, said Shutt, who is on the host committee. They will come together to strategize and learn how to build political power back home, according to the conference website.
Among the many issues on the agenda is immigration and the DREAM Act, which would create a legal pathway for undocumented immigrants who serve in the military or pursue higher education.
Immigration is important to LGBT people, Shutt said. They are not always able to live with their partners in the United States because this country does not recognize their unions.
Among the speakers on immigration is Pulitzer Prize-winning and openly gay journalist Jose Antonio Vargas.
The gathering will be Shutt's eight conference. He hopes to bring Emory students with him.
He said the conference is learning about American identity - whether it's gender, race, immigration status or sexual orientation.
It's also enlightening, empowering, he said. And liberating. It's one place where he doesn't have to do any explaining about the work that he does.
About In America
What defines you? Maybe it’s the shade of your skin, the place you grew up, the accent in your words, the make up of your family, the gender you were born with, the intimate relationships you chose to have or your generation? As the American identity changes we will be there to report it. In America is a venue for creative and timely sharing of news that explores who we are. Reach us at inamerica@cnn.com.
Black in America
iReport
JP– Let's do another experiment, shall we?
2 islands–Island A filled with 50 prejudiced hetero couples, and the other, Island B, filled with 50 loving gay and lesbian couples. Come back after 100 years and voila–Island A has destroyed themselves to "extinction" due to poverty, violence, and lack of food due to overpopulation. Meanwhile, on Island B, things are thriving... it's not uninhabited for they have found a way to "COEXIST" not to mention make life on the island a hopping party filled with beautiful people, the finest cuisine, beautiful architecture,the best in entertainment and...are you ready? Fabulousness!
In response to JP's original experiment:
2 islands – 1 has 100 lesbian couples, the other 100 gay male couples – no one else gets on or off the islands – come back in 100 years – what do we find? 2 uninhabited islands – extinction doesn't get any more 'natural' than that.
If only that was relevant.
jp: it is natural. "right" and "wrong" are subjective
"I will be a bigot if I want, and no one can change my mind"
Good perspective, Michael
That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. If you put 100 straight men on an island, none of them would be able to reproduce either. I'm gay and I have a kid. I'm gay, not infertile. And my kid is an honor student, varsity athlete, and seriously one of the kindest, funniest, most well-liked people you'll ever meet. Stop being so bitter and live and let live. Sheesh.
The following formula is FALSE
M+F=M+M, F+F
It is about equal rights, Blob.
Do you have PROOF that the formula is TRUE? If not then it is not "about equal rights."
the truth of falseness of your formula has nothing to do with rights. this is about equal rights.
Funny that you can only do basic arithmetic. Perhaps I can offer you a suggestion:
Marriage = {M+M,M+F,F+F} where the {} represents a set.
Hey bible thumpers will you stop believing that your man written book is the voice of god.
400,000 people at March for Life in Washington today... Must not be news worthy enough for CNN..
The term "perverted" is subjective, and differs for every person. Some people would think you "perverted" for being so judgmental.
All 12 people who are pro-polygamy? Please... No one will ever want to legalize polygamy. Marrying someone has everything to do with love and respect and wanting to share a lifetime together. Whereas polygamy has everything to do with s e x...When you love someone you give yourself only to them..not them and five others. Polygamy does not allow you to truly honor, cherish, and respect the one(s) you claim to love. Marriage should be between two people, regardless of s e x.
Elizabeth – Why do you hate freedom? If people wish to marry the same person, why should the government be able to disallow that?
Its funny obammy was against gay marriage 2 yrs into his pres, talk about flip/flop, you voted for it enoy it, if you pick a idiot, then idiotic things happen !!!
Good to see Randy hasn't had an evolved belief or change in stance since first grade. Seems you got it all figured out...I'll work on the other people besides Jesus and Randy.
The previous prohibition against interracial marriage violated both God's laws and Nature's laws. Also, who was to judge exactly how brown/black/pale/oriental someone needed to be in order to be allowed to marry? The current embrace and promotion of gay unions violates both God's laws and Nature's laws. However, this kind of reality and logic doesn't phase people who simply WANT what they WANT. After all, we ALL want what we want, don't we?...
The laws of any "god" apply only to those who follow it. As to the laws of nature, kindly explain why so many other animal species engage in same-gender intercourse. Better call the animal police!
Dave i think its safe to say we should be worried about you, get a new hobby !!!!!!!!!
*shrug*...you do as you see fit, friend. My statements are factual.
Not mutually exclusive Bob
Don't get me wrong, I can care less about gay marriage. We are a free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness and ones political or religious beliefs should have no effect on anyone pursuing those unalienable rights. And to secure theses unalienable rights from both domestic and foreign threats we the people will hold strong to the first and second amendments.
johnny: it's about equality under the law, capice?
The laws of the true, living God apply to all creation whether you choose to follow them or not. Ignore the law of gravity and see what happens.
Because ANIMALS don't have FREE WILL and higher reasoning skills. Animals behave on INSTINCT alone. They have no ability to think, or reason, or consider the potential consequences of their actions. They just act. And for the record, when animals engage in "same gender intercourse" it is generally done as an act of DOMINANCE over another. How exactly is behaving in such a way considered "equal" or even HUMAN? If one CHOOSES to behave as ANIMALS, then one can hardly complain about being treated as such.
Dave UR aware that some animals eat their young.
@Dave
*shrug*...you do as you see fit, friend. My statements are factual.
-----------------------------
Not necessarily. You use a lot of "apples/oranges" comparisons.
My statements on this particular thread are factual. Perhaps you can describe a false comparison statement I've allegedly made?
The most obvious "apples to oranges" is your comparison of animal gay S E X to human gay S E X to justify it in humans.
My mention of same-gender intercourse occurring in nature is meant as a direct response to the claim that such activity is "against the laws of nature".
