Monday, January 16, 2006
Washington State Republicans Abandoning Conservatives
Washington State Republican Sen. Bill Finkbeiner has aligned himself with the state's "first openly gay lawmaker, Democrat Cal Anderson of Seattle. Anderson died of AIDS in 1995" (cite). Before he died, he submitted a bill to create a new class of people not based upon skin color, gender, or age, but behavior. Like being a vegetarian, an individual's sexual preference will now become protected status.
If this bill passes, the civil rights statute becomes laughable. What I can't quite understand is how homosexuality becomes a civil right before adultery; or, maybe that's next along with polygamy. I've got their defense already, "I was born attracted to many members of the opposite sex." It seems as legitimate. Or, how about this for a new civil right, "I reject the carnivorous lifestyle and have committed myself to loving vegetables exclusively." The discrimation is everywhere for vegetarians; they can't even look at a menu without being forced to consider meats--ugh!
Unfortunately, this is a more serious issue than the satire above would demostrate. And, before the moonbats start their protests, I do not hate, nor have I ever discriminated against anyone. Still, I have serious concerns about making this the newest civil right. Here are some of the reasons. I urge all citizens of Washington State to contact your state Senator.
If this bill passes, the civil rights statute becomes laughable. What I can't quite understand is how homosexuality becomes a civil right before adultery; or, maybe that's next along with polygamy. I've got their defense already, "I was born attracted to many members of the opposite sex." It seems as legitimate. Or, how about this for a new civil right, "I reject the carnivorous lifestyle and have committed myself to loving vegetables exclusively." The discrimation is everywhere for vegetarians; they can't even look at a menu without being forced to consider meats--ugh!
Unfortunately, this is a more serious issue than the satire above would demostrate. And, before the moonbats start their protests, I do not hate, nor have I ever discriminated against anyone. Still, I have serious concerns about making this the newest civil right. Here are some of the reasons. I urge all citizens of Washington State to contact your state Senator.
Thoughtful Readers Speak:
<< Home
RIGHTFAITH: Where everything favors the stewardship of patrimony. All content is believed to be correct but may be amended based upon new information. The content of this page may be republished with proper citation without the expressed consent of the author. This site is not, in any manner whatsoever, associated with the religious philosophism from the Indian penninsula. All comments or emails to the author become the property of the author and may be published or deleted without notice or reason provided. Copyrighted 2005.
Why do you have this overwhelming desire to inflict your morals and lifestyle on the rest of us? It's not like gay people are out to make you marry a man, so why are you out to make them marry who you want them to marry? Look at it this way: your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.
I'm completely at a loss as to why you are so concerned with the personal lives of others. It honestly makes no sense to me.
I'm completely at a loss as to why you are so concerned with the personal lives of others. It honestly makes no sense to me.
Adultery is a civil right. Granted, it doesn't win you many friends, but they can't throw you in jail for it, or force you and your spouse to get a divorce over it.
And you can be a vegitarian, as well. You're free to do so, and no one has the right to invalidate your marriage as a result. So these civil freedoms that you ridicule are, in fact, already present.
Doesn't that just piss you off? That people are completely free to do things that don't affect you in any way, but that you don't personally like? How dare a vegetarian choose not to eat meats, or be told not to do so by a doctor. The nerve!
And you can be a vegitarian, as well. You're free to do so, and no one has the right to invalidate your marriage as a result. So these civil freedoms that you ridicule are, in fact, already present.
Doesn't that just piss you off? That people are completely free to do things that don't affect you in any way, but that you don't personally like? How dare a vegetarian choose not to eat meats, or be told not to do so by a doctor. The nerve!
And we are asked to pay for the consequences of rabid homosexual behavior with our tax money.
Right, but I'm asked to pay for the consequences of your religion's rabidly immoral stance on sex, so I think it's largely fair.
There's no "public health" argument in regards to homosexuality - at least, certainly not one that doesn't also apply to dangerous conservative restrictions on access to contraception.
Right, but I'm asked to pay for the consequences of your religion's rabidly immoral stance on sex, so I think it's largely fair.
There's no "public health" argument in regards to homosexuality - at least, certainly not one that doesn't also apply to dangerous conservative restrictions on access to contraception.
Apparently straight people don't contract sexually transmitted diseases. Oh, wait.
So, Randy, is it your plan to outlaw all sex except that sanctioned by your particular brand of religion?
So, Randy, is it your plan to outlaw all sex except that sanctioned by your particular brand of religion?
Considering the desires that have been evidenced by continual sexual scandals amongst many priests and their parishoners, I would think that some would be particulary interested in watching all sex so they can evaluate if it is sanctioned by their brand of religion.
Post a Comment
# posted by 
: 5:41 PM
: 5:41 PM<< Home
