WH Lists Commitments to LGBT Rights

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
There is nothing impressive about it being on the White House page - Team Obama essentially copied-and-pasted the stuff from his President-Elect site.

And it’s not terribly relevant. We have a generational economic challenge, two current wars, a feisty Russia, a barbarian Iran, unrest in South America, corruption in high government positions…

Learn to understand priorities. Not everyone is a soldier on your Crusade.[/quote]

I sincerely hope that President Obama shares your perspective w.r.t. to gay marriage. So many things on our plate, and he should waste time and effort on gay. fucking. marriage.?! That’s one notch behind getting a playoff set up for college football on the urgency meter.

Forlife, why is it not enough for you to accept that every state that voted on gay marriage has rejected it every time it’s come up on the ballot, even anything-goes California? I’m sure that in time the gay lifestyle will be accepted as mainstream. But as for now, it’s not.

Get over it.

22

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:

I sincerely hope that President Obama shares your perspective w.r.t. to gay marriage. So many things on our plate, and he should waste time and effort on gay. fucking. marriage.?! That’s one notch behind getting a playoff set up for college football on the urgency meter.[/quote]

Gay marriage is a non-issue. If a President Obama spends any political capital on it knowing the national challenges we have on our plate right now, he is committing nothing short of dereliction of duty.

Now, getting a playoff for college football might be somewhere around the Israeli-Palestine conflict in terms of priority, so perhaps we could see a new “playoff czar” appointed. That is a national emergency. :>

23

[quote]Standard Donkey wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Standard Donkey wrote:
Obama should also work with congress to create a tax which will cover the cost of all the stitches required by your kind.

You people are unbelieveable…

What do you mean…“you people?”

LOL

Get ready to watch our particular state that is broke, spend millions to reverse what the people voted for in prop. 8.

Shit, if that happens im gonna turn gay and dance like no one is watching.[/quote]

Just call into work gay… and state you are taking a gay rights day off with Obama reflection and hope, and your job will be secure for many years.

BTW…think twice about your tu-tu dance. I predict it will get turned over by the courts we have in California…because they know better than the people.

24

Obviously, gay equality means nothing to those of you that are straight and incapable of seeing past your own parochial perspective. The same was true of whites who couldn’t care less about equality for blacks because there was nothing in it for them.

It does mean a great deal to gay couples who want to start a family, visit their loved ones in the hospital, have social security benefits, and a host of other important issues to their lives.

I don’t expect it to take precedence over global issues like getting the economy back on track, but I do hope Obama makes headway in the next four years. Time will tell.

25

[quote]forlife wrote:
Obviously, gay equality means nothing to those of you that are straight and incapable of seeing past your own parochial perspective. The same was true of whites who couldn’t care less about equality for blacks because there was nothing in it for them.

It does mean a great deal to gay couples who want to invade your kid’s schools, inundate your churches, (or sue them into the ground altogether) indoctrinate your youth, have sex with your children, spread diseases, have “queer as folk” on primetime channels, twist young and pliable minds, and a host of other important issues to their lives.

I don’t expect it to take precedence over global issues like getting the economy back on track, but I do hope Obama makes headway in the next four years. Time will tell.[/quote]

fixed

26

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Support the LGBT community:
No, let’s leave them alone, and have them leave the “straight people” community alone

Expand Hate Crimes Statutes :
a crime is a crime, dubbing something a hate crime leads to abuse of the laws. Not worth it.

Fight Workplace Discrimination:
Let free people make free decisions. The hiring process in and of itself is discriminatory. Dress and act in a way you think the interviewer will like.

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples:
Get government out of marriage.

Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage :
sure.

Repeal Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell :
this one I’m iffy on. I’ll lean towards repealing, and being even harsher on stupid behavior. Primarilly when it’s sexual

Expand Adoption Rights:
No.

Promote AIDS Prevention:
How? start an organization to do it. I don’t plan on sticking my cock in dangerous places. I say no to giving tax dollars for an agenda.

Empower Women to Prevent HIV/AIDS :
I don’t want to pay for this. You do it if you want it so much.[/quote]

27

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Support the LGBT community:
No, let’s leave them alone, and have them leave the “straight people” community alone

Expand Hate Crimes Statutes :
a crime is a crime, dubbing something a hate crime leads to abuse of the laws. Not worth it.

Fight Workplace Discrimination:
Let free people make free decisions. The hiring process in and of itself is discriminatory. Dress and act in a way you think the interviewer will like.

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples:
Get government out of marriage.

Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage :
sure.

Repeal Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell :
this one I’m iffy on. I’ll lean towards repealing, and being even harsher on stupid behavior. Primarilly when it’s sexual

Expand Adoption Rights:
No.

