It Can Happen only in Texas.

[ironsides]

In this case the California Supreme Court overturned a State law before the people had a chance to vote whether they wanted it as a law or not. It was a premature decision on their part, as they are now thinking, they work for the people of California, not the other way around. In most states it takes 60+% or more to over turn a amendment. We have discussed this before, and I see it will have to be a U.S. Supreme court decision to settle this once and for all.

 

[ironsides]

Contrast this with USA, where forget about civil unions, many states don’t even give gays protection against discrimination. Only a handful states have passed legislation outlawing discrimination against gays. What this means is that in the states where there is no such protection (and this constitutes most of USA), a gay person can be fired from his job or thrown out of his apartment just because he is gay, for no other reason.

Sir: This statement is untrue, Federal laws protect all minorities blacks, hispanics, gays. women, disabled etc. from being unjustly evicted or fired from a job, just because they are a minority. You cannot be refused from purchasing/renting a home, you can only be refused employment if you are unable or un qualified for a job, an employer even has to make reasonable accommodations if your disabled. They have recourse, and that recourse usually makes them rich. The only problem seems to be the word marriage, nothing more. Anything else usually ends up in court with the minority usually winning.

 

[RanchHand]

You are correct in that there is not a federal law banning discrimination in the US against gays. A law to enact this has already passed in the House of Representatives.
"The states banning sexual orientation discrimination in private sector employment are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin"

This is approximately 40% of the population of the US. Obviously the trend is to extend this if not enact federal law in the near future. Canada has the luxury of being an isolated country from the rest of the world, consisting of a largely homogeneous population. We have almost as many illegal aliens as you do citizens. Despite that, there are 4 times as many Americans protected by laws dealing with sexual orientation as the entire population of Canada and nearly twice the population of Canada enjoy gay civil relationships. American society is many magnitudes of complexity greater than Canada, given our media, diverse population, world commitments etc. It's not just "chop down the trees" vs "don't chop down the trees". "Save the beavers" vs "don't save the beavers". "Bring back the troop commitment in Afghanistan that is 1/50 that of the USA now" vs " in 20 months".

If anti-gay discrimination is as rampant in the US as you would have your fellow Canadians believe, why can't you give me a boat load of links to articles about this? I can't find any. Don't refer me to academic papers as you say. Give me a bunch of examples. You're the one making all the accusations. Start listing them. You have a responsibility now that you've gotten Canadians running wild on this board over it.

 

[Spade]

The only problem seems to be the word marriage, nothing more.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

You're right on, of course. People seem to draw lines in the sand over words! Here and in the States. Remarkable! Time was when people would blanch over the "F" word; but, I assume sexual intercourse was okay. People used to cringe over "communism," but coöperation was just fine. Today, it's "Marriage." Go figure!

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Federal laws protect all minorities blacks, hispanics, gays. women, disabled etc. from being unjustly evicted or fired from a job, just because they are a minority.

Wrong, Ironsides, federal law specifically protects, blacks, Hispanics and women. I think later on they added disabled people. Gays are not included in the federal anti-discrimination statute. Republicans have fought tooth and nail any attempts to include gays in the anti-discrimination legislation.

Let us see what Wikipedia says about it.

LGBT rights in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

there is "very little statutory, common law, and case law establishing employment discrimination based upon sexual orientation as a legal wrong.

A proposed bill to ban anti-gay employment discrimination nationwide, known as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), has been introduced in the U.S. Congress, but its prospects of passage were not believed to be good when there was a Republican-controlled Congress. However, the Democratic victory at the 2006 mid-term elections may present a new opportunity for the bill to pass

Evidently this was written in 2006. The democratic majority in 2006 was razor thin, and was not enough to overcome Republican attempts to block the legislation. Now with increased majority, Democrats maybe successful in passing the law, I don’t know.

However, as of now, there is no federal law barring discrimination against homosexuals.

