Why Gay Marriage Matters
 

Yet another story that shows why not allowing same sex marriage causes real harm to real families.

Pond ended up dying and her partner and children had virtually no contact with her prior to her death:

This is not an abstract. This is a real family in a real crisis and they were treated abominably. And there is one and only one reason for that: anti-gay bigotry. Let's hear those "pro-family" groups defend what happened to this family.

Things like this really tick me off. I have no words.

Bigots should die.

that is beyond rediculous. i can't even think of a more fitting word than that. it's fucking pathetic what this world is coming to

I can not even think of a reason not to allow same sex marraiges, Or atleast some form of recognized civil union.

The only thing I don't like about homosexuality is it's glorification.
I went to my little cousin's high school and it's like they think it's cool to be gay or something.. And wtf are gay rights, aside from the union issue wtf right should they have that they do not have already? Should they have more rights than straight people? 'cause the way I understand it, all human beings are guarunteed the same rights.

I believe when the gay community talks about "gay rights" they are generally refering to the rights that other people have, but they are denied, based solely on the fact that they are gay.

In theory, all human beings are guaranteed the same rights, but in practice it just isn't so. Based on your social status, financial status, race, sexuality, etc, you either gain or lose multiple rights that other people either have or don't have.

A good example of a "gay right" which homosexuals are denied would be marriage. This is what people are talking about when they say they are "for gay rights." It isn't that they wants rights of their own that nobody else can have, it's that they want rights that everyone else has but they are denied.

Well put, but can you produce, other than marraige, any rights that gays have been denied because they are gay?

Of course.

Quite often, homosexuals are denied employment or housing based solely on the fact that they are homosexual. Homosexuals are often victims of hate crimes of all sorts. Homosexuals also often cannot adopt, which is particularly unfortunate for homosexual men because they cannot have babies any other way. Homosexuals also cannot serve in the military without hiding the fact that they are homosexual.

It's really no different from any other "subordinate" group. Blacks are denied rights solely because they are black, homeless people are denied rights solely because they are homeless. It's also, quite often, things that are not immediately obvious to the dominant groups(you and I,) because it is things we take for granted.

Anyway, as for homosexuals, marriage is obviously the big one, because without being allowed to marry, they're also denied a lot of other rights and benefits that you gain WHEN you get married. Gay marriage is a lot bigger than simply homosexuals not being allowed to marry. Not being allowed to marry denies you a lot of other things, as well.

From perusing through this thread, you've all said it better than I ever could have.

I agree with you KA, and I may also have picked up on why I come off as a bigot to you sometimes. You see, I do not see myself as a part of a group, I do not see my gay neighbors as part of a group, my half mexican half black friend at work is just Daniel. My neighbors are just Ray and Frank rather than a part of the 'homosexual group'

I see them as individuals, and to me individual rights are the most important rights of all. I see in so many ways the rights of groups trample all over the rights of the individual, for example If you were an employer two people come and apply for a position you have available, one ethnic or gay, the other white. Now for the purpose of this point the white man is credibly more qualified to perform the tasks you need performed. So you hire him.

Now the other applicant (ethnic or gay) even though it can be proven that he is less qualified (for no other reason than to show this point) sues for discrimination.

Now in this situation the only person who's rights are infringed upon is you. You are the sole victim in this situation, you the individual. To cut this rant short, a group mentality is an illness, it is destroying individual liberties.

Discrimination is a problem, but look at who really gets punished in the name of a group.

I would agree with you that people use race as an excuse for things sometimes, which is problematic. This is the main reason I think most feminists are cunts. Many of the feminists I've talked to think women should be SUPERIOR to men, rather than equal.

However, the group mentality is a necessity when an entire group is getting discriminated against. It isn't just a few gay people who are being discriminated against, it's all gay people. However, that does not mean that any time something is done to a gay person, it's done to them because they are gay. That's the error in the logic.

Also, just to use your own example against you(no offense meant, though,) take the same situation except the ethnic minority applicant is better. If you hire the ethnic minority applicant, the white person is going to think that you're hiring the person simply because you want cheap labor or whatever else. Quite often, the white person cannot even fathom that the other applicant might be better. This is the case with most discrimination against hispanics. If a hispanic person gets a job over a white person, it's never said that the hispanic person got it because he was better for the job, it's always said that he got it because he will work for less. Just the same, like you said, if the white person gets the job over the hispanic person, it's never about the white person being better at the job, it's always about the employer being a racist.

This is why I've supported the idea of forcing employers to pay everyone equally for the same job. I think it should be illegal for someone to pay one person less than another person for the same job. This way, if the employer can't pick one over the other simply for cheap labor, the employer has to pick the person that is more qualified.

i totally agree, but with the whole equal pay thing, kinda. 2 people that have the EXACT same job and do it at the same level and quality should get paid the same. if ones a slacker, and doesnt even do it well, they should get paid less IMO

I don't think paying someone less because they don't do as good of a job makes much sense. If they are not doing a satisfactory job, you should fire them and get someone else.

thats a good point hah

I'm not entirely sure if in most places sex determines pay directly. Rather you don't move up as quickly if you're gone on maternity leave a lot, and a lot of "female" jobs such as teachers don't typically pay well.