Posted on 07/06/2014 5:10:26 AM PDT by Salman
The U.S. Constitution protects gay people’s right to marry the person they love. It does not, however, protect them from getting fired for doing so. Throughout the first decade of marriage equality, most states that legalized gay marriage also proscribed anti-gay employment discrimination, rendering this legal dissonance moot. But as more and more states find marriage equality foisted upon them by a judicial mandate, this discordance in rights presents something of a ticking time bomb for the LGBT movement.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
But let's not say the opposite "gender," because "gender" means a fluid, intermittent and transient state of mind which drives you to present yourself publicly in a certain way (via dress, mannerisms, hairstyle, given name, cosmetics, demeanor, gait, voice, and pronoun preference), shaped by as well as shaping a set of social expectations.
How I lament the day that the word "gender" mutated and jumped out of the Basic Grammar Box and started roaming the city at large, waving its paws and threatening people at the intersection of Psychology and Sociology.
As far as possible, I don't use the word "gender." I use the word "sex."
"Sex" is actually what you mean: being an XY or an XX, a male or a female in a species which manifests binary sexual reproductive differentiation.
What’s the problem? The state does not recognize their marriage, they are free to dissolve the relationship as anyone who’s shacking up does.
And if they want the courts to decide, they can get their divorce in the state what married them...
Even if the people in question are tidy, hygienic, and sweetly scented homosexuals, it ought to be recognized that the drive to express endearment by sticking your wedding tackle into somebody else’s anus, is Not. A. Good. Thing.
Whether that person is the same or the opposite sex, rank or tidy.
Well, yes, if your employer happens to be a Catholic School or Church.
Thanks be to God.
I think everybody agrees with that. From the standpoint of law, the actual ability to have children cannot be the point. What counts is the ability to consummate the marriage, which is (or was) defined as the act of coitus by which the male's organ enters and deposits semen into the female's genital tract.
They had to discuss this in the UK, where of course none of the SS couples could legally consummate a marriage unless Her Majesty's Government redefined intercourse. There was no one definitive act that was "The Marriage Act," by which marriage is legally consummated.
Likewise they had to redefine "Adultery," since there was no one defining act which was "The Adulterous Act."
As BJ Clinton taught us 16 years ago, we've got to the point that we not only don't know what "sex" is, we don't even know what "is" is.
I guess I should have said, will any homosexual be fired from any secular business nowadays. I think that is doubtful.
Agree with that statement.
I also think there will always be sad silly queens out there. I don't begrudge them the right to cohabit. Just keep it quiet and behind closed doors. But (addressing them) Don't ever think you can or should ever call it marriage. It is an aberration.
Sums the issue in as succinct and common sense manner as anything I’ve seen in a good while.
Passing a law makes it legal thus a good thing. They have parental (gubment) permission.
Here’s the article about gays being forced to get “married.” Fools that they were.
This author is referring to states where "the gay mirage" is legal (because forced by the Federal courts) but the state laws do not have anti-discrimination clauses on the grounds of gender identity or sexual orientation. Thus, as soon as they get married, they are publicly identified as gay, and therefore those who wish to discriminate against them, could.
It's saying marriage might not be advantageous in states that don't have "gay" as a legally protected minority.
Because liberals speak a different language and think with a different part of their brain, they claim the right to what ever interpretation they desire.
This pure bull, there is no epidemic of f*ggots getting fired for being f*ggots.
However, you didn’t scorch earth with a huge support group for doing so.
Or most serious evangelical church/school institutions as well...
though it’s always sad when a “gay” worms his or her way into a Christian organization and none of the Christians have any idea something is awry in this person’s life until Surprise! this person announces a gay marriage, and a panic ensues. To me that suggests that the faith in that place had been weak. Surely the Holy Spirit ought to be at least equal in perceptive capability to any “gaydar.”
It’s pretty much another chip on their shoulders.
It’s not just perverted judges, many put there by the American people, but the American people themselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.