The anti-gay marriage movement IS homophobic

No it isn't. You and I both have the same right to join the Army or apply to be a police officer or compete for an opening at City Sanitation. The fact that each of these has requirements or responsibilities that we don't want to do does not mean that they discriminate against us. We may both be eligible to be health care workers but cannot stand the sight of blood so we choose not to do that. Should the hospital or clinic design a job that doesn't require that which we don't want to do to avoid discriminating against us?

Right now marriage does afford some benefits that those who cannot or choose not to marry don't have. I am all for some kind of arrangement to accommodate the people who need it. So then we'll have two 100% equal systems that ANYBODY can participate in--you choose to get married or you choose civil union or whatever they decide to call it. EVERYBODY has every right to choose one or the other. How is that discriminatory?

It does apply equitably in regard to sex. Everybody who marries has to marry somebody of the opposite sex whether they are gay, straight, or something in between. So what discrimination is there in that?

mesquite wrote:

Strawman? Where? That truly does look like a bush to me and it is wearing glasses.

Here is what you wrote:

Quote:

It is essentially the same argument that was used to justify laws prohibiting interracial marriages. i.e. each person was equally entitled to marry someone of their own race.

The strawman is that your example is discriminatory in that you have a 'separate but equal' system distinguished by race. This does not apply to my argument. I did not offer a 'separate but equal' system. I proposed two entirely different systems of which anybody and everybody can choose one or the other.

In my example there is no discrimination based on race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, size, weight, age, economic or social status, or any other criteria. Every single person plays by exactly the same rules.

But you haven't shown me how it is discriminating to apply the exact same rules to everybody.

C'mon you guys, surely you can see the basic point Foxfyre is trying to make? Right now, as the marriage law in Louisiana stands, anyone can marry anyone of the opposite sex (well, of course, we have to exclude family). So, the laws of Louisiana afford the exact same right to everyone.

Now, if homosexuals are to marry someone of the same sex, yes, the law will have to be amended. But, just because it has not been amended yet does not mean that homosexuals do not have the same rights. Heterosexuals do not have the right to marry same sex partners either as the law stands. Same right.

The law as it stands now:

Heterosexuals = can marry heterosexuals
Homosexuals = can marry heterosexuals

The law if amended:

Heterosexuals - can marry heterosexuals or homosexuals
Homosexuals - can marry heterosexuals or homosexuals

See? Simple.

Some people just don't seem to be able to accept that homosexuals exist in this world.

Homosexuals/bisexuals don't necessarily WANT to marry someone of the opposite sex. How difficult is that to understand?

The question really should be: What right does anyone have to deny human beings, no matter their sexual orientation, the chance to marry the one they choose?

flushd wrote:

Some people just don't seem to be able to accept that homosexuals exist in this world.

Homosexuals/bisexuals don't necessarily WANT to marry someone of the opposite sex. How difficult is that to understand?

The question really should be: What right does anyone have to deny human beings, no matter their sexual orientation, the chance to marry the one they choose?

Nobody has the right to deny human beings, no matter their sexual orientation, the chance to marry the one they choose so long as the laws governing marriage are followed. How difficult is that to understand?

Which is why some were moved to change the law.

Which is why some were moved to change the law.

littlek wrote:

Which is why some were moved to change the law.

Yes, but how to change the law is the issue isn't it? The majority of Americans believe that traditional marriage has its purposes and do not wish to change the definition that would make it quite different from what it is.

If the majority of the pro-gay-marriage group could accept that, then I believe the majority of Americans would be willing to work harder toward finding a workable way for everybody who cannot or don't want to marry under the existing laws to have the legal benefits they need.