The Gay Thread

Quote: Gandler

I don't feel that is true. But, if you want to talk about substance for gay issues: There are only two questions that matter.

1. Do you think gay marriage should be legal?

2. Do you support businesses discriminating against gay people.

To question 1, the only logical answer is yes (there are no negative effects of gay marriage on partners or on children).

Question 2 is more complex, and I actually think it is important to protect the rights of business owners to choose who they do business with. I personally support religious freedom protections laws (despite being an atheist). Also, this is one area (that nobody has mentioned) where some gay people take advantage of their sexuality for lawsuits and publicity stunts. If you cited this as an example, I would have taken your earlier comments more seriously.

1. No. I strongly believe marriage is about one man and one woman. The "no effect" on children is debatable. I do not believe there is "no effect." Sorry, but a gay relationship is not the same as a straight one. Nothing you are going to say will convince me, and I do not care who thinks what.

2. Yes. Mainly because of what you said. Lawsuit bait and publicity stunts. Also I think a bar should be allowed to refuse service if the owner does not want it to become a gay hangout. See the "All in the Family" episode where Kelsey tells Mike he does not mind Archie's gay friend because he is from the neighborhood, has a drink and minds his business, and does not "camp it up." While the guy he thinks is gay is not, the point is such a place has the right to have the kind of business they want to have.

FWIW I think a gay bar should be allowed to ban straights who are "sightseeing." This is more a problem with straight females based on an article or two I read in I forget what mainstream publication.

This goes back to the same line as people claiming they were fired for being gay. Was it that they were gay, or was it that their behavior was distracting to business. Or could it cause other issues, e.g.: in the military you do not want two gays in a combat situation as they may risk the unit for the sake of each other.

Quote: AZDuffman

1. No. I strongly believe marriage is about one man and one woman. The "no effect" on children is debatable. I do not believe there is "no effect." Sorry, but a gay relationship is not the same as a straight one. Nothing you are going to say will convince me, and I do not care who thinks what.

2. Yes. Mainly because of what you said. Lawsuit bait and publicity stunts. Also I think a bar should be allowed to refuse service if the owner does not want it to become a gay hangout. See the "All in the Family" episode where Kelsey tells Mike he does not mind Archie's gay friend because he is from the neighborhood, has a drink and minds his business, and does not "camp it up." While the guy he thinks is gay is not, the point is such a place has the right to have the kind of business they want to have.

FWIW I think a gay bar should be allowed to ban straights who are "sightseeing." This is more a problem with straight females based on an article or two I read in I forget what mainstream publication.

This goes back to the same line as people claiming they were fired for being gay. Was it that they were gay, or was it that their behavior was distracting to business. Or could it cause other issues, e.g.: in the military you do not want two gays in a combat situation as they may risk the unit for the sake of each other.

You do realize the majority of society is straight men and straight women.
The vast majority of men and women in the military are straight.
Should straight men and straight women not be together in combat situations?

Quote: Gandler

You do realize the majority of society is straight men and straight women.
The vast majority of men and women in the military are straight.
Should straight men and straight women not be together in combat situations?

1. Women do not belong in combat.
2. If women are going to be in co-ed combat units, any romantic or sexual relationships with the rest of the unit need to be prohibited.
3. If you think #2 is not possible, refer to #1.

Quote: Gandler

There are only two questions that matter.

1. Do you think gay marriage should be legal?{/q]

Don't care, why would I.

2. Do you support businesses discriminating against gay people.

If it's against a person's beliefs, who
am I to have a problem with it. The
entire Catholic Church discriminates
against Gay's who practice Gay sex.
They can't be members.

"According to the Catholic theology of sexuality, all sexual acts must be open to procreation and express the symbolism of male-female complementarity. Sexual acts between two members of the same gender cannot meet these standards"

Quote: Gandler

I
Question 2 is more complex, and I actually think it is important to protect the rights of business owners to choose who they do business with. I personally support religious freedom protections laws (despite being an atheist). Also, this is one area (that nobody has mentioned) where some gay people take advantage of their sexuality for lawsuits and publicity stunts. If you cited this as an example, I would have taken your earlier comments more seriously.

I look at it this way. Religion really is a choice and when two rights collide the right to not be discriminated against comes ahead by who you are rather than by who you choose to be as a religious person, or as a non-religious person.

But I agree is not all that easy depending on the what the decision is over. I wouldn't force a doctor to do an abortion who is against it either by religion or personal ethics. But that argument also includes constant debate over another important issue of rights or non-rights of conception to birth. So it is multi-pronged debate.

Quote: AZDuffman

1. Women do not belong in combat.
2. If women are going to be in co-ed combat units, any romantic or sexual relationships with the rest of the unit need to be prohibited.
3. If you think #2 is not possible, refer to #1.

Currently that is allowed (actually I know of several -straight- married couples in the same unit....)

The only restriction is you are not supposed to be romantically or sexually involved with somebody who outranks you (Officer and Enlisted, etc....) However, married couples are exempt if they were married before being in the same unit (IE If an enlisted person dates somebody in college and they marry, and she graduates and joins as an Officer).

All units are "coed" except for combat units, but know that is changing, so now all jobs will be open to all (and the new PT test is age and gender neutral, so all people are held to the same physical and mental standard).

Lets put combat situations aside, because most units are not regularly in combat. If you work in an Army Office or Hospital , warehouse, or railyard men and women are going to work together, some are going to date or just sleep together for fun. This happens everywhere that people (particularly younger, in shape, hormonal people) work together. You are never going to stop workplace sex, and that includes the military.

Quote: Gandler

Currently that is allowed (actually I know of several -straight- married couples in the same unit....)

The only restriction is you are not supposed to be romantically or sexually involved with somebody who outranks you (Officer and Enlisted, etc....) However, married couples are exempt if they were married before being in the same unit (IE If an enlisted person dates somebody in college and they marry, and she graduates and joins as an Officer).

All units are "coed" except for combat units, but know that is changing, so now all jobs will be open to all (and the new PT test is age and gender neutral, so all people are held to the same physical and mental standard).

Lets put combat situations aside, because most units are not regularly in combat. If you work in an Army Office or Hospital , warehouse, or railyard men and women are going to work together, some are going to date or just sleep together for fun. This happens everywhere that people (particularly younger, in shape, hormonal people) work together. You are never going to stop workplace sex, and that includes the military.

I clearly said "combat units." I am well aware of the ban on enlisted/officers dating. When I worked at a military bank a guy called for a loan or something and applied for him and his wife, she was an officer. When I hesitated he said she went to OCS or something before they married, said he was used to being asked.

I do have a problem with romantically involved people in the same unit if one or both are in a position of fiduciary responsibility of any kind. A second person in the same unit compromises security there. Even the most remote chance they can be alone together is a security risk. This same limitation is use in the private sector all the time.


9999!

Quote: AZDuffman

I clearly said "combat units." I am well aware of the ban on enlisted/officers dating. When I worked at a military bank a guy called for a loan or something and applied for him and his wife, she was an officer. When I hesitated he said she went to OCS or something before they married, said he was used to being asked.

I do have a problem with romantically involved people in the same unit if one or both are in a position of fiduciary responsibility of any kind. A second person in the same unit compromises security there. Even the most remote chance they can be alone together is a security risk. This same limitation is use in the private sector all the time.


9999!

Right, but combat units are now (or very soon when integration finishes) are open to all. I feel that is the right course of action as long as everyone is held to the same standard (which is the case).

Why would two people romantically involved be a financial security risk if they work alone? Its the Army, its not like you can sign off on a bunch of overtime for each other. And, you can't just promote somebody (its a long and complicated process involving many layers and many evals….)

Also, you did not say combat units, you said "coed units"...…. Which can apply to virtually any units, even if it is about as non-combat as it gets (working in a hospital)...

Just a reminder that everything Bob says about the Catholic Church is wrong.

Quote: FrGamble

Just a reminder that everything Bob says about the Catholic Church is wrong.

Take out “about the Catholic Church” and you’re still correct.