Is the battle for gay rights a civil rights battle?

[BigRedChief]

From Obama's inaugural speech.

"We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths — that all of us are created equal — is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall ... Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law — for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well."

Today Obama placed an original place for the battle for gay civil rights, Stonewall along side the same original battleground's for women's rights(Seneca Falls) and African-American rights(Selma).

So the poll question is............

Is the battle for gay rights a civil rights battle?

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by listopencil

...and, you're still wrong.

From the creator...sorry for your cause..I guess.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

From the creator...sorry for your cause..I guess.

Once again, our laws are not based on the DOI.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by ForeverChiefs58

It has nothing to do with opposing anything. I don't oppose gays or anything happening behind close doors, I don't think it should be of concern to the govt.
I do oppose special legislation benefiting any new groups, whatever they may be, for something that shouldn't be of the govt concern.

uhhh 40 years ago the "Blacks" were a new group wanting the same benefits as other citizens. 80 years ago women were the new group wanting the same benefits as other citizens.

[WV]

Why doesn't bringing back the term Civil Unions back and giving them the same rights as being married solve it all? Gives them what they want and gives Christians their terminology.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan

So, they are looking for the right to be gay and have the same rights as individuals who choose a partner of the opposite sex....in accordance with God's plan and the law?

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by WV

Why doesn't bringing back the term Civil Unions back and giving them the same rights as being married solve it all? Gives them what they want and gives Christians their terminology.

It probably sounds a lot like "separate but equal" to them. I think it's a stupid idea because we already have marriage laws, and I don't think our government should be in the business of coddling religious bigots.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by WV

Why doesn't bringing back the term Civil Unions back and giving them the same rights as being married solve it all? Gives them what they want and gives Christians their terminology.

Why don't we just give you a term and force you to be happy with that term?

They are not 2nd class citizens just because they are gay. They deserve every single benefit than heterosexual couples and individuals are granted.

This country will look back on this period with shame. The same way we look back on denying women and blacks equal rights. The future will not understand or be forgiving on how stupid we were.

[ForeverChiefs58]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

uhhh 40 years ago the "Blacks" were a new group wanting the same benefits as other citizens. 80 years ago women were the new group wanting the same benefits as other citizens.

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

You don't see that one of these things is not like the other?

Women

Black

What you eat

[WV]

Originally Posted by listopencil

It probably sounds a lot like "separate but equal" to them. I think it's a stupid idea because we already have marriage laws, and I don't think our government should be in the business of coddling religious bigots.

It's all splitting hairs and each group thinks they are more right than the other. And our Govenrment coddles enough groups now, what's one more.

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Why don't we just give you a term and force you to be happy with that term?

They are not 2nd class citizens just because they are gay. They deserve every single benefit than heterosexual couples and individuals are granted.

This country will look back on this period with shame. The same way we look back on denying women and blacks equal rights. The future will not understand or be forgiving on how stupid we were.

If it accomplishes the result they are after I don't see the issue. Again I don't give two shits, they can legalize it and I couldn't care less. However, marriage is deeply rooted in religion (not just Christianity) and to most religious people that religious aspect is the sticking point.

It has nothing to do with treating someone as second class citizens, it's just terminology. I understand the fight, but I think this would be a good compromise considering the circumstances. Religious freedoms are part of what this country was founded on and I don't see where forcing religious believers to accept Gay Marriage is totally right either. If you could somehow remove the religious connotation I can see your point, but religion is deeply rooted in the traditional marriage.

Ultimately it's pretty stupid to have a fight over terminology and I realize I'm over simplifying it, but that's what it amounts to to me.

[Bump]

Originally Posted by dmahurin

good point

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by WV

It's all splitting hairs and each group thinks they are more right than the other. And our Govenrment coddles enough groups now, what's one more.

If it accomplishes the result they are after I don't see the issue. Again I don't give two shits, they can legalize it and I couldn't care less. However, marriage is deeply rooted in religion (not just Christianity) and to most religious people that religious aspect is the sticking point.

It has nothing to do with treating someone as second class citizens, it's just terminology. I understand the fight, but I think this would be a good compromise considering the circumstances. Religious freedoms are part of what this country was founded on and I don't see where forcing religious believers to accept Gay Marriage is totally right either. If you could somehow remove the religious connotation I can see your point, but religion is deeply rooted in the traditional marriage.

Ultimately it's pretty stupid to have a fight over terminology and I realize I'm over simplifying it, but that's what it amounts to to me.

See, that's the sticking point to me. If you are one of those people who don't approve of gay marriage...no one is forcing you to get gay married.

[Bump]

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

Our government was founded on my religions principles...so....

bullshit as a matter of fact, our founding fathers wanted religion excluded from government. I'm sure your preacher has told you that, guess what, it's a lie just like everything else about it.

[WV]

Originally Posted by listopencil

See, that's the sticking point to me. If you are one of those people who don't approve of gay marriage...no one is forcing you to get gay married.

I agree, but I'm just pointing out that that is how some people feel as in regards to their religious freedom.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by WV

Religious freedoms are part of what this country was founded on and I don't see where forcing religious believers to accept Gay Marriage is totally right either.

They don't have to accept it. They just have to accept that most people don't care what they think of it.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by WV

I agree, but I'm just pointing out that that is how some people feel as in regards to their religious freedom.

Sure. I think a lot of religious people want the laws of the land to reflect their belief system. Unfortunately Christians in this nation really have been coddled. Led to believe that their belief system is the only one that is morally correct, pandered to by politicians, even receiving dogma as education in public schools. That's how you end up with someone like Killer Clown just flat out refusing to believe the Constitution of the United States.