 

[Tyr]

You are correct in that there is not a federal law banning discrimination in the US against gays. A law to enact this has already passed in the House of Representatives.
"The states banning sexual orientation discrimination in private sector employment are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin"

This is approximately 40% of the population of the US. Obviously the trend is to extend this if not enact federal law in the near future. Canada has the luxury of being an isolated country from the rest of the world, consisting of a largely homogeneous population. We have almost as many illegal aliens as you do citizens. Despite that, there are 4 times as many Americans protected by laws dealing with sexual orientation as the entire population of Canada and nearly twice the population of Canada enjoy gay civil relationships. American society is many magnitudes of complexity greater than Canada, given our media, diverse population, world commitments etc. It's not just "chop down the trees" vs "don't chop down the trees". "Save the beavers" vs "don't save the beavers". "Bring back the troop commitment in Afghanistan that is 1/50 that of the USA now" vs " in 20 months".

If anti-gay discrimination is as rampant in the US as you would have your fellow Canadians believe, why can't you give me a boat load of links to articles about this? I can't find any. Don't refer me to academic papers as you say. Give me a bunch of examples. You're the one making all the accusations. Start listing them. You have a responsibility now that you've gotten Canadians running wild on this board over it.

We have almost as many illegal aliens as you do citizens. Despite that, there are 4 times as many Americans protected by laws dealing with sexual orientation as the entire population of Canada and nearly twice the population of Canada enjoy gay civil relationships.

So what's your point? Meaningless statistical comparisons alluding to Canada which has 1/9th the population of the USA?

Re-jig the statistical comparison and you might have a point

 

[SirJosephPorter]

If anti-gay discrimination is as rampant in the US as you would have your fellow Canadians believe, why can't you give me a boat load of links to articles about this? I can't find any. Don't refer me to academic papers as you say.

Sorry, RanchHand, I have given you what I consider to be sufficient evidence. The scholarly paper I referred gives a detail description of the harassment and discrimination suffered by gays.

Religious tolerance website, which I quoted says the same thing. If you go to ACLU website you will see plenty of cases of discrimination against gays. Let me give you one example.

American Civil Liberties Union : Lesbian Gay Rights

here they list the following:

Federal Appeals Court To Hear Challenge To Kentucky Childcare Agencys Faith-Based Bias

ACLU Sues Nassau County Schools to Enforce Right of Gay Straight Alliance to Meet at Yulee High School and Yulee Middle School

Women Ask Court to Order New Illinois Birth Certificates Following Sex Reassignment Surgery Abroad

ACLU Asks Court To Strike Down Arkansas Parenting Ban

ACLU Urges Tennessee Appeals Court To Protect Rights Of Lesbian Mom

As I said, it is very easy to find examples of discrimination against gays. I think I have given you enough evidence, if you want any more, find it yourself.

You have a responsibility now that you've gotten Canadians running wild on this board over it.

I have done that? You give me too much credit.

 

[Tyr]

You are correct in that there is not a federal law banning discrimination in the US against gays. A law to enact this has already passed in the House of Representatives.
"The states banning sexual orientation discrimination in private sector employment are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin"

This is approximately 40% of the population of the US. Obviously the trend is to extend this if not enact federal law in the near future. Canada has the luxury of being an isolated country from the rest of the world, consisting of a largely homogeneous population. We have almost as many illegal aliens as you do citizens. Despite that, there are 4 times as many Americans protected by laws dealing with sexual orientation as the entire population of Canada and nearly twice the population of Canada enjoy gay civil relationships. American society is many magnitudes of complexity greater than Canada, given our media, diverse population, world commitments etc. It's not just "chop down the trees" vs "don't chop down the trees". "Save the beavers" vs "don't save the beavers". "Bring back the troop commitment in Afghanistan that is 1/50 that of the USA now" vs " in 20 months".

If anti-gay discrimination is as rampant in the US as you would have your fellow Canadians believe, why can't you give me a boat load of links to articles about this? I can't find any. Don't refer me to academic papers as you say. Give me a bunch of examples. You're the one making all the accusations. Start listing them. You have a responsibility now that you've gotten Canadians running wild on this board over it.

You have a responsibility now that you've gotten Canadians running wild on this board over it.

Canadians "running wild" like a pack of rabid dogs fighting over a piece of carrion.

Imagine that!!! Canadians on a Canadian Forum. :roll:

What next..... Wummon gettin' ta' vote :idea:

 

[petros]

Did somebody resurrect Anita " the fascist" Bryant?

