Human rights law passed- Gays, lesbians get protection

Cincinnati Post ^ | April 30, 2003 | Mike Rutledge

[BlackElk]

Not only are gays and lesbians prohibited from marrying but squares cannot be circles. There is no constitutional right to put things where they don't belong. Grow up.

[BlackElk]

The language about all men being created equal is in the Declaration of Independence and not in the Constitution.

[EdReform]

"Don't ping me for these "propaganda monkey feces-flinging" episodes. It's all too common as it is... we find these steaming dumps everywhere... no need to call attention to it."

Sorry, but this is a PUBLIC FORUM. Any comments or claims you choose to post in a PUBLIC FORUM are subject to being debated and refuted with ample documentation. If you post ANY comments or documentation in this PUBLIC FORUM and I choose to refute them, then my reply WILL be addressed to you. Noone is forcing you to participate in this forum.

Your little diatribe is exactly what we expect to hear from the homosexual community. Any disagreement with the homosexual lifestyle or documentation refuting homosexual claims is met with ranting and name-calling.

So why don't you address the fact that the The American Psychological Association actually published a comprehensive research paper on sexual-orientation change in one of their journals? If it's all "junk science" as you claim, why is it now being published in APA journals?

[EdReform]

Ping

[nastypumps]

Speaking of flinging emotional words around...have you read your own posts?

[nastypumps]

By the way, I did not "pick those fights".
They, and the people who supported (and still do support) segregation, denial of due process and the right of fellow citizens they simply didn't like, or actually feared, to vote were waiting to be fought.
When I was young I figured I owed my country, its constitution and the future a little of my time and energy and, when I was older, my professional expertise.
If I had been courageous enough to be disabled in the twin causes of equality and liberty, I hope I would have had the courage and fortitude to be glad of it.

[First Amendment]

lesbians get protection, nastypumps wrote: Speaking of flinging emotional words around

I call homo activists Nazis because they (you?) use Nazi and Marxist propaganda tactics. One of the founders of ACT-UP (Larry something or other) admitted they read Mein Kampf for their inspiration and guidance. The Big Lie is glaring evidence. You guys are like the Undead Unman.... You just repeat the same lies over and over, and you are never able to refute the facts presented.

[First Amendment]

lesbians get protection, nastypumps wrote: Speaking of flinging emotional words around

I call homo activists Nazis because they (you?) use Nazi and Marxist propaganda tactics. One of the founders of ACT-UP (Larry something or other) admitted they read Mein Kampf for their inspiration and guidance. The Big Lie is glaring evidence. You guys are like the Undead Unman.... You just repeat the same lies over and over, and you are never able to refute the facts presented.

[nastypumps]

Now who's being silly?

[reg45]

Who ever said that homosexuals were human? They may be a non-reproducing mutant species similar to humans, but they are NOT human. Humans can mate with humans and reproduce. A male of one race could marry a female of another race and the two of them could have children - this would be possible because they are both human.

[nastypumps]

All negative prejudgements about individuals based on their actual or imagined participation in a group one decides to dislike are the same in that they produce the same distructive results and scapegoating.

The old argument about lifestyle choice rather than genetics or biology is no more valid than arguing that because someone chooses to convert to Catholicism I can discriminate against him, but not if he's born into it.

While I find dead beat parents and millions of wholesale abortions morally repugnant, I don't fear or condemn every heterosexual I meet because tens of millions of them choose to abandon or just slaughter their inconvenient babies while all but a handful of the rest choose to stand around and do nothing about it.

Afterall, some straight people are OK, I guess, as long as they don't try to shove their baby murdering lifestyle in my face.

Sounds silly, doesn't it? So does all bigotry. Until you feel it.

[Old Professer]

Maybe it's just me, but you come across as a bit of a pompous crusader; would you mind telling me what the nature of your disability is?

I realize that there seems to certain cachet attached to "differentness" nowadays, but I hardly think I can be convinced that lesbians or male homosexuals are in any immediate need of corrective relief from me or my government based solely on their so-called sexual orientation.

In the first place, homosexuality is indefinable absent a reference to behavior or practice observationally and lately by a declaration of option to join the ranks of those already so defined.

If there were an affirmitative-action program for homosexuals how would I, as an employer, verify that the applicant met the category of the target group?

My neighbor doesn't cut his grass to suit me, but I don't make a big issue of it -- I do take great exception of his allowing his children to operate the mower while barefoot.

[traditional1]

And your point is????

[traditional1]

Are you a member of "Sheep lovers, Unite"? Get a life. What you do in a closet to each other is your business...keep it out of the street, out of the workplace, and out of the legal system. Marriage is a heterosexual union, by law, as that was the "intent" in the law's formation. Only pandering Liberals, courting the gay vote, will vote against clarifying the law to prohibit recognition of a deviant lifestyle choice to be a "marriage". Get over it....

[ninenot]

Well, there's a way to remedy that. Torch the houses of the council members who didn't vote right.

It'll raise quite a stink, but the lesson will be learned.

Ask Quaddafi of Libya, or Baghdad Bob.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Now who's being silly?

It must be the Freeper who fled and refused to answer direct questions? I like the way you went on a rant about not fleeing then fled! LOL!!!