Promote AIDS Prevention:
How? start an organization to do it. I don’t plan on sticking my cock in dangerous places. I say no to giving tax dollars for an agenda.

Empower Women to Prevent HIV/AIDS :
I don’t want to pay for this. You do it if you want it so much.[/quote]

  1. I really dont think you believe that. Hate crimes are beyond just a regular crime through and through. We’ve had problems with that in San Diego having a fairly large gay population. Hearing trail testimony by people thinking they were just gonna be put in the drunk tank like normal fights, when they go to Hillcrest and get drunk and fight random people they think are gay is absurd. This absurdity is why hate crime laws should exist, people are usually trying to take advantage of the law and they should be punished more for it.

  2. work place discrimination laws are needed, many advantages both socially and economically to have them since a lot of people suck. though i really wish we didnt need them.

  3. yea govn’t should get outta marriage, both sides would be happier. the tax benefits ect can be worked out.

  4. agreed on dont ask dont tell, adoption is iffy, a lot of the studies against same sex adoption are fabrications, i think the good outweighs any negatives in this situation.

  5. if you work in any form of public health youll find out that a lot of people still have stupid views on hiv/aids, get it from kissing, shaking hands, “hanging out” ect. so its still needed at least on the education side.

28

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:

  1. I really dont think you believe that. Hate crimes are beyond just a regular crime through and through. We’ve had problems with that in San Diego having a fairly large gay population. Hearing trail testimony by people thinking they were just gonna be put in the drunk tank like normal fights, when they go to Hillcrest and get drunk and fight random people they think are gay is absurd. This absurdity is why hate crime laws should exist, people are usually trying to take advantage of the law and they should be punished more for it.[/quote]

How the fuck is beating the shit out of people “taking advantage of the law?” It’s BREAKING the law. And such, it should be treated as though a law was broken. It makes NO differences whether or not the person who was beat was gay, or simply looked at a drunk dude funny.

[quote]
2. work place discrimination laws are needed, many advantages both socially and economically to have them since a lot of people suck. though i really wish we didnt need them.[/quote]

Companies that don’t hire valuable gay employees because they are gay are already punished in that they are losing a valuable employee that will now go to another company. Or they could just not say they’re gay. /shrug It isn’t like we straight men go into interviews declaring our love of vagina.

29

[quote]doubleh wrote:
forlife wrote:
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I’m just glad to have a President that agrees with me for a change.

Serious question OP - are you gay?[/quote]

No, he has Bush-rejection syndrome you insensitive bastard!

30

[quote]forlife wrote:
Obviously, gay equality means nothing to those of you that are straight and incapable of seeing past your own parochial perspective. The same was true of whites who couldn’t care less about equality for blacks because there was nothing in it for them.
[/quote]

See, the problem is that you demand fairness and distributive from a government and I understand that-

the problem is though that that includes entitlements that I think no one should have, no matter what their sexual preferences are.

31

[quote]orion wrote:
See, the problem is that you demand fairness and distributive from a government and I understand that-

the problem is though that that includes entitlements that I think no one should have, no matter what their sexual preferences are.
[/quote]

As I see it, the question is whether the “entitlements” provide a large enough return to justify the investment.

Does society benefit significantly from rewarding and holding people accountable for maintaining stable family relationships? I think so. It is good for children, good for the couple, and good for society at large.

It’s more than that, though. Equal rights for gays isn’t just about “entitlements”. It is about having fundamental and fair access to hospitals, employment, etc. The guy that sits next to me at work was with his partner for 25 years and had done all the legal work, but when his partner had a heart attack he was denied visitation rights and had to wait for his partner’s father to arrive and grant permission. His partner ended up dying. That is wrong and should be fixed.

32

[quote]forlife wrote:
orion wrote:
See, the problem is that you demand fairness and distributive from a government and I understand that-

the problem is though that that includes entitlements that I think no one should have, no matter what their sexual preferences are.

As I see it, the question is whether the “entitlements” provide a large enough return to justify the investment.

Does society benefit significantly from rewarding and holding people accountable for maintaining stable family relationships? I think so. It is good for children, good for the couple, and good for society at large.
[/quote]

That is classic utilitarian reasoning and it does not work.

The reason is that there is no way of measuring whether society benefits or not, because that would require the cardinality and inter-subjective comparability of utility functions.

All such reasoning leaves as with is the attempt to rob from each other by pretending to “benefit society”, and that is not enough to justify what would be called “theft” by a less “enlightened” ethical system.

