jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (10 posts)

Protected Choices - why is religious choice protected?

  1. jlpark profile image86
    jlparkposted 3 years ago

    Protected Choices - why is religious choice protected?

    Let's pretend for a minute that the opinions of those who feel sexual orientation is a choice are correct (for the sake of this question) - why do people seek to deny protection to those who are LGBT, yet religion is most definately a choice (you can choose whether or not to be religious) - and extremely protected - to the detriment of those in the LGBT in some states (new bills passing to discriminate etc) - please be civil (will remove any personal insults towards anyone etc)

  2. dashingscorpio profile image88
    dashingscorpioposted 2 years ago

    Federal laws Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibit discrimination based on race, age, gender, religion, and sexual orientation. The LGBT is protected for the most part.
    It's not against the law to be lesbian or gay in America. On paper everyone is entitled to have the same rights to pursue happiness.
    Having said that throughout history most groups including women and various minorities have had to demand, protest, fight, and in some cases die in order to get laws enacted to protect or uphold their civil liberties.
    As of now 37, States have legal same-sex marriage. Eventually I suspect there will be a federal law which will legalize "marriage equality" nationally. The same thing was done with "interracial marriage" in 1967 when some states continued say it was illegal for people of different races (namely black and white) to marry.
    That law was enacted just less than 50 years ago!
    However creating laws is a long way from changing minds and hearts. There will always be pockets of people who want others to conform to their way of thinking or (their beliefs). They don't buy into "the live and let live" philosophy. Some people simply fear change and they're willing to do whatever it takes to stem the tide. Younger generations are more accepting of change than older ones.
    The reality is based on the 2013 NHIS data  96.6% of adults identified as straight. Only (1.6%) identified as gay or lesbian, and 0.7% identified as bisexual. The remaining 1.1% of adults identified as “something else".
    Based upon the media coverage and uproar you'd think the world is coming to an end over (3.4% of the population) who don't identify themselves as being straight.
    I suspect there is more than one way how people come to recognize or identify their sexual orientation. Being a heterosexual man I cannot recall "the day" I (decided) to pursue women.
    I was always (naturally) attracted to women.

    1. jlpark profile image86
      jlparkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I find it intriguing that most who use the choice arguement for the reason to deny right are usually those benefiting from the rights to choice of their religion. Thanks for your answer - it's interesting what people have had to fight for.

    2. Skyy4344 profile image76
      Skyy4344posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I totally agree the younger generation is thinking forward but I think a lot more heterosexual people are more tolerable than years ago. The issue is what people say out their mouth might not be what's in their heart

  3. The0NatureBoy profile image46
    The0NatureBoyposted 2 years ago

    First: in most cases being religious is not a choice but a conditioned mind by family up brings or pier pressure [pier pressure includes religion's
    "hell fire" found in many religions]. 

    The reason religion is protected and not LGBT here in these United States of America is because religion is written in the First Amendment of the Constitution.  However, the wording of the Preamble suggests something different (see my Hub "The U.S. constitution, The Supreme Law") because "preamble" means what the document intends to implement upon this nation disregarding the behavior of the people in the first Constitutional Convention. 

    When we see the phrases "We The People of the United States, in order to form a more prefect Union…" we should know it suggests there will NOT be classes, political parties, ethnic, religion, sexual orientation, handicapped nor slavery of any people in perfecting the union process.  In this respect, no one in government has fulfilled their oath to protect the constitution and, thereby, the constitution DEMANDS their impeachment [recalling] because at the least they have committed a "misdemeanor" and at the most "treason" as causes for recalling [impeaching] them. 

    Therefore, religions rather than LGBT are protected because "We The People" are ignorant having allowed a prejudice government to dictate to us the meaning of the constitution.

    1. jlpark profile image86
      jlparkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for that. I'm not American or in the US so some of the 'choice' arguements are just weird to m. Now I get it more!

    2. The0NatureBoy profile image46
      The0NatureBoyposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Are you saying the Constitution is NOT American?  It's something we've preached for over 200 years but suddenly it isn't American?  Haven't studied - not just read - the document? No, then of course it is foreign to you, what else do you expect?

    3. jlpark profile image86
      jlparkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      The0 - no, I'm saying I live in New Zealand, so it IS foreign to me. Do u understand the Treaty of Waitangi? The protection of a choice in protecting religious belief yet using this choice to deny protection 2 another 'choice' is what is weird to me.

    4. The0NatureBoy profile image46
      The0NatureBoyposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I apologize for my ignorance of your location, Forgive my ignorance?  The USA is considered the "world's ruler" by people of many nations and whatever she say the rest of the world has generally followed is why LGBT isn't accepted like religion.

    5. jlpark profile image86
      jlparkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Thankfully, NZ doesn't follow that part - though we've only had marriage equality for a couple of yrs - we still had the same arguments re choice. But in the end - choice or not - people are equal, and so should their marriage rights be was what won.

Closed to reply