 

[Tyr]

 

[ironsides]

Ok, it is not a Federal law, but California the state in question does.So we are back to the word "marriage", it will have a difficult if not impossible chance of becoming backed by a federal statute.

 

[ironsides]

You're right on, of course. People seem to draw lines in the sand over words! Here and in the States. Remarkable! Time was when people would blanch over the "F" word; but, I assume sexual intercourse was okay. People used to cringe over "communism," but coöperation was just fine. Today, it's "Marriage." Go figure!

Lets pick another word. :lol:

 

[lone wolf]

Ok, it is not a Federal law, but California the state in question does.

Thirteen states plus the District of Columbian (DC) have laws that protect against discrimination due to sexual orientation and gender identity. They are:

• Minnesota
• Rhode Island
• New Mexico
• California
• District of Columbia
• Illinois
• Maine
• Hawaii
• New Jersey
• Washington
• Iowa
• Oregon (Beginning January 2008)
• Vermont
• Colorado

So we are back to the word "marriage", it will have a difficult if not impossible chance of becoming backed by a federal statute.

Unfortunately, discrimination is a difficult thing to prove when so many other excuses are so easily found. What's in a word? The news is filled with stories of corporate marriages. Does that make the merger any less legal?

Marriage? Union? Partnership? Spousal arrangement? Why are people so threatened? So what if it's not right for me. It's right for that particular couple. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Do the United States stand by their word or not?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Did somebody resurrect Anita " the fascist" Bryant?

I remember Anita Bryant, Petros. She was very active in anti-gay movement when I lived in USA. She was of the opinion that gays should be locked up for 20 years (she doubled up on the Texas sodomy law, she thought Texas sodomy law was too soft on gays).

She was a fervent, passionate member of the religious right. Anyway do you know what happened to her? She got a divorce, and the religious right community cast her out, she became a pariah in the cultural conservative movement.

But I don’t think she changed her opinion about gays.

 

[RanchHand]

SirJosephPorter, you've provided an 'academic paper' and a half dozen links to activities by the ACLU to prove your point of widespread discrimination against homosexuals in the US.
Rampant? 300,000,000 citizens? An essay on the subject and the fact that evidently the ACLU is involved in a few incidents does not make your case. Why can't I find article after article on examples of this discrimination when I search Google news or the New York Times? It seems what you're doing is another example of a Canadian throwing **** balls to your south with the intent of making yourselves feel good about Canada and defining your identity as a nation as being relative to the United States.
You ignored the following:
4 times as many Americans as Canadians are protected by anti-gay discrimination.
2 times as many Americans as Canadians are eligible for civil unions.
5 times as many US states as Canadian provinces make consensus at the state level more difficult
10 times as many US citizens as Canadian citizens make consensus at the federal level more difficult
43% of Canadians identify themselves as Roman Catholic vs 24% in the US yet you identify the Roman Catholic Church as a US anti-homosexual hate group.

Just another case of Canadian **** ball tossing. You've been debunked my friend.

How Americans and Canadians differ religiously

 

[ironsides]

"Marriage? Union? Partnership? Spousal arrangement? Why are people so threatened? So what if it's not right for me. It's right for that particular couple. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Do the United States stand by their word or not?"

We think so, but I can see how it could be a matter of Matter of interpretation.
Does it mean the same now as it did 7/4/1776?

 

[Ron in Regina]

4 times as many Americans as Canadians are protected by anti-gay discrimination.
2 times as many Americans as Canadians are eligible for civil unions.
5 times as many US states as Canadian provinces make consensus at the state level more difficult
10 times as many US citizens as Canadian citizens make consensus at the federal level more difficult
43% of Canadians identify themselves as Roman Catholic vs 24% in the US yet you identify the Roman Catholic Church as a US anti-homosexual hate group.

I know this has already been pointed out, but perhaps it has been missed.
The USA & Canada differ in population by nine fold. Lets qualify your
statements in that, the ONLY time you balance your argument on a %'age
basis (the "Roman Catholic Church" thing) is to minimize that number by
population.

Either state ALL your points as a percentage of the total population, or none
of you points as a percentage, but don't attempt to twist the numbers in cherry
pick'n your methodology. I'd like to see your examples all expressed as a %.