Wilson....I think Dave has you on this argument.
That is still "apples to oranges."
Aside from the fact that it plainly isn't. Responding to a claim about the animal kingdom, with a factual comment about the animal kingdom is in no way "apples to oranges".
"god's laws and natures laws" are irrelevant when we are talking about the laws of the land
You may not have noticed but many of our man made laws reflect the letter and/or the spirit of God's law.
you may not have noticed it, but only two of the ten commandments (possibly three, if you are talking about lying in a court of law) are covered by the law
"gee, teacher, i only got 20%, but that is passing, right?"
tell us of some of the laws, besides stealing, killing and (possibly) lying that reflect the "letter or spirit (?) of god's law"
Yes. Many people want to marry. it's really quite common to love your spouse and family enough to want that formal legal commitment.
They should be allowed to marry, its their right though they are denied it. And freedom of religion means they are free from the "Law of God" as you say it.
Biblical arguments were used against interracial marriage, and people claimed you were against nature if you supported interracial marriage. Southern fundamentalists were astounded that anyone Christian could support interracial marriage, because some parts of the Bible made it so clear that God is against it. Sound familiar?
The following formula describes the marriage laws 50 years ago:
WM + WF = BM, NAM, AM, LM + BF, NAF, AF, LF
As you can see, the formula is FALSE.
The following formula describes the current marriage laws:
M + F = F +M
As you can see, the formula is TRUE.
If you can get an animal (assuming non-human?) to sign the marriage license and swear that he/she is of sound mind and consentual age, have at it. Incidentally, many non-human animals are dead at around age 16-18, so choose your species carefully – necrophellia tends to violate the consentual asumption.
For those of you, who support gay rights -
Where do we draw the line people? Is it only about freedom to do what one wishes, as long as it does not involve violence!!! You talk about supporting gay rights, but should we also accept consensual incest? should we also approve of polygamous marriages (again consensual)? and continuing along the same lines, should we begin to accept some amongst us, who would want to indulge in intercourse with animals?
If the incest is between consenting adults, and they're willing to accept being ostracized by their family, why not allow it? It hurts nobody. Same goes for polygamy. If and when animals achieve the ability to think cognitively, communicate, and then give legal consent, then we can address that issue. Until then, it's nothing more than a desperate strawman argument.
Dave - you speak of ostracising by family members for indulging in incest - and i reckon you are implying those family members are not comfortable with incest - Now is it alright for people to ostracise gays, because they don't approve of them? The argument for intercourse with animals was only a thought-exercise. You spoke of animals developing cognitive ability to develop a legal consent. But do we really care about consent of animals. I don't think we seek that consent when we kill them for pleasure or for meat consumption. We don't seek their opinion when we displace them to build houses. We have been doing that for centuries. Isn't it hypocritical to speak of getting consent from an animal.
Whether it's right or not to ostracize family members is a matter of opinion, and therefore subjective. As I said, if people in a consensual incestuous relationship, or people in a same-gender relationship are willing to accept the possibility of being ostracized by their family members, then who are we to tell them they can't?
The part where you deviated from humans to animals was nothing more than a tedious and thoroughly disproved slippery slope argument.
Wow take your meds you a real sicko
Incest and polygamy DO indeed hurt others. Marriage Equality does NOT. My marriage has not "destroyed" any straight person's relationship, and it never will.
Pretty soon The Blacks will want to marry white women
Then women will want to vote! Ha, how preposterous. Keep things natural, as god intended.
These are the same arguments used against interracial marriage, and they are as unfounded today as they were back then.
ABC – These are the same arguments used against interracial marriage, and they are as unfounded today as they were back then.
Agreed!!! But where do we draw the line. Be it inter-racial marriages, equality for all races, equality for women - we have come a long way and accept (or are beginning to accept) these concepts as normal... Does that mean, we have to accept rights of gays as normal too? And if we do, are we prepared to accept the points I wrote in my first post as normal too?
Why is it you feel the need to draw a line?
Dave - good question about why do I need to draw the line... It is part of the behaviour. We all do it, whether we realize it or not... as a society we have defined many boundaries.. If I were to cite examples I can cite plenty and I am sure you can think of very many scenarios....
*shrug*...any excuse you need.
I think a case could be made for allowing polygamous marriage because no one is harmed by polygamy. The same cannot be said of incest because when 2 people who are related have a child together, the child is very likely going to be harmed because of genetic factors.
How about incest with protection? That will not lead to a new life. Would you approve of incest if the two people are not trying to create a baby? I could be pre-mature in my understanding, but from your post, I reckon, you do not approve of incest. thus you have drawn a line somehwere on what is acceptable behaviour and what is not..
Dave - I replied to your shrug comment, but I dont see my posting here.
No, an interracial marriaqe can produce offspring – this is why SCOTUS said in Loving vs VA that marriage is "fundamental to our existance and survival". A gay marriage does not produce offspring, and please don't bring up infertility – gays are NOT infertile, they CHOOSE to not have children. BIG difference from can't produce.
Should I assume you are against interracial marriages? That was also taboo.
If you must know, I am not. But what I feel is less significant here. The point I am making is, do we draw the line somewhere or do we accept everything under the garb of freedom for all (as long as it does not get violent).
Yes, we accept things under the banner of Equality. If two consenting adults wish to marry, that should be allowed to happen, because 2 OTHER consenting adults already can. You draw the line when one of those 2 are not an adult, or do not consent. Your personal opnion of "icky gross!" should not be a factor. I really do not see why this is an issue at all. It does not take away anything from anyone else. It does not force anyone to gay marry, to attend a gay marriage, to bless a gay marriage, or to provide a tea cozy as a marriage gift. Not allowing gays to marry will not prevent gay se.x. It will not turn gay people straight, and will not prevent them from moving into the condo across the hall and going grocery shopping on saturday. Some people want to deny thier rights simply out of spite.
