Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ernie.cal
With respect to your comment "There is no real need for gay marriage except for the few who desire recognition to make themselves feel better." Perhaps you would care to amplify your statement. What PRINCIPLES underlie your argument? We should grant rights or equal protection of law based upon what rules?

One principal is the first amendment. For instance, if homosexuals marriage was protected BY LAW would churches be allowed to deny employment, benefits, etc. to homosexuals? One instance of this is laws proposed to FORCE Catholic pro-life hospitals and Catholic pro-life medical professionals to perform abortions if they receive any government money, even in the form of medicare payments.

You will have a hard time getting ANY conservative Christians to submit to being bound by your agenda.

191 posted on 12/23/2004 9:15:37 AM PST by Judith Anne (Thank you St. Jude for favors granted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies ]


To: Judith Anne

principal s/b "principle.


193 posted on 12/23/2004 9:16:53 AM PST by Judith Anne (Thank you St. Jude for favors granted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies ]

To: Judith Anne
ME: What PRINCIPLES underlie your argument? We should grant rights or equal protection of law based upon what rules?

YOU: One principal is the first amendment. For instance, if homosexuals marriage was protected BY LAW would churches be allowed to deny employment, benefits, etc. to homosexuals? One instance of this is laws proposed to FORCE Catholic pro-life hospitals and Catholic pro-life medical professionals to perform abortions if they receive any government money, even in the form of medicare payments.

Judith: What is the CURRENT status of law with respect to employment of homosexuals by churches?

If I understand your position correctly, you are suggesting that employers (including churches) should have the right to deny employment based upon what they perceive to be the sexual orientation of a prospective employee. Consequently, for example, if I am Catholic and gay, and I apply for a job at a church or church-operated facility, I should be rejected solely based upon being gay and have no recourse because churches should have the right under the First Amendment to associate with whomever they want--or exclude whomever they want.

And THAT behavior is what YOU want society to affirm as proper, decent, pro-family, behavior.

OK---once we establish THAT as the underlying principle of our law regarding employment, then OTHER non-church employers should be allowed to follow the same rules---correct? If so, what happens when large numbers of gays or bi-sexuals can no longer find gainful employment---because as several persons in this thread have said, the "majority" of Americans don't approve of homosexuals?

Furthermore, once we affirm the principle you have suggested, will gays and bi-sexuals still be required to pay taxes? Why should they pay full tax if they don't have access to the same opportunities as you do? Should gays be allowed to vote? If so, why? Allowed to teach children? Allowed to seek employment in any profession where they might be portrayed as a role model?

Why permit diseased, immoral, perverted, promiscuous, disgusting persons to have ANY rights? What example does that set for our children?

263 posted on 12/23/2004 10:21:05 AM PST by Ernie.cal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson