Do you strongly contend that the complete legalization of LGBT rights is humane or a slippery slope?
Why? Why not?
Of course it's humane. Denying the same rights and privileges to a group of people just because an outdated generation relying on religious doctrine doesn't "approve" of people being themselves is what's inhumane.
I think denying any human being equal rights is a slippery slope. If discrimination against one group is legal, or if one segment of the population has fewer rights than others, how is that a just society?
In my mind, a just society has one set of laws for everyone, no matter their race, creed, gender, or sexual orientation.
Jp you live for earth , I live for both heaven and earth, so you will not understand , you speak for now , and your present concerns , but the whole world has greater, and there is a cure to all our problems but you will not consider the truth.
Actually, you won't consider any truth bar yr own. Again, KT, I am not discussing this on any other comment than our own - it's extremely rude, and I'm sick of u doing such. Email me or use only our answers. I will not continue this in any other way
Why does your reasoning and words show
That you are angry because people disagree.Set the example of kindness in your character then private business.
You show hostility when shown none to you.
I express my beliefs you stress hostility in you
People have pointed to the Bible to prop up the institution of slavery, to keep interracial couples from marriage, to subjugate and oppress women, even to engage in acts of terrorism. If you open your Bible looking for a scapegoat or someone to hate you always will find somebody, but what a sad misuse of a great resource. Of course human rights for everyone equally is a humane platform. I can't believe so many people would misuse their own religious doctrines in order to question that.
Excellent point about interracial marriage. It wasn't until 1967 the Supreme Court struck down all state laws that forbid interracial marriage. That's less than 50 years ago! (Loving VS Virginia). The couple was going to be jailed for 2 years!
Jp, l love people in General the reason I come on HP to help people know the future , to help them know that all pain and suffering will end,to let people know the real life is ahead, the only way we can experience this provision is being educated.
Discrimination based upon gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation is inhumane. In a nation which espouses separation of church and state LGBT rights are essentially a civil rights issue.
It's not against the law to be gay or lesbian, or for same sex couples to cohabitate, or adopt children. Logically it made no sense to forbid them from getting married to the persons they love.
I never understood why 95% of the population would be so concerned with giving 5% of the population the same rights to marry.
Hopefully we have bigger concerns than worrying about who marries whom. It's not going to affect who we choose to love or marry.
In 1967 less than 50 years ago the Supreme Court struck down laws that forbid interracial marriage. Today it's not an issue for most people. I suspect 50 years from now "same sex marriage" will be viewed the same way by future generations.
Thanks for the comment! Judge Thomas would not have been able to marry his current wife in all states prior to the 67 decision but still didn't vote to give marriage freedom to those who didn't yet have it. How sad is that?
Neither would Michael Jordan, Robert De Niro or George Lucas be able to have their chosen spouses today either!
Progress is usually gradual and one generation at a time.
Jp the point is you only know what is physical because that is your experience,
But there are the spiritual things of God you will not recognize.And that is not forced by him
But there are people who understand the spiritual things of God who share
It never occurred to me that "same sex marriage" would ever be an issue that received so much attention until I took a class in sexual orientation. A lot of documentation for such a small issue increased my horizon on the issues same sex couples faced. Well here it is 2015 when same sex marriage is as common as e.g. legalizing marijuana with pros and cons from every avenue and culture. When I thought about two people of the same sex getting married, it never registered with me so naturally at first I opposed this issue. I could accept the fact that these humans could adopt and raise children without any bias. So in the end I would say that if it doesn't cause physical harm to others and doesn't effect the economy, even though the Bible clearly states that sex is for a man and a woman (what I argued in my essay), then it would allow people like me to think about it themselves.
Well, they're called "Human Rights" so like it or not, LGBTs are human beings too, just like everyone else, and according to the constitutional beliefs that this country was built on, here in the U.S., they deserve the same human rights as any other human being...
Jp saying people hate people because they support the bible in all moral aspects is not a fair statment.
I find this to be the case with people, if you disagree then you hate us, if you agree you love us.
No love is telling the truth to save life
Slippery implies easiness and slope implies inevitability. The advancement of LGBT rights has been neither of those things. To a lot of people it seems like this issue is changing fast, but the reality is that this has been in the works for decades and has been pushed along by hundreds of court cases and the efforts of a multitude of individuals and organizations.
If a slippery slope, metaphorically, is like pushing someone down a water slide, then the advancement of LGBT rights has been more like pushing someone over flat ground through a bunch of brambles.
And if rights are in the future to be extended to other groups it will only be through the same torturous process. There will be nothing slippery or slopey about it.
Jp. You do not believe in God , in not believing in God ,then you can not believe he inspired his words in the scrolls which is in translations of the bible.
My comment was to people who do believe
There is a spiritual journey to life ,
We are on
Two people in love, should have every right to marriage. We have couples cheating lying and hurting each other every day and that is legal, then you have two people who really love one another and respect each other, and the world has a problem.
People seem to think that all love is negotiable as long as it is love. We love our pets , but there should be a limit , not romantic.
Example of Adam and Eve proved they cross their limitation , of right and wrong from the heavenly Fathers point
I love everyone, we are meant to be different to test other's hearts. I will never turn my back on another human. Gay straight, we are humans!
Jp the manager relates the message to the employee, but the employee does not like the manager relating the message and says I am tired of you saying what the boss told you to say. So the boss knows the situation
What will the boss do ?
They are human beings LOVE IS LOVE! Men or women deserve same treatment!
God promotes Love ! Man promotes hate and fear is part of hate !
God created love , but people fail to address what type,
Example God created food for us, Adam and Eve were allowed 99% of all food, but one tree was off the list.
Was it eatable yes. Could they see it touch it yes, but did they have a right to it.
Given we, as LGBT, are humans and all that is being asked for is the same rights as other humans - I think it's entirely humane.
When a person just wants to be able walk down the street holding their partner's hand without being at risk of being beaten, or even killed, merely for holding their partners hand - is it inhumane to ask for that?
When one wants to be their authentic self, and that self is different to their assigned at birth gender, they want to be able to exist without being murdered merely because they are different (see the amount of trans murders in 2015) - is it inhumane to ask for this?
In some countries, merely being assumed to be LGBT can earn you a death sentence, a jail sentence, a beating, mental insitutionalisation. All for being human. Uganda even has American pastors who are supporting, and encouraging bills such as a the "Kill the Gays" bill - which would have enacted the death penalty for the crime of homosexuality in Uganda (and from memory may have also meant that anyone who killed someone who was assumed to be gay may have gotten off....not sure on that though)
The slippery slope arguments are usually bordering on ridiculous - "whats to stop someone marrying their dog/toaster/a bridge?" "What about people marrying their children, or children in general?" - ALL of these arguments miss a VITAL piece - CONSENT. None of these things - children, dogs, toasters, bridges etc - can give informed consent to a marriage.
In several countries, it is legal for children to be married off - but I don't see anyone protesting that, and these are usually countries where homosexuality is punishable by death or imprisonment - so, the argument of a slippery slope falls over given children are being married off and gays are being killed.
All we ask for is to be treated as human beings - because we are human beings. And if you can't - put yourself in our shoes for a minute - imagine what it's like to walk down the street, the possibility of assault etc always in your subconscious (Actually, that actually covers women as well as LGBT...imagine being a gay/trans woman!).
Vla, he does this ,1Co 10:11 Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for a warning to us upon whom the ends of the systems of things have come.
We can learn from past experiences.
KT - please only reply to people on the answer or comment list you are talking on - it's rude, and confusing to take over someone else's answer with comments to another.
Jp death was a genetic sentence against Adam and Eve, we also are effected since we came from Adam and Eve. So this is a valid truth that God's word is truth.
Please, stay on the topic of my answer - but I'll comment - All animals, cells, humans, plants are subject to death - cells die, we are all made from cells. All living things will die. A+E didn't affect other than human, so how come others die??
JP I can not explain to you something you do not want to believe in. you do understand death , So does the bible answers why we all can die, why is it a tree can live over 4000 years, animals are worth more then humans and they can live 100's.
Fine. Then stick to the topic of my answer - I mentioned nothing of death or even Adam and Eve. I mentioned the inhumane treatment of LGBT. nothing about religion. It's rude when u take over these topics with yr pushing of religion + I'm tired of it
Jp the whole world of humanity is being mistreated. I feel for anyone being abused
by another human, I do not want anyone hurt or mustreated. Let me make that very clear.
But I do support the morals of the bible as the proper source of how to live.
So if the bible mistreat, then you're okay with it? Funny that, given you are a woman, + yr book treats women badly. What yr saying is that mistreatment is bad, unless one is LGBT, Bcus yr belief says to mistreat.
Jp park you want to interpret the bible in that light , maybe the real problem is that you find it convenient to stone the bible or God because it does not fit your lifestyle.
This can be clearly seen. So we can not agree on anything here.take care
In the Bible you use to condemn homosexuality it insists that a woman marry her rapist, that if she doesn't she should be stoned to death, it condones slavery, mistreatment of others. I'm not interpreting in anyway other than how it is written.
Jp people can make the bible say what ever they want it to say, but that certainly does not make it true. Many people read it and do not have your analysis. No matter what I say , or you say the truth will prevail.
My point exactly - you could say it says being gay is wrong, and your interpretation could be wrong. Yet, it seems that only those interpretations that agree with you are right, and nothing else. NOW, back to the topic at hand - being humane to LGBT
You know Jp, you seem extreme on the subject, and you interpet the bible to say what you wish,When I share scriptures it is not to be mean or cruel because I Share Them With everyone. But it seems you are only concern with your lifestyle that's all.
Nope, not extreme, just fed up with religious beliefs/Holy books being used as an excuse 2 treat people inhumanely. U shared scripture, I shared that the word homosexual is mistranslated 2 remind others. Topic here is LGBT hence y focus on right now.
Jp you are blaming God for the misuse of the others through the bible . That is like blaming a child for something his parent did. Say the parent stole a car, the child has nothing to do with how the perants schemed to steal a car. You blame all.
Where have I blamed anyone? I've never blamed anyone - I'm just tired of religion being used as a scapegoat for being nasty, veiled in 'Gods word' when it's the persons opinion of what 'God' may have said. I have no issue with God, just some followrs
Interesting Jp because you express different then what you say. Like a manager may help a owner run a business , and the employee may never see the boss, and the owner says tell the employee not to do something a certain way. The manager relates
Show me where I express differently? I have no issue with God, just some of his followers. What does this have to do with my answer? Nothing. I'm asking politely - stick to what my answer speaks of (+ question topic) or I do not wish to continue.
KP it is mean and cruel to share Scripture with ANYONE when that Scripture is mean and cruel. I don't care what any god or prophet or holy book says: if we don't practice tolerance where there is no wrongdoing than we are doing wrong.
In matters of coexistence in society, law should be based on one single question: if a form of relationship is hurting anyone, affecting anyone's possessions in a negative way, or disrupting public way of life. Other than that, law makers should stop sticking their big nose into private matters - or else pretty soon we may have to answer to them for having a pizza for dinner.
The last time I checked, our western culture was bragging about its "freedoms"'; and now it seems like they are even making a joke out of that part of the Constitution that guarantees the citizens their right to pursue happiness. If being married would make gay folks happy, who has that right to prevent it?
Matching their marriage to my question up there clearly shows that they are not hurting anyone or anything; so - who even cares what a law maker's sexual preference may be, that's his private business which he should not impose on everyone else. I don't know if this is a legal term for my dissatisfaction, but I am truly pissed off with any human being telling another human being what they are allowed to think, feel, or do in the pursuit of their happiness.
I am not gay, but I certainly sympathize with those underprivileged folks; and the only time that I may start changing my mind will be if I ever hear them publically calling straight marriages "not normal".
I do not think what people say can stop people from their choices, Certainly God himself has not sent an executioner while anyone is living their choice even violating his principals .
But he does do this.
To Kiss &Tales: It is your right to PERSONALLY follow your beliefs in God's laws. Some decent people opt for the laws of morality, which don't prevent gays from being happy. I don't think they are preaching their laws to you, so let's keep it fai
As a comment is allowed here I give it in truth, not personally knowing anyone or their pacific lifestyles , but we can share why we believe what is written as Grace asked this question. Is this a question preached, neither is the answer preached.
To Kiss & Tales: We PREACH when we warn homosexuals that they won't get into the "Kingdom of Heaven", like you did below. It wouldn't be preaching if you shared that you don't agree with their marriage because of your religion. - no "sin" allude
Vla, I did not warn anyone ,we all are human under the same warnings, so who can preach and is not a sinner, the point is the scriptures shared all things that will keep any one out, as posted. This was already written before my birth and yours.
To Kiss & Tales:: Not worth discussing, my friend. You are not aware that you keep preaching even while explaining how you are not. Keep your faith by all means. I got nothing more to add here. All the best, and be well.
what, KT, if your God isn't the 'one' - what if you've been fooled, + U r supposed embrace all with love, rather than warn? What if the 'warnings' we all 'live under' r not true? Bcus yr God is 1 of 1000s worshiped. Morality is not religion based
Jp, what if you are wrong, have you considered that it is easy to say another human is wrongThe God of Abraham, Moses , David, Jesus has proven he is real.
Death is a sentence from Adam and Eve's
Death is proof we experience.
Ah, but all god's speak of death and what becomes of us afterwards - who's to say thats proof of any God? Medically it's the end of life, cells don't last forever. Nothing to do with Gods. How have Moses, Jesus etc proven what u say
The United States is a democratic Republic, Not a Theocratic government. We are not a Christian governed country, we are human beings who choose to live in a "free" country. Our formal constitution clearly states that all citizens are created equal on this soil. All people have the "right" to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Human rights, equal rights, civil rights included. And there is a distinct difference between a "legal" marriage and and "religious" marriage. Homosexuals do not seek to change or interfere with religious marriages. They seek to have equal "legal" rights to "legal" marriage. To follow the constitution and enable themselves to gain legal stature and protection under the laws of our country. They seek legal recourse to right the wrongs that have been done in the past. These people do not "inflict" they lifestyle nor their religious beliefs on others, nor do they inhibit others lifestyle or religious beliefs. This whole matter should have nothing to do with God, but only the laws of man. I believe in God, I say my prayers to God every day. But I pay my taxes to Washington. And Washington allows me my rights and responsibilities as a citizen, and that must include marriage. Religion is between a person and his God, and according to the "Bible" it is not up to one man to judge another, but only for God to judge each of us in our time. There is in my opinion no slippery slope about human rights.
As a true and open minded liberal, I support any human's right to do whatever they wish, providing their wishes do not compromise anyone else's right to do as they wish. That said, sexual orientation is irrelevant, ethnicity is irrelevant, religion is irrelevant, and so is any other social, economic, and\or demographic distinction between human beings. There really are on two camps: liberals and conservative.
Conservatives tend to resist change on the premise that 'things have always been that way'. By contrast, liberals tend to be more tolerant of change, particularly change which does not threaten the individual or community. However, not all liberals are truly liberal - many are just trying to further a controversial agenda of their own but flip to conservative posturing if\when diversity contradicts their own values - but that is not a true liberal.
A true liberal recognizes everyone's value system is an arbitrary function of experience and perception. The only true wrong is inflicting harm upon another person. Even the definition of harm is in many ways arbitrary. Perhaps one person views tattoos and body piercing as morally harmful to society, while another person believes this to be their full right of self-expression. True liberals take their own predispositions out of the judgment call and make a concerted effort to be tolerant and accepting even when they may not be partial to the action they support.
Some may find the LGBT issue peculiar, but the true liberal considers whether the perceived peculiarity is harmful in a tangible way, or if it is circumstantial or based on personal preferences. The liberal, irrespective of their own likes or dislikes, makes an effort to accept what is different, providing no discernable victim results from another person's freedom of choice. Simple, and by that premise the LGBT community should not have anyone stand in its way of being just as free to exercise their choices as everyone else.
Pointing to the bible, or perceived moral standards as an indisputable justification for resisting advancements for the LGBT community, is a common conservative ploy. My stance is, if something is illegal, then the law must be respected, but awareness should be spread to get unjust laws reformed within the existing democrat process. Morality, norms, traditions, mores should also be respected to observe social harmony, but liberals are more likely to support change there also if change involves no tangible harm.
If both partners are adult and if it is their personal free will, to have a sexual relationship, then this is their private decision and nobody should be allowed to do any harm to them, even not to say any bad things about them.
The people, who condemn them, should analyze their own motives and they will find, that there exist many bad motives in themselves, like arrogance, jealousy etc.
And especially Christians should always remember, that Jesus taught us, to do no harm to others, even not the slighest.
Who the hell cares? Let people be people. I never understood why others are so concerned about things that don't even have anything to do with them.
I am not sure if 'humane' is the correct term for this, but that being said, we are all humans. It is that simple. Humans are humans.
Another hard to understand question.
What is humane?
What is the slippery slope, you are referring to here?
You already have same sex marriage, what else do you want?
I am just not sure what LGBT legalization is a slippery slope too. I think that while the biological mechanics of what makes someone gay, lesbian, or transgendered is not fully understand, the American Psychological Association has firmly established that people do not choose to be LGBT.
Given that being LGBT isn't just a style preference brought on my what some prefers or was taught but in born, I don't see how allowing full LGBT rights poses any kind of slippery slope. The fact is, just like you cannot make someone gay, you also cannot make someone straight. Straight people will continue to be straight no matter how popular or unpopular LGBT rights are and LGBT will continue to be LGBT no matter how popular or unpopular that is (although if it becomes less popular they may choose to hide it).
Also, it is relatively inhumane to pressure someone who is gay to enter into a heterosexual relationship plus it is unfair to the non-gay partner to find themselves in this relationship. In that regard, this provides a benefit to those that are heterosexual as LGBT feel freer to pursue relationships with those that are like them openly they do not have to worry about trying to deceive others to get the same benefits that a heterosexual might receive.
Also, in one of the comments the questions was posed "You already have same sex marriage, what else do you want?" The fact is in most states, you can married on Sunday and fired on Monday. Most states do not ban companies from firing people based on their sexual preferences. Also, there are still many places where LGBT are just not accepted and that is a problem. Overall, there really is no slippery slope to LGBT rights and a lot of harm done to people in denying them.
Sure granting LGBT rights might be upsetting to those that believe strongly against them, but this was no more upsetting than what those who felt that legalizing interracial marriage or end segregation felt. It doesn't mean that we should not do it since their frustration is a small price to pay for the suffering and indignity provided for those who are being truly discriminated against.
The key to this is acceptance. Someone mentioned that this has been at issue for many years, by many different people. This is true. However, it's an issue that has been taboo for thousands of years. LBGT people should have legal rights, as things are finally moving that way. The people that take issue with these rights have to accept gay marriage as a legal right. But they cannot be expected to accept it morally. Acceptance is a process; not an event. The straight community has to accept that times have changed and so have people and the way they think. The LGBT community has to accept that even though others have to accept legal changes, they can't expect to receive their blessings. We must give time, time.
Be straight. Be gay. Be a man in a woman's body, or vice-versa. Be gender-fluid. Be asexual. Get married, or don't. Have a partner. Stay single. Be monogamous. Be polyamorous. Quote the Bible, or the Qu'oran (sorry if I spelled that wrong), or better yet, quote Lewis Carroll or Dr. Suess. Or if you're any good, quote yourself. Be what you are, even if you're a little person who is scared to death of people who are different. Who is scared of your own queernesses and shoves them down as far as they can be shoved.
But whatever else you are, BE NICE. and TOLERANT. and if you are not tolerant, keep your intolerance to yourself and do not show it.
There, see? I was nice just then. I have faith in every possible and impossible deity that you can all be nice as well.
Thank you for your cooperation, and have a fantastic day!
by Andrew Spacey 2 years ago
Same sex marriage - Equality or Not for gay people?Ireland recently voted 68% to 32% by referendum to allow same sex marriage, the first country in the world to do so. Is this true democracy at work? How do you view the decision - is it good for a whole country to be given the chance to vote on...
by PrettyPanther 3 years ago
The world is a' changin' and we're a little slow but we're tagging along.Read the opinion in its entirety here:http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/06 … y-marriage
by S T Guy 7 years ago
I was chatting with a friend, Sam, the other day. He is openly gay, insists that he is a traditional Orthodox Jew and is very adamant about his “rights”. He believed that “people should be able to live however they wanted to or chose” – which to me, is the scariest phrase in the history...
by mohamedhmm 9 years ago
I believe we are as human kind we should defend our human rights and our wellness from any harmful act such as same sex; so, let's come together to protect our human rights and keep our society safe for us and next generation; it's our responsibility to say "no" for same sex because it's...
by Kharisma1980 16 months ago
What is your opinion on the issue of gay/lesbian relationships and gay marriage?
by Felixedet2000 6 years ago
What do you think about the promotion of same sex marriage?The adoption of this pattern of marriage is also a source of concerns to various stake holders in the religious and political circles.What is you say in all this?
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|