Sane Person – I agree with you that most people want to deny them rights out of spite. There are many amongst us who would rely on their religious texts to label gays as evil. So I am all for their rights, and I do not see anything wrong with it… But then I do not see anything wrong with two consenting people (even if both of them or one of them is not an adult) wanting to be together. It can always be rationalized. But as a society we have chosen to define a boundary. The points that you make to support your case about no-body will be forced to become a gay, or forced to attend a gay wedding, they can as well be made about a marriage between an adult and a minor (consensual, no coercion). Also because I don’t approve of a marriage between an adult with a minor, will not stop them from indulging in se. x or going grocery shopping together. How do in such a scenario, I make a choice that lets root for gay marriage and draw a line for other kinds of marriages. If I am to be guided only by rationale and logic and allow for everything that promotes equality for all – I have got to become a proponent of other forms of marriages too.
Only recently a bill was proposed in Germany to make "intercourse with animals," illegal. I did not hear if it passed or not.
You need to go to a place called "the library." In them are these things called "books". You can read them, and they educate you. You know, about how most people who are into beastality are straight. And polygamy is usually linked to old religious sects. And "gayness" doesn't rub off on straight people (or vice versa).
If two people are of legal age and are both consenting, they should be allowed to marry and reap the benefits of that contract being recognized by the law. Something as simple as taking family leave from work to care for your ill spouse, or making medical decisions. It's not all about S E X. Grow up.
Elizabeth - I don't see anything wrong with extending benefits such as visitation rights, tax benefits, being able to make medical decisions on behalf of one's partner being extended to gay couples... but would you also approve of extending the same benefits to incestuous couples and those in polygamous marriages... We can discount the case of beastiality, because that is only about s. e. x.
Just playing devils advacye – so since some states in the US say 16 years of age is "consenting", you would be OK with your 16 year old daughter marrying a convicted pedophile? Be honest now.
Just trying to point out, that just because they are consenting should it be OK.
A worse thought is in Mexico, some states have only 12 as "consenting".
Thank you for at least acknowledging those things. But, no, I personally would not approve of incestuous or polygamous relationships. As far as incest is concerned, there is no reason to be with a family member when there are billions of people at their disposal.. 🙂 Also, if children come about from that relationship, it is not physically healthy.
And polygamy, well I'm sorry but that IS all about s e x. If one is in a polygamous relationship, there is no way they are caring for everyone's needs, emotionally and physically. You cannot honor, cherish, respect, and love each individual involved. Only two people can genuinely do so, in my opinion.
Elizabeth - I think you are bringing in your prejudices here. Many parents love their kids equally. Many people love and care for their many siblings genuinely. So the notion that only two people are capable of genuine love is a flawed one. This notion arises from the kind of society we live in and get indoctrinated with such views as we grow up... and it is an indoctrination of this sort that makes us define what is moral and what is not... We can always rationalize what we consider immoral as just a prejudice.. For example, in your posts, I have seen that you consider casual se. x to be immoral and perverted - and I don't understand why should that be the case.
You say that there is no reason to be in an incestuous relationship when there are billions of people out there. Now can I make this argument that there is no reason to be in a gay relationship, when there are billions of people of the other gender out there? As for genetic defects - let's say there is a medical work around, about the genetic issue - would you then change your opinion? I could be wrong about it, but I think you would not. You consider it to be wrong. You have chosen to draw the line here. and that is what I am asking, where do we draw the line.
1. How do you know that people don't genuinely love each other in a polygamy relationship? 20 years ago, people said the same thing with gay couples.
2. If relatives get married (incests), they should have the right to abort the kid because legitimate relationship shouldn't be based on if they can or can't have kids. Cause ultimately their love trumps a fetus (not real thing).
..and I base my statement on the current logic on how people defined what "Love" means.
We draw thie line right where it is. We allow two single consenting adult unrelated people to form a marriage if they choose. No resounding changes or mental gymnastics required.
The "Dream Act" is important. How is America supposed to Re-Patriat if we don't open our borders to cheap labor.
"Lets marry animals too!"
It's a little early in the day to be drinking, eh?
Maybe a wormhole? 🙂
🙂 I like it! I'll take that as the winner 😉
So its NOT ok for two beings of the same species to be "married" which is a term made up by our species, yet it is ok for a Corporation to be considered "A person." That analogy is closer to marring animals...noone is suggesting we start inter species marriages! I love how you distort the argument....Here, let me try.."whats next, marrying three-ring binders???" How was that?
Fascinating.
Why do people bring up marrying animals or children? Why would that even cross your mind, pervert?
Makes the same amount of sense.
How do you define perversion? To many, an act of marriage between people of the same gender could be perverted...
I love God!
Good for you.
I love gays!
Here's a puzzler for all the folks out there screaming in righteous indignation and staunch religious zeal about the proepect of gays not being discriminated against...if being gay is such a huge violation of all things "christian", why didn't Jesus ever condemn them?
When Jesus said, "Love one another," he didn't specify genders, did he?
Not in any version of the "bible" I've ever read. But look at it from a historical and societal perspective. If Jesus was an unmarried male in his 30's, and outcast from society, and lived with 12 other unmarried male outcasts, the chances are extremely good that he was gay, himself.
It is labeled a sin in the Bible, just like other sins every human makes. No one talking about locking anyone up, or stopping people from making choices.
Oh, you mean "sins" like eating shellfish, wearing clothing of mixed fibers, etc? Got news for ya...nothing in the Old Testament is supposed to apply. And actually, there is a very large organized effort to stop people from making the choice to marry. So again...if being gay was such a huge no-no to the Christian religion, why didn;t the guy who founded it ever find the time to say anything about it?