Just 'cuz someone happens to be gay, does that determine which religion they
gravitate towards, if they wish to follow a religion at all? I don't think so. For all
I know, there are more Gay Roman Catholic Americans than there are Canadians,
but that just comes back to the question of, so what?

Personally, I don't even understand the whole kafuffle over Gay marriage.
Really....so what? If two homosexual people want to inflict marriage upon their
relationship and make it a legal and binding union in front of their friends, family,
and the tax man....is it really anybody's business except their own, their families,
their friends, and whomever they pay their taxes to?

Gay people are gay, 'cuz that's just the way it is. I'm sure they (& any of us) don't
get out of bed in the morning, and have to make a conscience decision as to
which sexual orientation they're going to be that day, or week, or year....but does
that mean that gay people don't deserve to have the same rights as hetro folks for
some reason? I don't even understand the argument against gay marriages...8O

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I know this has already been pointed out, but perhaps it has been missed.

Quite right Ron, I have already pointed it out to him. 100% of Canadian population is eligible for civil union or gay marriage, while only a small fraction of Americans is eligible for civil unions and only a tiny, minuscule fraction of Americans is eligible for gay marriage (only in Connecticut and Massachusetts).

In effect what he is saying is that since India has more Christians that Belgium, and since Belgium is a Christian country, that makes India an even more Christian county.

As for other points ,you have done an admirable of answering him, so thank you (but then, according to RanchHand, ‘I have gotten Canadians running wild on this board over it’, so I suppose that is to be expected).

Why can't I find article after article on examples of this discrimination when I search Google news or the New York Times?

RanchHand, maybe you don’t know how to do Google search (either that or you expect me to do your work for you). Anyway, I Googled for ‘New York Times discrimination gays’ and I got 1,140,000 hits.

On each page I see a few articles about discrimination against gays (discrimination in Florida, in Ireland, on Facebook to name just a few).

So as I said, I am finished finding articles about discrimination for you, if you want to find any more, do it yourself.

 

[Zzarchov]

There has been a modern revionist history in the western world, bordering on hysteria, against gays, as they become normalized into society, its a backlash.

This IS almost identical to what occured to blacks.

I'll give an example.

Blacks were originally given no restrictions on joining the military nor in voting in the birth of the United States (providing they were free, or as a method of becoming free in the case of the military)

Then revionism came in, in 1835 the rights of blacks to vote was removed in the Carolinas, hysteria was drummed up over time that blacks couldn't possibley make good soldiers and that they would harm unit cohesion, or need special divisions.

This went on for so long people seemed to forget there never were these problems, to the point that even in WWII as the need for bodies created black combat units, alot of generals believed as fact that black men were too cowardly to fight, completely forgetting the founding of the nation. Similar arguements were used about their ability to vote..ignoring they had no problem voting at the begining of America.


Likewise Gays for instance, are prohibited from the military, claiming they harm unit cohesion, or can't fight, or have poor emotional balance or organization skills. Meanwhile the United States military was founded and organized by an openly homosexual man, and countless armies throughout history have had no problems with homosexuals serving.

But this revionist myth has been dreamed up. Because if history debunks your bigotry, sometimes the easiest thing to do is rewrite history.

Hell, Same Sex marriages are not a new phenomenom. It used to be the norm in most cultures, until Rome banned them in 324, and western culture spread this, finally banning such arrangements in the orient (the last places to be westernized) in the 1920's.

 

[Ron in Regina]

It Can Happen only in Texas

To prejudice against somebody due to their sexual orientation,
the way I see it, would be akin to prejudice against somebody
due to their shoe size.

As a kid, you don't get to pick what size your feet will be when
you grow up, just like your sexual orientation. Now if I put my
mind to it, if I felt so inclined, I could argue that people with
little feet in relation to their mass exert more force per cm2 and
wear out lino & carpet faster than people with big feet with a
similar mass, so I don't believe little footed heavy people have
a right to walk on anything but pavement. I don't have to be
right....I just have to convince the gullible. Does this mean that
it would be right to not allow little footed heavy people to walk
on carpet or lino? 8O

Yeah...it doesn't make much sense to me either, but it ranks
right in there with not allowing gays to marry if that's what they
really want to do. :lol::lol::lol: