No, I meant philic, Liberals are homophilic, it's my rebuttal for their homophobic word they throw around. I can't see condoning the lifestyle. Do you know what death from AIDS is? Normally a person dies and then their body rots. With AIDS you get the rotting before you die. This is not an exaggeration or mischaracterization, you rot while you are still alive to see it. Pieces of your skin fall off and you become home to every disease that comes your way. Liberals want to encourage people to enter a lifestyle that often ends like that, and at a young age too. Are they insane or what??
Religions can oppose homosexuality all they want. That's the right of the clergy and the parishioners. The Supreme court did not make up the right to gay sex just as the constitution did not invent the right to hetero-sex. The Supreme court disallowed the state from outlawing gay sex, calling it a violation of the 6th amendment. If you want to take your sexual instructions and reproductive marching orders from the bible go ahead, just don't try to push it through the legislature. You seem to have trouble understanding that individual rights and behavior in our republic are generally considered to inhere to the individual unless specifically outlawed or in conflict with legal obligations.
You must have a special nose for gays burnin because I can't find a thing that Gekko said that indicates he is gay.
balda - Four friends just returned a month ago from a two week trip to Siberia and they all had to go through the test on the way in. Also an organization I work with that has about 20 people working also in Siberia and are there under visas are now having to be tested for visa renewal if they return to the states and then apply for a new extended visa. We have had organizational discussions as to what to do in the case of a HIV positive person joining our organization, without our knowledge and since we can't legally ask, and then going through the whole visaing process only to be turned away by the government where they are applying. If we do know of their HIV positive condition then we can advise them where to and not to go. We are right now checking with all the countries where we send people to see what their restrictions are. That process won't be completed for another month or two. Maybe there was a regional difference although they were in Moscow, St. Petersburg, and about a dozen cities in Siberia. Two other friends left this week for two months over there so I will ask them when they return. It is important that we as a organization know as we have a steady stream of people coming and going. I would like to know for sure as it really effects our planning process.
gg - the thing about homsexuality in nature. Could you point us to a link. The link we got on the last discussion was about primates apparently using sex the way inmates use sex for political control or to show their power. I do not think homsexual rape is a value to be extolled. So if you got other links I would like to read them. I am not arguing anything --just like to know the true state of the debate.
In fact, there is a large and growing conflict over what people can say or the views they can express. Many liberals, who otherwise pride themselvs on protecting freedom of expression, are quick tolabel any skepticism regarding homosexulaity as "hate speech" that should not be allowed in civil society. Their view would be that religious expression should be confined to church and home, but that gay pride can flower everywhere. There are lawsuits going on now over schools banning the display of religious symbols. This is one good reason that homosexuality should not be included under anti-discrimination laws. Our experience with other anti-discrimination laws has taught us that there soon develops a huge body of law prohibiting anything that creates a "hostile work environment", whether or not anyone has actually been discriminated against.
What you have cited sounds extreme and has an imflammatory ring to it. It would be helpful to know more about the facts of specific cases where people are seizing upon "hate speech" charges to quell free conscience on the issue of gays. If you can cite or describe, I would like to know. On the second issue, I am not sure what you mean. I gather from your statement that you feel there is a huge body of law prohibiting behavior and policies that create a hostile work environment for people of color. THere must be laws that prevent a company for example from discriminating agaisnt black people due to their skin color or thier interest in things more commonly enjoyed by other black people as opposed to white people. If advancement at a company is hindered solely by your skin color, I suppose you would have a good chance to petition successfully for legal redress. If there are not policies or attitudes among executives at a company that hinder the advancement of blacks nor any that tend to create a hostile workplace, then It seems that the antidiscrimination laws are nugatory in such places. How is it different for other groups then? If a gay person or any other minority crys wolf and unjustly charges discrimination to manipulate matters to his advantage, and many do, then the system has to have the courage and resolve to deal with them forcefully. THe large social issues are like pendulums when they shift, and you have to get your hands around them and get them to stop swinging.
dggabriel- What you state sounds great in theory. I know of all types of small to medium size firms that have not hired black people because they are afraid of law suits if the potential hire does not work out. Talk to unemployment law attorneys. I would say it is such a big concern it was almost an epidemic when I was lawyer in the mid 90s and I still hear about it today even in the prop trading industry. I have very conflicted views regarding anti discrimination laws and affirmative action. But to me there seem to be even less reason to protect gays. Black is usually obvious and not a choice gay does not have to be obvious and sex is a choice.
While the debate of whether or not homosexuality is genetic or not continues, let's say for the sake of argument that it is a choice, unlike skin color. Religious preference is a choice too, yet we protect the rights of people to practice religious freedom and deem that behavior as not to be a factor in the hiring or firing process, the same way we now do with gender or race. Someone cannot be fired or not hired based on that individual's religious preference, and the same should be applied to those who opt for an alternative sexual preference or lifestyle. Racial profiling is wrong, religious profiling is wrong, and so is sexual preference profiling where such activity outside of the workplace is not illegal.