One minor correction I forgot to make. Not every human sins. Only religious ones. A sin is defined as a violation of the rules, dictates and mores of one's own chosen religion. By definition, atheists are sinless.
@ Dave: By your logic, if someone doesn't believe in the “Social Contact” and choose not to abide by the law derived from it, can they claim to be lawful? The vast majority of us were born into the “Social Contract” but how many of us signed on to it? I don’t recall where I agreed not to kill or steal but if I did partake in those actions I would be judged by a group of people who see such actions as wrong.
Many will claim they don’t believe or following the laws in religion because it is made up by some person seeking power and god is not real. The same argument can be made about any law created by any so called authority. It’s not worth following because it was drafted and is being enforced by a person seeking to enslave the people and attain power.
really, harvesting? don't christians claim that we are born into sin? are you claiming that people choose to be born?
Harvesting, you are completely incorrect. There ARE nutbags out there who insist that all glbt's be locked up, quarantined, or killed. We are working only for Marriage EQUALITY, which we do NOT "already have", so don't even bother to go down that tired road.
Jesus did not condemn anyone, other than calling out the pharisees and scribes as the hypocrites that they were. He made it quite clear that judgement rested with God alone. However, he also advised those sinning to not sin anymore. Think of the adultress and his retort to those who wanted to stone her; Let he who is without sin cast the first stone...
We should have the right to discriminate against whoever we wish. If I don't like gays or whites or blacks or latinos or chinese or whoever, I should have the right to not hire them, serve them, associate with them or sell anything to them if I wish. Just like they have the right not to patronize my place of business. If I am forced to serve them, then I am being discriminated against. What happened to my rights to run my business as I see fit? Political Correctness is killing this country.
So you'd have no issue with being discriminated against? *LOL*
I award the Gold Star for Stupidity to your post. Thank you for reminding us what the 1500's were like.
Don't insult the Renaissance! The 1300s marked the dying of the Dark Ages, a more appropriate time span for bigoted types.
I wonder how many people feel the same way? I happen to think this country is way too PC. The thought police are out in force every day.
I know right! Its so hard to be civil and polite and considerate of others! Oh, I too long for the days when I could defame anyone or toss derogotory names around willy nilly. Where has the good times gone! woe is me!
Gee and they said dinosaurs and Neanderthals are extinct. They are alive and doing well it appears.
Yes. Just go to New Orleans this month to the French Quarter. They are dressed like women and have feathers and lipstick. If you get a chance to collect dna samples please publish which gene is the gay gene so we can breed it out of future genrrations as we would MS or cancer.
I've finally gotten rid of my last gay employee, due to "cut backs." If I had known the three I've gotten rid of were gay, I would not have hired them in the first place, not qualified, found someone better qualified, etc. It is to bad that I cannot say, "I didn't hire you because I did not want to."
*yawn*
You are a bigot and you make me sick!
No, they're a troll, and you're making them happy.
Boo. You're just trying to get a rise out of people.
Don't respond to this neanderthal..it will just bring him/her pleasure. =)
I wonder how many people feel the same way? I happen to think this country is way too PC. The thought police are out in force every day.
You mean, TOO bad. If you're going to troll, at least use proper grammar.
Really, this is the internet, there is no proper grammar. That is like telling a black person in Baltimore to speak proper English in the workplace. No, you can't ax me a question. It is a pointless battle that you will never win.
Your goat is calling for you.
do you bible bangers actually believe the world is only 6,000 years old and some mystical thing created it???? this is the most ignorant thing and is unconprehendable. where were all the dinasors involved in this? you people have never had a conversation with this god thing or had any proof that there is one. you just say "have faith". faith in what? in some thing or someone that can't even show itself? all of these quotes from a book that was written by some delusionable individual/group to justify your point is unbelieveable.
I know, isn't that crazy? you are part of the 30%
Why cant you guys get that equation? You use the same arguments that were used to repress the civil rights and freedoms of a minority of people (blacks) for centuries, yet somehow this argument is valid against gays????
Really???
Fifty years ago it was considered immoral and illegal to get married to the person you love...if they were black. Now it's considered immoral and illegal to get married to the person you love...if they're gay.
Anyone want to stand up and say they agree with the first statement? Then why would you agree with the second? Marriage should be about LOVE, not your body parts or skin color and any other nonsense...
By the religious line of thinking, a marriage between a man and a woman where he beats on her and cheats on her is considered more moral than a loving relationship between two men/two women. You cannot argue with non-logic like that.
Or, as a wise man once said, "Haters gonna hate".
Because its not "illegal" to "marry" the person they "love" because they are "gay". It is simply not recognized as such by the state. Find a compelling state interest for the state to do so and then you might have a case.
what is the compelling state interest in denying people their rights?
I think it's curious how those of you that dislike gay people sure do read all of the articles posted about the subject...
Gay people pay taxes just like straight folks and deserve the exact same rights. Being gay is not contagious...so calm down.
But don't you understand?! Gay marriage will somehow wreck their own marriages!!! Still trying to figure out the details on how that works...
Lol .. go figure. Oh no! Gay marriage is legal.. now my children will be gay! How will I face my friends?!
I'm not sure how that works either. What, straight folks are going to stop getting married just because gays can? Or could is be straight conservative parents just don't want to explain little Johnny's parental situation to their children?
It certainly is contagious! EVIL is contagious!
Calling complete strangers "evil" is not very nice.. Someone needs to learn some manners.
I just caught EVIL from your comment! Help! Ack! !!!Hack!!!
unfortunately for those around you, your stupidity and bigotry are much more contagious than gay.
He wasn't calling them evil. He was calling their behaivior evil.
I'm glad that gays are finally able to get married. The good thing is this sets a precedent whereby the goverment cannot obstruct true love like that between an elderly man and a child or a 30 year old teacher and her student. Hands off my body!
Shove it.
Yes just like giving women the right to vote led to animals voting and freeing slaves led to you not being able to keep pets. Such logic in these slippery slope arguments! Right On!
Your comparisons make no sense. Consenting adults vs adult and child? Really??
They're afraid of "TEH GHEY AJENDA!!1!!"
I can't dispute that it is very likely that there are many people out there who just dislike gay people and that is that....however, there are others that, according to their religious belief, believe that God ordained that marriage should be between a man and a woman. They don't dislike, hate or persecute individuals who are gay. They simply don't agree with them...just like gay people don't agree with them regarding their beliefs. I make this comment to clarify something that is very important and no one seems to be paying attention to: If I don't agree with something you do, it doesn't mean I hate you. If I don't agree with something you do, it doesn't mean I don't respect you as a person. If I don't agree with you, it doesn't mean I don't actually admire lots of things about you. We just disagree. Period.
Alip- My sentiments exactly.
We should have the right to discriminate against whoever we wish. If I don't like gays or whites or blacks or latinos or chinese or whoever, I should have the right to not hire them, serve them, associate with them or sell anything to them if I wish. Just like they have the right not to patronize my place of business. If I am forced to serve them, then I am being discriminated against. What happened to my rights to run my business as I see fit?
I think there are still countries that allow that kind of behavior. You should move.
You never had the right to discriminate at will. All men are created equal. Does it get lonely under that white sheet and hood, thinking that you are somehow better than any other race on the planet? Come join the human race . . .
All men may be created equal. After that the quality theory breaks down pretty fast.
Pretty lame trolling attempt. I only give it a 5.
You have a valid point. I'm black and I agree with you 100%.
Tell me more about yourself, so I can sure to discriminate againt you, a hateful human being.
go to a country that doesn't care. you'll be very happy there amongst the haters.
Wow Gyrgul....sucks to be you....
Finally this is indeed a brave new world.....
And only the brave will embrace the tide of change that really has already come and gone...it passed you by Gyrgul and there is no going back. I don't think even North Korea will take you now.
I think people should be able to run their business any way they see fit. Serve whoever they want, or not serve whoever they want. If they kill their business, it is on them.
Why dont these people just crawl under a rock, it is where they belong.
they actually never crawled out.....they just got a computer under their rock with them......
the rock, closet, wherever, people should stay put.
I agree – southerners and fundies should crawl back into their dark holes and let the rest of the country live better.
Because we ROCK!! Yeah!! Woo! Under a rock is the new "black" folks!!
you really have to ask yourself "why", regardless of the answer you will get, I think "just because it's wrong" is not a real answer, learn to go deeper in analyzing things, you'll be much better off.....
Great speech by a master talker. Full of the promises of Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, and Equality for all.
I noticed, however, that he did not give even lip-service to those tiniest, weakest, and most defenseless Americans who are waiting – and hoping – to be born. Those little Unborn Americans who still do not have the Most Fundamental of All Rights – the Right to Life.
But then again, since they cannot vote, perhaps they don't deserve his affections, nor room for even a passing mention, in yet one more speech, by an elder brother, never short of words.
They are American fetuses if anything, not babies and no, they don't "hope" to be born, they cannot hope, breath or do anything without their host mother, so basically a non issue.....
I see. An unborn human can be either a baby or a fetus. I just depends on who you ask. If the mother wants to carry the unborn to term then it's a baby. If not, then it's a fetus. What happens if the mother is killed in a car accident by another driver on her way to get an abortion. Is the driver charged for the death of two people or just one. HMMMM.
Without any interruption by the host mother the expectation is I hope that the child would be born. Call the interruption whatever you like.
David in Houston, My apologies and yes you are right on, I should have mentioned the slaughtering of the unborn. I was guilty of endorsing that behavior years ago and suffer for it each and every day. There is not a day that goes by that I don't regret my support of the decision and the desire to change what happened that tearful day. Maybe he/she would have been the next president, the doctor that discovers the cure for cancer, or a father or mother who were finally able to have children after years of trying. Again, thank you for this reminder, Mr. David in Houston.
Pjr, statistics don't lie, he/she would've probably ended up in jail, have a terrible childhood and a miserable life.......if you decided that way at the time there must have been reasons and those reasons would've been there when he/she grew up, probably screwing not only her life but yours and the other parent lives too......said that I am sorry you had to take that decision but regretting it will do you no good while putting it in perspective will definitely help you to overcome it.
As the abortion rate has risen, the crime rate has fallen, after the appropriate lag time. Connection?
Somebody should do a cost-benefit analysis on the topic. I think it might show that our society and its citizens have benefited greatly by giving poor women the option of aborting an unwanted fetus. Not having to bear and raise an unwanted child has given these women a second chance at a decent life they wouldn't have had otherwise. Not to mention the positive impact abortion has had on welfare services.
About 55% of Americans support legal abortion (a number that has been increasing).. Until you manage to elect a Santorum or a Bachmann, you will not get your way,
And yet I bet you get upset when you hear of some 17 year old throwing her baby in a dumpster. Why would that upset you?
The planet needs fewer humans.
Sounds good. You volunteering to go first?
Glad you aren't my parent.....What else do you fake?
Grim – If you love him and I am sure you do because he is your son, you will not hide your true feelings. You will share with him that man does not lie with man the way a man lies with a woman. Just like you shared with him that stealing, and other crimes often times have serious consequences. Just like you told him not to touch the stove when it is on. If you do, you WILL get burnt. Be well, Grim.
Well, yeah, man does not lie with man exactly the same way that man generally lies with woman, but I hope you go into that much detail during your birds and bees talk...
