"Gay Rights"

[MaC]

does the term 'gay rights' refer to anything other than marraige?

[Jake]

They don't exist, so no.

[Dr. Cynic]

Well, allow me to elaborate on Jake's "answer" just a little bit. The term does include marraige, as well as recognition as a couple. It also expands to anti-descrimination, as well as being treated equally under the law. Now, forgive me if I'm wrong, but the term "All Men are created equal" was never expanded to include "Except for the blacks, the Chinease, the Mexicans, and the gays, etc."

I take that phrase quite literally. I never thought it was up to interpretation, as it is a very concise statement. "All Men Are Created Equal". Now, don't go into the arguement that the phrase "doesn't include women..." Allow me to elaborate. All men=All of humankind.

[MODU]

does the term 'gay rights' refer to anything other than marraige?

Technically yes, since other benefits reserved for truly married people are not eligible for gay couples.  However, everything hinges on their claim to deserve the right to be legally married, so "gay rights" is viewed as being "gay marriage."

[Jake]

All it takes is another person as brave as Hitler, and problem solved.

[adam]

Gay Rights = Political Tool

When people stop caring, gays will have their rights. Until then, their (for lack of a better term) suffering is needed to aid the political process of the United States.

[MaC]

All it takes is another person as brave as Hitler, and problem solved.

and chances are you wouldn't be alive either Jake, genius

[afleitch]

All it takes is another person as brave as Hitler, and problem solved.

Must be Jake's split persona talking

Such rights do mean much more than marriage and can, depending on the person, exclude marriage, they mean a right to simply 'be'; without harrasment or being hauled out of your bed or being fired on a whim because someone takes objection to anything but your ability.

[dazzleman]

does the term 'gay rights' refer to anything other than marraige?

It means a lot of things, and the meaning has evolved over time.

Initially, it simply meant the right to go out publicly as a gay person without being arrested or beaten.  Later, it evolved into the right not to face employment discrimination.

Much more recently, it has come to mean the right to marry and adopt children.  I think that like most of the 'rights' movements of the past 40-50 years, it has veered off track at this point, even though it surely started out with the right idea, as did feminism, the civil rights movement, etc.  All these movements have gotten old and stale, and seem more interested in perpetuating their own existence than actually completing what they initially set out to do.

[afleitch]

Initially, it simply meant the right to go out publicly as a gay person without being arrested or beaten.

And as Joke Jake still takes pleasure in the idea of such things happening then it's clear alot more has to be done by the movement when it comes to the basics!

[dazzleman]

Initially, it simply meant the right to go out publicly as a gay person without being arrested or beaten.

And as Joke Jake still takes pleasure in the idea of such things happening then it's clear alot more has to be done by the movement when it comes to the basics!

I doubt Jake means what he says.  It is actually surprising to learn about the level of abuse, legal and illegal, to which gay people were subjected in the relatively recent past.

In all honesty, I don't think homosexuality will ever be viewed as being equal to heterosexuality.  Even the most 'enlightened' people on these issues would be devastated if one of their kids turned out to be gay.  I don't think that's really going to change, however politically correct people try to be.

I think the mistake all these 'movements' make is that they refuse to acknowledge that any progress has been made.  I understand why they do this -- they are trying to keep up momentum for further changes -- but beyond a certain point, it becomes a tactical mistake.

When I hear black leaders talk as if life for them hasn't changed since the 1930s, or feminists bitterly complain about how oppressed women are, it's just a turnoff for most people, whether they are targeted beneficiaries of the movement or not, and encourages them to write off the movement entirely.  Even if you support increased rights for blacks and women, if these movements are as impotent and ineffectual as they themselves claim to be, why put any stock in them?

The gay rights movement is moving down this same path, IMO.  The goals keep being redefined, to things that are more and more elusive.  Just as the feminists are practically at the point of demanding legislation that mandates that men carry 50% of all pregnancies, some segments of the gay rights movement appear to be on the brink of demanding that gay couples be acknowledged as the NATURAL parents of children they have adopted, something that even heterosexual adoptive parents don't have.  This is impossible and a denial of reality.

My hope (and also fear) is that all this political correctness will provoke a backlash at some point.  A backlash against some of this stuff is definitely needed, but I fear that the longer it is held off, the worse it will be when it happens.  And I wouldn't want it to sweep away legitimate gains.

[NewFederalist]

does the term 'gay rights' refer to anything other than marraige?

Yes. It is the opposite of "gay wrongs".

[Rin-chan]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?  I didn't even think they had officially proven that people are born gay.  I thought it was just speculation and theory.

Rin-chan

[NewFederalist]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic? 

I think he made it up.

[Rin-chan]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?

I think he made it up.

Me too.

Rin-chan

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?  I didn't even think they had officially proven that people are born gay.  I thought it was just speculation and theory.

Rin-chan

Yeah!  And how do we REALLY know the Earth is round instead of flat?

Its abundantly obvious that people, en masse, do not choose to suffer discrimination and abuse.

The 10% number is an aggregation of a number of studies and surveys.  Until its put in the census, its probably impossible to get an exact number.

[Rin-chan]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?  I didn't even think they had officially proven that people are born gay.  I thought it was just speculation and theory.

Rin-chan

Yeah!  And how do we REALLY know the Earth is round instead of flat?

Its abundantly obvious that people, en masse, do not choose to suffer discrimination and abuse.

The 10% number is an aggregation of a number of studies and surveys.  Until its put in the census, its probably impossible to get an exact number.

We really know the Earth is round because we can go into outer space and see it.  It's fact.

However, we can't rule out whether someone is possibly genetically gay verses someone who is gay because of their environment, such as childhood abuse or early interactions with family.

Not even the census can prove or disprove something like that.

Rin-chan

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?  I didn't even think they had officially proven that people are born gay.  I thought it was just speculation and theory.

Rin-chan

Yeah!  And how do we REALLY know the Earth is round instead of flat?

Its abundantly obvious that people, en masse, do not choose to suffer discrimination and abuse.

The 10% number is an aggregation of a number of studies and surveys.  Until its put in the census, its probably impossible to get an exact number.

We really know the Earth is round because we can go into outer space and see it.  It's fact.

However, we can't rule out whether someone is possibly genetically gay verses someone who is gay because of their environment, such as childhood abuse or early interactions with family.

Not even the census can prove or disprove something like that.

Rin-chan

We can certainly rule out your theory given that there are gays that come from all kinds of backgrounds.  Do you really believe that most gays and lesbians are homosexual because they were abused as children or had some sort of abnormality occur to them?

You spread around your theory because its the only way you can justify bigotry and intolerance against gays - by suggesting that something abusive occured to them in childhood.

But lets just pretend you're right for a moment... that there is no genetic predisposition to homosexuality.  Lets pretend that all gays are just victims of abuse.  Isn't it sick of you to re-victimize someone - to not give them some hope of a normal life - sharing love with the partner of their choice?

[dazzleman]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?  I didn't even think they had officially proven that people are born gay.  I thought it was just speculation and theory.

Rin-chan

That's a statistic that has been thrown around by others, and there's really no proof to it.

I do believe that some people are born gay, but I have no idea what percentage they are.  There are even theories that gay men were born that way, but gay women were made that way.  Who knows?

I think the gay movement likes to push the idea that anybody who is gay was born that way, for obvious reasons.  Others like the Christian right say that nobody is born gay, and that it's a choice.  I don't think either theory is correct.

[opebo]

One in 10 people are born gay.  I have children.  One of them could very well grow up to be gay.  I will not know for a long time.  Why on Earth should I not want the same rights for them if they are.  I would rather that they be able to get married than to shack up.  Better a white picket fence than a bath house.

Actually I think the bathhouse sounds much more fun. 

And usually you can tell if a kid is gay pretty early on - here in Thailand you regularly meet parents who tell you that their pre-pubescent child is gay, or 'will be a ladyboy'.  Such things can be seen easily if one has a tolerant culture.

[??????????]

But lets just pretend you're right for a moment... that there is no genetic predisposition to homosexuality.  Lets pretend that all gays are just victims of abuse.  Isn't it sick of you to re-victimize someone - to not give them some hope of a normal life - sharing love with the partner of their choice?

She didn't even say "all gays". So why don't you put on your reading glasses and try again, thanks.

[afleitch]

Can I just say for the record, being gay is not the result of bad parenting. My mother and father are the greatest people in the world to me and encouraged me every step of the way in what I wanted to do in my life both personally and academically.

Neither would they, or I be pleased to hear of anyone insinuating otherwise. They raised four kids and four bloody good kids at that in exactly the same way, with the same care and the same patience. It just so happens one of them is gay. Likewise with my partner and my other gay friends.

To me, the very possibility that people are simply born gay is too much for some people and their beliefs, sensibilities or predjudices. So they screen it out. It becomes 'white noise' and then attack the findings, and the people who propose them for upsetting their comforting held views on the matter.

Of course, as with all threads on this issue we have veered off course

Can I point out to you that the gay rights movement is the US is at a differnent pace from that in say the UK. We have rights and abilities that we now take for granted, (civil partnerships, adoption, serving in the armed forces) that America will be unwilling to grant, even on many state levels for a generation.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Can I just say for the record, being gay is not the result of bad parenting. My mother and father are the greatest people in the world to me and encouraged me every step of the way in what I wanted to do in my life both personally and academically.

Neither would they, or I be pleased to hear of anyone insinuating otherwise. They raised four kids and four bloody good kids at that in exactly the same way, with the same care and the same patience. It just so happens one of them is gay. Likewise with my partner and my other gay friends.

To me, the very possibility that people are simply born gay is too much for some people and their beliefs, sensibilities or predjudices. So they screen it out. It becomes 'white noise' and then attack the findings, and the people who propose them for upsetting their comforting held views on the matter.

Of course, as with all threads on this issue we have veered off course

Can I point out to you that the gay rights movement is the US is at a differnent pace from that in say the UK. We have rights and abilities that we now take for granted, (civil partnerships, adoption, serving in the armed forces) that America will be unwilling to grant, even on many state levels for a generation.

There are three seperate points which have developed in this thread:

First, are so-called 'gay rights' merely limited to 'gay marriage'?  The answer to this is clearly no.  Many homosexuals in the United States (I will not comment about those in other lands) are interested in gaining access to minor children, and getting religious bodies to abandon traditional doctrine.

Second, is the issue of the extent of homosexuality in the United States.  The generally accepted percentage is between two and three per cent, not ten per cent as alledged by some.

Third, is the issue as to the cause of homosexuality.  Despite claims to the contrary, no valid scientific evidence has been produced of a 'gene' which causes homosexuality. 

[Rin-chan]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?  I didn't even think they had officially proven that people are born gay.  I thought it was just speculation and theory.

Rin-chan

Yeah!  And how do we REALLY know the Earth is round instead of flat?

Its abundantly obvious that people, en masse, do not choose to suffer discrimination and abuse.

The 10% number is an aggregation of a number of studies and surveys.  Until its put in the census, its probably impossible to get an exact number.

We really know the Earth is round because we can go into outer space and see it.  It's fact.

However, we can't rule out whether someone is possibly genetically gay verses someone who is gay because of their environment, such as childhood abuse or early interactions with family.

Not even the census can prove or disprove something like that.

Rin-chan

We can certainly rule out your theory given that there are gays that come from all kinds of backgrounds.  Do you really believe that most gays and lesbians are homosexual because they were abused as children or had some sort of abnormality occur to them?

You spread around your theory because its the only way you can justify bigotry and intolerance against gays - by suggesting that something abusive occured to them in childhood.

But lets just pretend you're right for a moment... that there is no genetic predisposition to homosexuality.  Lets pretend that all gays are just victims of abuse.  Isn't it sick of you to re-victimize someone - to not give them some hope of a normal life - sharing love with the partner of their choice?

I'm not saying they were all abused.  That was just an example.  If you payed attention to the "interactions with family" example, then you may have found a good example of the nurture argument.  Although Freud is a whack-job most of the time, he did come up with an interesting theory.  If a young child does not identify themselves with the same sex for whatever reason (opposite sex parent wasn't home enough or strongly preferred the mother or opposite sex parent was the strong, silent type, etc.), then the child will identify with members of the opposite sex and, therefore, take on characteristics normally attributed to that sex.

Erik Erikson believed that throughout our lives, we must solve different crises at different stages of our lives.  His fifth stage, identity vs. role confusion, says that children must find their place in society or become confused.  This includes sexual identity.

Now, I'm not saying that people aren't born homosexual, I'm saying that the statistic that 1 in every 10 children will become gay may not be completely accurate.

I'm also not saying that either of the above theories are correct, I'm just throwing them out there because neither of them have been disproved yet.

However, until there is undeniable proof that there is some sort of genetic link to homosexuality, I don't think that such statistics should be thrown around lightly.

Rin-chan

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?  I didn't even think they had officially proven that people are born gay.  I thought it was just speculation and theory.

Rin-chan

Yeah!  And how do we REALLY know the Earth is round instead of flat?

Its abundantly obvious that people, en masse, do not choose to suffer discrimination and abuse.

The 10% number is an aggregation of a number of studies and surveys.  Until its put in the census, its probably impossible to get an exact number.

We really know the Earth is round because we can go into outer space and see it.  It's fact.

However, we can't rule out whether someone is possibly genetically gay verses someone who is gay because of their environment, such as childhood abuse or early interactions with family.

Not even the census can prove or disprove something like that.

Rin-chan

We can certainly rule out your theory given that there are gays that come from all kinds of backgrounds.  Do you really believe that most gays and lesbians are homosexual because they were abused as children or had some sort of abnormality occur to them?

You spread around your theory because its the only way you can justify bigotry and intolerance against gays - by suggesting that something abusive occured to them in childhood.

But lets just pretend you're right for a moment... that there is no genetic predisposition to homosexuality.  Lets pretend that all gays are just victims of abuse.  Isn't it sick of you to re-victimize someone - to not give them some hope of a normal life - sharing love with the partner of their choice?

I'm not saying they were all abused.  That was just an example.  If you payed attention to the "interactions with family" example, then you may have found a good example of the nurture argument.  Although Freud is a whack-job most of the time, he did come up with an interesting theory.  If a young child does not identify themselves with the same sex for whatever reason (opposite sex parent wasn't home enough or strongly preferred the mother or opposite sex parent was the strong, silent type, etc.), then the child will identify with members of the opposite sex and, therefore, take on characteristics normally attributed to that sex.

Erik Erikson believed that throughout our lives, we must solve different crises at different stages of our lives.  His fifth stage, identity vs. role confusion, says that children must find their place in society or become confused.  This includes sexual identity.

Now, I'm not saying that people aren't born homosexual, I'm saying that the statistic that 1 in every 10 children will become gay may not be completely accurate.

I'm also not saying that either of the above theories are correct, I'm just throwing them out there because neither of them have been disproved yet.

However, until there is undeniable proof that there is some sort of genetic link to homosexuality, I don't think that such statistics should be thrown around lightly.

Rin-chan

Then, until there is undeniable proof that there is no genetic link to homosexuality, and that its just a "lifestyle choice", why should we discriminate against gay and lesbian Americans?