Virginia bans homosexual civil unions

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

Meh. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted the gist of those enormous posts, but I have to admit that it's incredibly to difficult two or three incredibly lengthy consectutive posts where the quoter and quotee are not clearly labeled.

[Dirty Meg]

Originally posted by Stratos: That post can be view as offensive to some, Dirty Meg, and you may want to edit it.

I will not amend my post because people who restrict other peoples right to enjoy themselves in a way which harms no one else are irredeemable vindictive halfwits. I will however apologise, as my post may appear to imply that all rural Americans are backwards and incestuous. Just to clarify, only those who oppose gay-marriage are.

[ 06-07-2004, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: Dirty Meg ]

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Dirty Meg: quote: Originally posted by Stratos: That post can be view as offensive to some, Dirty Meg, and you may want to edit it.

I will not amend my post because people who restrict other peoples right to enjoy themselves in a way which harms no one else are irredeemable vindictive halfwits. I will however apologise, as my post may appear to imply that all rural Americans are backwards and incestuous. Just to clarify, only those who oppose gay-marriage are. [/QUOTE]Being anti marriage is not a restriction of rights. No-one is forbidding gays from having life cohabitation or sex or raising a child. You are advocating restricting peoples right to determine where their excess energy is spent, and what values they wish to encourage. A society, a collection of individuals has every right to give breeaks and encouragements to selected humans if it believes it serves the best interests for the emotional health, and thus continues sucess of that society.

Might I point out, that despite the request to modify your language, you have essentially called me backwards and incestuous. Incestuous.

Moderators, can we ban this person please?

[Dirty Meg]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Dirty Meg: quote: Originally posted by Stratos: That post can be view as offensive to some, Dirty Meg, and you may want to edit it.

I will not amend my post because people who restrict other peoples right to enjoy themselves in a way which harms no one else are irredeemable vindictive halfwits. I will however apologise, as my post may appear to imply that all rural Americans are backwards and incestuous. Just to clarify, only those who oppose gay-marriage are. [/QUOTE]Being anti marriage is not a restriction of rights. No-one is forbidding gays from having life cohabitation or sex or raising a child. You are advocating restricting peoples right to determine where their excess energy is spent, and what values they wish to encourage. A society, a collection of individuals has every right to give breeaks and encouragements to selected humans if it believes it serves the best interests for the emotional health, and thus continues sucess of that society.

Might I point out, that despite the request to modify your language, you have essentially called me backwards and incestuous. Incestuous.

Moderators, can we ban this person please? [/QUOTE]With respect, I didn't call you incestuous. I said that you were the product of incest. And no, a society shouldn't have the right to decide 'what values they wish to encourage'. A society might encourage the value that Christians are superior to Jews or that Whites are superior to blacks. What harm does it do to you if a man marries another man or a woman marries another woman?

[Timber Loftis]

society, a collection of individuals has every right to give breeaks and encouragements to selected humans if it believes it serves the best interests for the emotional health, and thus continues sucess of that society.

Actually, in this country, we only have the right to give breaks to "selected humans" only where those breaks distinguish between groups of people for "rational" reasons and for purposes that are "legitimate."

Unless of course, you're using a classification that is generally "suspect," such as race or gender, where "strict scrutiny" of your classification will apply, requiring that to use the classification you have "necessary and compelling" reason to do so.

Either way, you have to clear a hurdle of legitimacy to distinguish between groups of people in this country, Yorick (how high, i.e. "rational basis" hurdle or "strict scrutiny," depends on the classification type used). So, it's not a carte blanche right of the majority to chose whom to dole out social privilege to.

Remember, most important of all, the Constitution exists to protect the MINORITY members and classes in society from the whims and abuse of the majority.

Oh, and I know you've heard by "equal protection" schpiel before, just thought you could use a refresher course.

And, Meg, stick to your guns. Inbreds, one and all!!!! [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img] But, be careful, Uncle Dad says he's gonna git you good.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Dirty Meg: I will not amend my post because people who restrict other peoples right to enjoy themselves in a way which harms no one else are irredeemable vindictive halfwits. I will however apologise, as my post may appear to imply that all rural Americans are backwards and incestuous. Just to clarify, only those who oppose gay-marriage are.

Offering insults instead of counter-arguments does nothing to improve your credibility.

[Cloudbringer]

Dirty Meg, slandering the inhabitants of a any state as a whole is bashing an entire group of people based on the attitudes or behaviors of a small number. It's not acceptable to do that to gays, or democrats or the English, Americans or Canadians etc etc and it's not acceptable to make sweeping insulting generalizations in this case, either. I realize the topic is heated and you obviously have a strong opinion that differs with those of others here and in Virgina, but it only inflames things if you toss out wholesale insults like that.

In general, I'd like to remind everyone who posts in this thread to please keep this discussion civil or it will end up being locked.

[Mouse]

Just a couple of gentle reminders. Firstly, from the Rules and Regulations, with which I am sure you are all intimately familiar:-

Be Polite: No targeting of another user by harassing or giving unwarranted attention to or attacking ones race, gender, ethnicity or country. Also, respect each person's views and questions--this includes attacks on NEW users.

and from my contribution to another debate on this forum:-

Danger Phrases
Certain phrases, which can be perfectly innocent in the right tone of voice, can be easily misinterpreted in plain text. Smileys can sometimes get round this, but there are some phrases to avoid as they more often than not cause people to respond badly.

"It's obvious that..."
Is it? It implies that no one else's opinion is carefully considered, or in any way valid. Dangerous!
"In my opinion (IMO)"
Of course it is. Everything you say is your opinion. Redundant!
"You'd be really stupid to think..."
Someone will think it (how many thousands of people are reading your conversation that you don't know about?), and you've called them stupid. Dodgy!
"Lighten up"
How to throw fuel on the fire of someone's passionate beliefs. Patronising!
"You are (wrong/talking rubbish/arrogant/egotistical/etc.)"
Does it need an explanation? Argue with the ideas, not the person. Hostile!

Before this thread descends below the level acceptible here I would like you to give a couple of moments thought to the above. If you don't feel able to adhere to our basic standards of respect and tolerance of differing viewpoints, then perhaps you should take a break from posting on controversial topics.

[Cloudbringer]

GMTA, Mouse!

[Dirty Meg]

Originally posted by Cloudbringer: Dirty Meg, slandering the inhabitants of a any state as a whole is bashing an entire group of people based on the attitudes or behaviors of a small number. It's not acceptable to do that to gays, or democrats or the English, Americans or Canadians etc etc and it's not acceptable to make sweeping insulting generalizations in this case, either. I realize the topic is heated and you obviously have a strong opinion that differs with those of others here and in Virgina, but it only inflames things if you toss out wholesale insults like that. In general, I'd like to remind everyone who posts in this thread to please keep this discussion civil or it will end up being locked.

I disapprove of lots of things... Drinking Coffee rather than tea, Using ashtrays for non-smoking related debris, Mime, voting labour, Vivaldi ring tones... I could go on forever. This is not a debate about whether people approve of homosexual marriage or civil unions, this is a debate about the right of a majority to oppress other peoples activities merely because they disapprove of them. I may dislike all of the activities listed above, but I would defend to the death your right to do them.
My remarks were not directed at the people of Virginia as a whole, merely those who don't want to give gay couples the same rights as hetrosexual couples.