Felicia – For clarification – The God of the Bible and who inspired men to pen it, does not condone the abominable behavior of the gay and lesbian sector. Yes, we are to love people, but if the behavior is contrary to God's Word, we are to hate it and speak out against it. You are either living the Truth or living a lie. Truth is Jesus and the lie and deception comes from the pit of hell....the devil. You are either in God's corner through Jesus (John 14:6) or you are being controlled by the deceiver. I choose Jesus.
You folks that presume to speak for god slay me. You are THE worst examples of Christ-like love.
Gregory – I am NOT speaking for God (capital G). I am speaking what His word says in the Old and New Testament. Even Jesus speaks out against gay and lesbian behavior. Besides, if you don't stand for something you will fall for anything. This is the not the way of our country. It was founded on the word of God and many of our founding fathers lost everything for not compromising on the Word of God. I love, but hate the sin (missing God's mark....perfection). I love and will tell you what God loves and God hates.
I pick the deceiver...it's a tie!
There is never a 'tie'. Keep choosing the Deceiver and you will die!
Choose the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and Live!
Your choice – your eternal destiny.
How about I reject ALL the "gods" in your antiquated blood cult, and stick with using my intelligence?
PJR – Blessed are you - for in the same way, they persecuted the prophets before them. Keep speaking the Truth – the Lord will always be pleased when we speak Light into Darkness. Even though the Darkness has not comprehended it. Grace.
One can advise comfortably from a safe port.
BS R U.
Jesus didn't say anything against gays.......the bible on the other hands is quite clear, but it is clear also about owning slaves, killing, eye for eye, etc......to me on this issue either God was confused or he was sending mixed signals.....
I'm afraid it is you who are confused. But, then the unspiritual man cannot receive the things that are of God.
Repent, believe upon Jesus and His finished work on the cross, receive the Holy Spirit that your eyes might be opened to understand the Word of God.
"This is not the way of our country" Who the hell are you? Let me give you a clue....self righteous, self centered, and self important. Our country is made of a melting pot of folks from all over with different ideas, religious beliefs. Yes, even the Muslim ones (that I sense you also despise with the help of your bible). THAT is what our country is founded on. Equality for all men. Not just the ones that YOUR bible teach you to hate. PS the small g in god and the small b in bible were intended for your benefit of pin heads that wound benefit from also reading Matthew 7:3.
Yeah, yeah, yeah . . .the bible also says that when your child misbehaves you should take them to the front gate of the city and stone them to death. Let me know when you've taken care of that bit of the Lord's work.
@pjr I am a born again Christian – I know what the Bible/Jesus/God says. You must have missed the parts where it said "judge not lest ye be judged" and "love one another as I have loved you".
It's not my 'job' to say if people are doing something wrong in their bedrooms – I will leave that task up to my Saviour on judgement day. And besides – 'let (s)he who is without sin, cast the first stone"!
When Jesus said, "Love one another," he didn't specify genders, did he?
@pjr I am a born again Christian – I know what the Bible/Jesus/God says. You must have missed the parts where it said "judge not lest ye be judged" and "love one another as I have loved you".
It's not my 'job' to say if people are doing something wrong in their bedrooms – I will leave that task up to my Saviour on judgement day. And besides – 'let (s)he who is without sin, cast the first stone"! (another part you might have missed when you were reading your Bible)
See my above post, but Did Jesus Speak English? Cause you seem to quote him in English alot. Too funny.
Fred Phelps, is that you?
No, pjr, you are claiming KNOWLEDGE, not faith, that the bible is the world of god. Ergo, you are claiming to speak for god
Since most of my post are not showing up Im moving on,
I don't especially like the gay lifestyle or gay agenda. That does not make me "phobic" or a "hater." It makes me a non-liker. Just because someone does not embrace something does not mean they hate it.
This is a familiar tactic libs use to try and put people on the defensive.
"Not support" or "not like" does not equal hate.
Jane being a non-liker does not make you a hater but separating yourself in an "us" and "them " mentality does. We're all on this big blue ball together. Why not decide not to hate so much and then disguise it as "oh geez gosh I didn't really mean anything at all by not liking people". This is what religion does to people. It warps their brains into non-responsibility for words and actions.
Oh come-on Greg!
Trying to put that thin veneer around your cauldron of putrid hatred is not working.
Just like is frowned on to make love in public no matter which way you swing it should apply to gays in the same way. I should not have to watch a couple of gays kissing in front of my children in a movie house just because the gays think they are special and should be able to do anything that they want to.
dan: who is claiming that gays say they should be able to do anythng they want to?
making up lies does not help your argument
I take it you "don't support" or "don't like" freedom, equality, and civil rights as well then? I "don't like" people with very strong garlic breath but I would never try to limit someone's right to eat that particular food.
It's thinking that there's a "gay lifestyle" that make you a "hater."
I'm gay. What do you imagine you know of my lifestyle?
I accept gays and love all people because the bible tells me to do so. However, there are some things that I do not condone.
that makes no sense the bible doesnt tell you to accept gays at all.... smh
It's about equal rights, felicia. what part of that do you not understand?
Gay rights activists have to try the "equality" argument because their position is indefensible. Marriage is one man, one woman. Always has been, always will be. Trying to change the definition of marriage is not the answer. Equal treatment under the law can be provided with civil unions.
Civil Unions are NOT the same as Marriage Equality. Get used to it, and grow UP.
The very definition of marriage is a union between a man and a woman. that is the definition. You cannot change the definition of what the word actually means.
Wrong. There are numerous examples in the Bible of men having more than one wife, including Abraham (a wife and a concubine), Jacob (two of each), David (at least three wives, one of whom was his mistress prior to marriage), and Solomon (multiple wives, concubines, and lovers).
that was old testament, pre-christ... sounds more like Islamic polygamy
Nick – Do you even have any thoughts about what you have said or do you just parrot what you've been brainwashed to believe? Try being original if you want to be convincing.
I thought that they were wanting equality in Civil marriage. Have they been asking for something else? Let me know. B.
Who said that a secular marriage is between one man and one woman? Subtracting religion from the subject deflates your case.
Good point since marriage has been around longer than religion.
But to prove your point, I would say you have to prove gay marriages was around also before religion. Otherwise, the pro-gay argument is without substance or proof, just opinions.
Civil Unions don't provide the same protections.
As times change, definitions change. This debate is a perfect example of this....Marriage nowadays is better expressed as the union of two mutually consenting adults...Painful for many to hear...In the end, it can only be individually defined...
@Nick "…Marriage is one man, one woman. Always has been, always will be."
Not a true statement at all, as soon as people like you die out, the definition of marriage will be changed. 🙂
Nick: Since you cannot be legally married without a state license, the state decides what marriage is or isn't. "Separate but equal" was rejected in the 1960's and it will be rejected now. The prohibition on gays marrying will fall to the 14th amendment in the same manner that interracial marriage did.
Obama claims that he is a Christian; I would like to know what bible he is reading
I am a Gay Christian. I read the same bible as you. Enough said.
So what does it says? What did you read that says it is okay?
@Felicia – mine says "love one another as I have loved you."
It also says that a man who lies with another man is an abomination.
According to the great Jewish philosopher Maimonides there are 613 commandments to be obeyed in the Hebrew Bible. Why pick out just one? Why not start a crusade against idolatry, a sin the authors of the Hebrew Bible spent a lot more ink on. You've got Deuteronomy 13 as a road map on how to get started on annihilating anyone who doesn't believe as you do. Start out simple by destroying a city and all the people in it. Also their cattle. Never forget the cattle, toward which YHWH had a real animosity.
"16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16 of course.
It says whoever, doesnt say only men or woman or gays or straight it says whoever. Which is all including gays like me who Love Him and believed His Word.
I know two gay couples that have both adopted. All are excellent parents. All three of the kids have come from foster care where their birth parents were either drug addicts or abandoned them. There has been dramatic improvement in their social skills, speech therapy, and education. I would be appalled that some of these "Christians" on here would rather these kids to stay in foster care or orphanages and remain disadvantaged, than allow them into good homes with gay couples. I think a gay couple can provide a safe and nurturing environment for kids. The next time a so called good "Christian" spews their hate about gay parents....ask em how many kids have they adopted? or brought in as foster parents? Most of the time they are taking care of their grandkids, because of there great parenting skills with there own kids ended up so well.
They didn't adopt in the South, did they?
RIght in the heart of the Bible Belt!!!
Y'All can say anything you want but being gay is just plain wrong and against physically wrong also.
When starting a statement with "y'all," you have said all you needed to.
Jesus will never accept union of gay people. What will you do then after you meet Jesus? Is this life about all fun with no thought on what Jesus told us?
And i present to you someone who speaks for Jesus! Point out to me in the bible where Jesus said gay marriage is wrong.
Gladly. Jesus is God made man/flesh. Jesus is the way, the truth and the light. God said no man shall lay beside another man. No woman shall lay beside another woman...Deuteronomy.
I would take a picture with him and post it on fb.
that has got to be one of the best replies i have read :).
Holly, I am so glad that you speak for Jesus on this subject matter. Finally someone besides G.W.Bush that hears and can speak for Jesus. BTW....what happens if you are wrong? What if your own prejudices of the unknown are making you say these things and then using the cover of Jesus to justify your narrow mindedness? Please educate yourself, don't always assume that everything that was written in the bible should be taken as law. It was written by Man as a guide to live one's life, not to be used to cast judgement on anyone else just to make you feel better or superior about yourself.
Wouldn't that be between me and Jesus and not me and the government or rednecks? Or do you personally talk to him because if you do there is medication for that.
Holly, Jesus is dead, so I doubt I'll meet him. Thanks anyway.
I'm Jewish...who's Jesus?
He's the "straight" leader of their hate club who hung out with 12 guys and constantly"slept with" one called John. Oh yeah, he got in the gospels...... The tart.
Jesus is the way, the truth and the light. Jesus is God made flesh.
Jesus supposedly never married or had kids, maybe he was unspokenly gay? Hey with 12 apostles, one never knows...
Holly,
Listen to the cry of a person in labor at the hour of giving birth – look at a child's struggle for understanding and acceptance – a dying person's struggle for equality under law and then tell me whether something that begins and ends thus could be intended for enjoyment or "fun."
Why wouldn't he? If he ever existed, (which he most likely didn't), he'd have been a gay man, himself.
Jesus probably will shake my hand and say, "Oh, Holly is not going to be here, since we don't accept haters up in here."
For much of the rest of the world, yes. I'm sure there are at least a billion people who have never heard the name, any more than you've heard of their spiritual leaders. And, believe it or not, everyone who embraces a different belief system than Christianity knows that theirs is the One True Religion, just as you do.
Holly: What Jesus would accept or reject has no bearing on our laws. Jesus would not eat pork. Want to put ham producers out of business?
On another note, I know a lot of straight parents who should never have been allowed to have kids!!!
I have heard of a straight person who killed a child. Therefore we should have gay marriage.
Straight person who killed a child? Timothy McVay! Along with over a hundred others, he killed an entire day care center.
What a bunch of socialists.
Thank you!
What a joke ! Trying to MAKE people like gays ! The politically correct will have a field day with this statement but I speak the truth,unlike the politically correct and their lies.
Make people like gays??? yes the gays are holding down people who dont like them and will only let them lose if they swear to like them. You dont make sense.
Just eliminate laws that hold gays down or denies them equality under law. I am fully aware hateful people are going to hate. Go ahead!
no one is trying to make you like them. you have a right to hate whomever you choose, for whatever reason you choose. what you don't have a right to do is to deny them their civil rights.
Just curious...Has anyone done a study on how many of our children that have been abused, molested, beat and tortued, left alone, or died from starvation, have gay parents. Oh and how about all the young people that are getting into trouble these day. Just curious!!
Perhaps we can start with the New Mexico boy who shot his mother, three siblings, and his politically active pastor father?
This is a BLOG, not an official ARTICLE. Liken this to an op-ed section in a paper.
Blogs, by definition, do not have to be neutral or objective. These are definitely peoples' opinions and not stated facts.
CNN keeps the blogs with the lengthy comment sections close to the articles because they stimulate dialogue (and generate web traffic).
An article about gays on CNN and first out of the comment gate? Hateful Christians spewing their mean spirited venom.
Notice in the few comments so far the hate-group Family Research Council hateful talking points.
"spewing their mean spirited venom."
Ask Chick-fil-a about people spewing their mean spirited venom.
Chick-fil-a is spewing their own venom as they funnel money to hateful Christian groups.
Fox News' forums are closed down. That's why all these hateful mor0ns are here at CNN commenting. Apparently, the hate in their hearts must be expressed.
No, I don't care what you are hearing from the media, most people in America are still against Gay marriage
@ Susie
"No, I don't care what you are hearing from the media, most people in America are still against Gay marriage"
Not at all, most of us just waiting for all you haters to die out. The clock is ticking... Tick tock, tick tock...
What about the rights of children? Don't they have the right to have a mother and a father, as all children do? Artificially creating laws that say not having a mother or a father as OK, only considers the desires of some adults that believe any love between adults is the same, when naturally they are much different! This is a case of when "good is called evil," and "evil good" with the President and others triumphing it as a civil rights issue, all the while ignoring the best interests of our future generation.
So should we take kids away from single parents??
Not to mention negating the marriages of straight couples who can't, or won't, have children...
Children have a right to a loving/supportive family. Are you saying that a single parent, mother or father is not adequate? your argument does not make sense. Your opinion, if i am reading this correctly is that being gay is evil....well that is your opinion, as much as I respect that, don't try to impose your opinion on the minority. Also, it IS a civil rights issue; this is per the ACLU. Maybe you should read more into Gay rights/ Gay Marriage, before spouting off an argument that doesnt make sensse.
This is a good point. Children are always better off to be in a home with loving mothers and fathers, which is the ideal put into law for marriage. For the single parents, my heart goes out to them, and we should support them as much as we can. Yet, this doesn't mean we go out and change marriage to include only a single adult. Marriage is reserved for the ideal family structure and for raising our future generation, not a test bed for social experiments just because somehow our ideals have changed. This isn't progress, no matter how hard you try to justify it.
Nobody is changing Marriage!! it is simply the process of extending rights! Reserved for the ideal family structure?? what exactly is ideal?? Some parents i know shouldnt even be parents? test bed for social experiments? Two females or Two males raising children did not just happen yesterday...it has been happening for years! There is no evidence that gay couples raise worse children than straight families. Once again...do your research! And yes it is progress when we extend marriage rights to two individuals who love and are committed to each other. How is gay marriage going to hurt your marriage? Why is this such an important thing to deny gay couples the right to marry?
Children have a right to loving parents. Period. I would much rather a child be adopted by a gay couple that will love them than be stuck in a welfare system or with deadbeat parents.
so the best interest of future generations is to NOT let them get married to whom they chose? Get with the program...either you move forward with the rest of the nation or you can stay behind. I choose to progress forward not backward.
Wouldn't it be better to have two loving gay parents than one single parent? Not to take anything away from single parents, but it's a tough job to do all by yourself. 50% of marriages end in divorce so what are you proposing we do about that issue? And perhaps by your reasoning we should make it illegal to have a child outside of marriage?
Furthermore, marriage is not synonymous with having children, especially in these modern times. So it is a completely separate issue anyway.
Jo; No, children do not have a "right" to a mother and father.
J...please enlighten me what exactly is bias in this article? besides the writer quoting individuals there is nothing in this article that articulates personal opinion and biases. He/She is simply stating facts.
It's biased because only those people whose views lie on one side are used, or heavily used, without giving voice to those with opposite viewpoints, when in reality America is still split half and half.
That's not reality, that's you living in La La Land because you don't want to face up to the fact that the times are a-changin'.
So, Jo – every time the views and rights of, say, black people are discussed, "real" journalism requires that someone from the KKK be represented? And *NOT* to do so automatically yields "bias"? Seriously??!?
And...every single time the views and rights of, let's say, evangelical Christians are discussed, "real" journalism requires that someone who is diametrically opposed to evangelical Christianity MUST be represented, lest the entire exercise is "biased"? Really??!?
@Jo
"CNN is heavily biased, especially in this issue."
Then don't come to CNN's news website anymore?
Times has changed, perhaps you should as well. Your view of ideal family still stuck in 1950s, and the rest of us just don't have time to wait for you anymore.
Can the writers at CNN ever create an article that isn't bias? Maybe you should write "Opinion" on things like this.
Does unbiased equal anti gay in your world?
So now that we are a gay country are we going to go around the world and force our gay rights in other countries like we are forcing democracy on other countries?
Discuss my fellow gay countrymates
cdub2k,
Many other countries have had equal rights for gays for some time.
NO, NOT ANYMORE THEN PROMOTING BLACKNESS AROUND THE WORLD AFTER THE CIVIL RIGHT FOR BLACKS. AMAZING HOW THERE ARE STILL MANY IGNORANT PEOPLE OUT THERE.
CNN is heavily biased, especially in this issue.
Once again, Jo, point out to me in this article what exactly is bias? bias= expressing ones opinions that sway toward one side or the other.
It is an Op-ed piece. Of course it is an opinion
The freaks think that they matter when all of this is nothing but a political point and nothing else...LOL!