If Americans can vote away the fundamental rights of one group, why not another?
I’m entirely tongue in cheek, but I makes a point we shouldn’t do it.
Well, it seems there are more straight people than gays. There are also more white people than black, more white people than Hispanic. It seems that we the people have forgotten that little line:
"Fist they came for the Jews, but I wasn’t a Jew, so I didn’t say anything. They came for the political opponents, but I wasn’t a political opponent, so I didn’t say anything. Finally they came for me and there was no one left to say anything…."
How do people not understand that fundamental rights are just that: fundamental. If you vote someone else's rights way, then someone can vote away yours. It seems people vote on what they personally are comfortable with. What happens when someone finds that you don't make them personally comfortable?
Europe is more civilized....
How would I know:
I see you didn't read that at all:
There was a Maine State law passed granting that right. It was voted down. Thus yes, a right was voted away: a statutory right granted by the legislature and with the governor's support.
"Lifestyle Choice" If it's a choice, see if you can be gay for a week. You can't anymore than a gay person can be straight.
Care to try again?
No, it's not a religious thing or if it is, there are many religions that permit gays to marry. Why do we blindly follow Christianity? Separation of church and state?
When did marriage become a right?
Nice to know most people don't even know their own laws....
I said "IS" more civilized; not "WAS."
You're basically saying it's not civilized because the holocaust happened there? Do you see any native Americans around you?
We committed genocide too: manifest destiny anyone? Typhoid fever laced blankets as goodwill gifts?
2nd try and second strike.
"They in your example is us: the American people."
Gee, you mean the same ones who formed lynch mobs to "vote" to kill black people in the south? If the south could "vote" for slavery, they would have. It took a civil war to get rid of that.
Also German People, American People, it's all "they" in my example. The German people were tricked into letting Hitler get power. The American People were tricked into letting bush get into power. Both Hitler and Bush used ... o what's the word now "enhanced interrogation techniques." It's so cliche to call it torture now-a-days. Gitmo, Abu Grav, o well.
"They" is a public that doesn't understand what it's doing and it works perfectly here.
- 1 decade agoBest Answer
For the poster above, a civil union =/= a marriage. There are many rights offered to married folks that people in a civil union do not get.
Example: In Florida, one gay man or one gay woman can adopt, but a Gay couple under the "bonds" of a civil union cannot.
Example: Even though each state has its own laws around marriage, if someone is married in one state and moves to another, their marriage is legally recognized. For example, Oregon marriage law applies to people 17 and over. In Washington state, the couple must be 18 to wed. However, Washington will recognize the marriage of two 17 year olds from Oregon who move there. This is not the case with Civil Unions. If someone has a Civil Union in Vermont, that union is not recognized in any other state. As a matter of fact, two states, Connecticut and Georgia, have ruled that they do not have to recognize civil unions performed in Vermont, because their states have no such legal category. As gay marriages become legal in other states, this status may change.
I am not a homosexual and am not in any way biased, but that is absurd. Marriage, no matter what it used to be, is defined in the 21st century social policy of today as simply the state recognized union between two non related, human beings in love.
There is literally nothing wrong with that statement; and for the close minded lot that feel this would slippery slope into apes marrying their borthers and so forth, come off it.
If we can have over 11,000 laws regarding guns and gun ownership, I'm sure we could logically handle two gay people getting married.Source(s): EDIT: Are the thumbs down from people who have a valid response and are typing it up or from religious nut jobs who don't have the adequate capacity to respond?
- 1 decade ago
"Europe is more civilized" Ha! So the Holocaust happened in Africa, did it? Maybe the Antarctic?
So the bans on Muslim clothing in France and Germany were not part of Europe? Race riots in France and the UK were offshore, perhaps?
I agree with your basic premise about fundamental rights, but your final statement is nonsensical. Humans naturally view themselves as part of specific groups, and it take a level of intelligence, understanding, empathy, and compassion to extend that group to include all humanity. It happens everywhere, not just in the US.
- TruthSeeker818Lv 61 decade ago
When did Marriage become a right? You do know the govt can turn you down for a marriage license right? Marriage isnt in the Constitution.
Marriage is a religious sacrament, centuries old. Its just like Baptism and communion, the Gov`t cant change that.
And your little quote there about first they came for the jews...well the "They" in your quote is us, the American people. The American people voted against gay marriage, not the gov`t. So your quote doesnt quite fit with the situation
- FlivverLv 51 decade ago
Sorry, the link wouldn't work for me. Are you talking about gays or smokers?
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- How_Would_I_KnowLv 41 decade ago
There is one central problem with your rant... nobody voted away anybody's rights.
Gays have the same exact rights as normal people. 100% identical.
What is being rejected is the demand that homosexuals deserve special treatment and extra rights because they've made a "lifestyle choice."
- anonacoupLv 71 decade ago
But, without scapegoats people would have to blame themselves for their own problems, so....