[quote]
It’s more than that, though. Equal rights for gays isn’t just about “entitlements”. It is about having fundamental and fair access to hospitals, employment, etc. The guy that sits next to me at work was with his partner for 25 years and had done all the legal work, but when his partner had a heart attack he was denied visitation rights and had to wait for his partner’s father to arrive and grant permission. That is wrong and should be fixed. [/quote]

Well, that is wrong and should be fixed and private contracts are a great way to do that.

I deny however that you have a “right” to hold a job with a corresponding duty for someone else to give you one just because you are gay.

I think gays and lesbians would make a great partner in a libertarian “leave me alone”-coalition, alas they do not want less government tits but more so that they can suck on them too.

In the end not everyone that is against large parts of your agenda is so because he is homophobic , I would also be against them if they furthered any other agenda.

33

[quote]orion wrote:
The reason is that there is no way of measuring whether society benefits or not, because that would require the cardinality and inter-subjective comparability of utility functions.[/quote]

By that standard, society would grind to a halt since nobody has that kind of information to inform policy decisions regardless of the policy in question. Instead, it is a judgment by lawmakers on the overall costs/benefits of each law.

My friend and his partner had a legal contract, and it was ignored by the hospital. A contract alone isn’t enough.

Nobody has argued for that. However, a person shouldn’t be fired just because he is gay, especially in government positions.

34

[quote]forlife wrote:
orion wrote:
The reason is that there is no way of measuring whether society benefits or not, because that would require the cardinality and inter-subjective comparability of utility functions.

By that standard, society would grind to a halt since nobody has that kind of information to inform policy decisions regardless of the policy in question. Instead, it is a judgment by lawmakers on the overall costs/benefits of each law.
[/quote]

As I said that is basic utilitarian reasoning, look it up.

The problem is that you equate society with governments. Society actually promotes welfare through voluntary exchange and brings us ever closer to the pareto optimum, government however must harm others (taxes) to benefit someone and have no objective way of determining whether that is true or not.

That however leaves the door wide open for the problems that are discussed in the public choice theory. Such a system cannot NOT be abused in a democracy and it is only a matter of time before it does more harm than good.

You see, us libertarians are not just cold hearted bastards who have no soul, we are cold hearted, soulless bastards with a library and a calculator.

Of course it is and a government should make it perfectly clear that such contracts are to be taken serious or else.

Whether government punishes people who discriminate against you or who do not honor your contracts would have the same outcome in this case BUT the second reason is something every libertarian practically must agree to, whereas the first is a big deal breaker.

[quote]
I deny however that you have a “right” to hold a job with a corresponding duty for someone else to give you one just because you are gay.

Nobody has argued for that. However, a person shouldn’t be fired just because he is gay, especially in government positions.[/quote]

Make that, “only government positions” and I agree.

I do believe that everybody has the right to exclude you from his property for whatever misguided reason, but government cannot take your taxes and discriminate against you.

35

[quote]forlife wrote:
It’s more than that, though. Equal rights for gays isn’t just about “entitlements”. It is about having fundamental and fair access to hospitals, employment, etc. The guy that sits next to me at work was with his partner for 25 years and had done all the legal work, but when his partner had a heart attack he was denied visitation rights and had to wait for his partner’s father to arrive and grant permission. His partner ended up dying. That is wrong and should be fixed. [/quote]

Do Texas employers, insurance companies, and hospitals recognize domestic partnerships?

If not, would it ease most of your concerns to move to a state that does?

36

[quote]forlife wrote:
doubleh wrote:
Serious question OP - are you gay?

Yes, I’m gay.
[/quote]

Well then.

37

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
forlife wrote:
It’s more than that, though. Equal rights for gays isn’t just about “entitlements”. It is about having fundamental and fair access to hospitals, employment, etc. The guy that sits next to me at work was with his partner for 25 years and had done all the legal work, but when his partner had a heart attack he was denied visitation rights and had to wait for his partner’s father to arrive and grant permission. His partner ended up dying. That is wrong and should be fixed.

Do Texas employers, insurance companies, and hospitals recognize domestic partnerships?

If not, would it ease most of your concerns to move to a state that does? [/quote]

I think you and Orion are misunderstanding the homosexualist agenda. It’s not about ‘rights’ or ‘equality’ at all (as if ‘equality’ were ever guaranteed by the Constituion.)

Homosexualists work to make society accepting of their disease spreading lifestyle, instead of just buggering each other in private. After they have made sodomy acceptable, they work to make it dominant.

38

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
forlife wrote:
It’s more than that, though. Equal rights for gays isn’t just about “entitlements”. It is about having fundamental and fair access to hospitals, employment, etc. The guy that sits next to me at work was with his partner for 25 years and had done all the legal work, but when his partner had a heart attack he was denied visitation rights and had to wait for his partner’s father to arrive and grant permission. His partner ended up dying. That is wrong and should be fixed.

Do Texas employers, insurance companies, and hospitals recognize domestic partnerships?

If not, would it ease most of your concerns to move to a state that does?

I think you and Orion are misunderstanding the homosexualist agenda. It’s not about ‘rights’ or ‘equality’ at all (as if ‘equality’ were ever guaranteed by the Constituion.)

Homosexualists work to make society accepting of their disease spreading lifestyle, instead of just buggering each other in private. After they have made sodomy acceptable, they work to make it dominant.[/quote]

Posts like this remind me why reading this section of the site is a bad idea. Stupidity abound.

39

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
Support the LGBT community:
No, let’s leave them alone, and have them leave the “straight people” community alone

Expand Hate Crimes Statutes :
a crime is a crime, dubbing something a hate crime leads to abuse of the laws. Not worth it.

Fight Workplace Discrimination:
Let free people make free decisions. The hiring process in and of itself is discriminatory. Dress and act in a way you think the interviewer will like.

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples:
Get government out of marriage.

Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage :
sure.

Repeal Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell :
this one I’m iffy on. I’ll lean towards repealing, and being even harsher on stupid behavior. Primarilly when it’s sexual

Expand Adoption Rights:
No.

Promote AIDS Prevention:
How? start an organization to do it. I don’t plan on sticking my cock in dangerous places. I say no to giving tax dollars for an agenda.

Empower Women to Prevent HIV/AIDS :
I don’t want to pay for this. You do it if you want it so much.

  1. I really dont think you believe that. Hate crimes are beyond just a regular crime through and through. We’ve had problems with that in San Diego having a fairly large gay population. Hearing trail testimony by people thinking they were just gonna be put in the drunk tank like normal fights, when they go to Hillcrest and get drunk and fight random people they think are gay is absurd. This absurdity is why hate crime laws should exist, people are usually trying to take advantage of the law and they should be punished more for it.

  2. work place discrimination laws are needed, many advantages both socially and economically to have them since a lot of people suck. though i really wish we didnt need them.

  3. yea govn’t should get outta marriage, both sides would be happier. the tax benefits ect can be worked out.

  4. agreed on dont ask dont tell, adoption is iffy, a lot of the studies against same sex adoption are fabrications, i think the good outweighs any negatives in this situation.

  5. if you work in any form of public health youll find out that a lot of people still have stupid views on hiv/aids, get it from kissing, shaking hands, “hanging out” ect. so its still needed at least on the education side.

[/quote]

I’d just like to point out that with have our right to property. Affirtmative action and similar things antagonize that, and are not constitutional.

period.

Although I do appreciate the well thought out, polite, competant reply. That is a rarity around here.

40

[quote]ethos14 wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
forlife wrote:
It’s more than that, though. Equal rights for gays isn’t just about “entitlements”. It is about having fundamental and fair access to hospitals, employment, etc. The guy that sits next to me at work was with his partner for 25 years and had done all the legal work, but when his partner had a heart attack he was denied visitation rights and had to wait for his partner’s father to arrive and grant permission. His partner ended up dying. That is wrong and should be fixed.

Do Texas employers, insurance companies, and hospitals recognize domestic partnerships?

If not, would it ease most of your concerns to move to a state that does?

I think you and Orion are misunderstanding the homosexualist agenda. It’s not about ‘rights’ or ‘equality’ at all (as if ‘equality’ were ever guaranteed by the Constituion.)

Homosexualists work to make society accepting of their disease spreading lifestyle, instead of just buggering each other in private. After they have made sodomy acceptable, they work to make it dominant.

Posts like this remind me why reading this section of the site is a bad idea. Stupidity abound.

[/quote]

It isn’t really though. We have legitimate guys like forlife, and we have some fucked up people in that subculture. It’s sad for the decent people, like forlife. Because instead of sotiety seeing homosexuals as am odd little subculture with wierd sexual tendencies. We see them as having pedophiliac tendencies, irresponsible behavior, and radically forcing their lifestyle on churches and schools. Just because of what a certain part of the subculture does. Forlife doesn’t seem to have said anything about homosexuality in schools, he’s already adamantly opposed being able to sue churches for not marrying people (iirc), and he just wants to be able to see his partner if some shit goes down. And have the peace of mind that goes along with it. Agree with a lifestyle or not, we should follow our constitution, while avoiding causing pain to a group of people just because we hold biases.

Most of the people here are very far to either side of the fence here, while the gay guy seems to be in the middle. I do NOT agree with forlife on every aspect of his arguement, but I CAN agree on not diliberately causing pain to a group of people becuase I don’t agree with their lifestyle.

common sense guys, use it.