State Laws/ Propositions

[Godslayer Jillian]

But how do all murders become as evil as a deliberate bigoted murder?

[Underwater Ophelia]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

But how do all murders become as evil as a deliberate bigoted murder?

It's not any more evil than killing someone for money or because your wife cheated on you.

[x-deviant-x]

I'm kind of torn on the whole hate crimes legislation thing myself. I think the crime should be punished, regardless of the reason behind it. If you kill someone for anything other than self-defense or absolute undoubted accident, then you should be punished for it accordingly. It shouldn't really matter what the motives were. But hate crimes are escalating, and something does need to be done about it. I don't really see what stiffer penalties for killing a homo is going to do to curb this rise though.

The Matthew Shepard Act (officially, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 or LLEHCPA), H.R. 1592 was a proposed federal bill that would expand the 1969 United States federal hate-crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim's actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. The bill would also:

* remove the current prerequisite that the victim be engaging in a federally-protected activity, like voting or going to school;
* give federal authorities greater ability to engage in hate crimes investigations that local authorities choose not to pursue;
* provide $10 million in funding for 2008 and 2009 to help State and local agencies pay for investigating and prosecuting hate crimes;
* require the FBI to track statistics on hate crimes against transgender people (statistics for the other groups are already tracked).[1]

The bill passed the House of Representatives on May 3, 2007, 237 to 180, with Barney Frank, one of two openly gay Representatives, presiding.[2]

On 11 July, 2007, Senator Edward Kennedy introduced the bill (S. 1105) in the Senate as an amendment to the Senate Defense Reauthorization bill (H.R. 1585). The Senate hate crime amendment had 43 cosponsors, including four Republicans. After Republicans staged a filibuster on a troop-withdrawal amendment to the defense bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid delayed the votes on the hate crime amendment and the defense bill until September.[3]

The bill passed the Senate on September 27, 2007, as an amendment to the Defense Reauthorization bill. The cloture vote was 60 to 39 in favor. The amendment was then approved by voice vote.[4] President Bush indicated he might veto the DoD authorization bill if it reached his desk with the hate crimes legislation attached.[5][6] Ultimately, the amendment was dropped by the Democratic leadership because of opposition from antiwar Democrats, conservative groups, and President George W. Bush.[7] However, Barack Obama's website outlining the goals of his new administration cites passing the Act as a priority[8].

(And just for the record, McCain is against passing this too).

.
.

[raggedyanne]

Originally Posted by Joker_in_the_Pack

I imagine what you don't know would fill libraries. You want me to not call you names? That requires respect.

When you stop trying to take rights away from human beings based on an antiquated work of fiction, I'll show you some respect, until then, you can go cram a bible in your happy hole you judgmental cunt.

If I could hug you right now I would. Auriel, your religion should not prevent other people from enjoying basic civil rights. If you are so offended by homosexuals being allowed to marry, then don't go to their weddings and don't be homosexual. But please, if a proposition to give gay people the right to marry comes up in your state (which i doubt it ever will, bigoted bastards those mid-westerners), please consider that it is an issue of civil rights, not religion and that by preventing a group of people from enjoying these rights your are no better than the fat white governor sitting his office laughing as firefighters spray water hoses at civil right supporters.

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by x-deviant-x

I'm kind of torn on the whole hate crimes legislation thing myself. I think the crime should be punished, regardless of the reason behind it. If you kill someone for anything other than self-defense or absolute undoubted accident, then you should be punished for it accordingly. It shouldn't really matter what the motives were. But hate crimes are escalating, and something does need to be done about it. I don't really see what stiffer penalties for killing a homo is going to do to curb this rise though.

The Matthew Shepard Act (officially, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 or LLEHCPA), H.R. 1592 was a proposed federal bill that would expand the 1969 United States federal hate-crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim's actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. The bill would also:

* remove the current prerequisite that the victim be engaging in a federally-protected activity, like voting or going to school;
* give federal authorities greater ability to engage in hate crimes investigations that local authorities choose not to pursue;
* provide $10 million in funding for 2008 and 2009 to help State and local agencies pay for investigating and prosecuting hate crimes;
* require the FBI to track statistics on hate crimes against transgender people (statistics for the other groups are already tracked).[1]

The bill passed the House of Representatives on May 3, 2007, 237 to 180, with Barney Frank, one of two openly gay Representatives, presiding.[2]

On 11 July, 2007, Senator Edward Kennedy introduced the bill (S. 1105) in the Senate as an amendment to the Senate Defense Reauthorization bill (H.R. 1585). The Senate hate crime amendment had 43 cosponsors, including four Republicans. After Republicans staged a filibuster on a troop-withdrawal amendment to the defense bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid delayed the votes on the hate crime amendment and the defense bill until September.[3]

The bill passed the Senate on September 27, 2007, as an amendment to the Defense Reauthorization bill. The cloture vote was 60 to 39 in favor. The amendment was then approved by voice vote.[4] President Bush indicated he might veto the DoD authorization bill if it reached his desk with the hate crimes legislation attached.[5][6] Ultimately, the amendment was dropped by the Democratic leadership because of opposition from antiwar Democrats, conservative groups, and President George W. Bush.[7] However, Barack Obama's website outlining the goals of his new administration cites passing the Act as a priority[8].

(And just for the record, McCain is against passing this too).

.
.

http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Conten...x?rsrcid=33756
This is a really great article. I think if there is going to be equality, Obama is the president that is going to be the one to fight for it.

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by raggedyanne

If I could hug you right now I would. Auriel, your religion should not prevent other people from enjoying basic civil rights. If you are so offended by homosexuals being allowed to marry, then don't go to their weddings and don't be homosexual. But please, if a proposition to give gay people the right to marry comes up in your state (which i doubt it ever will, bigoted bastards those mid-westerners), please consider that it is an issue of civil rights, not religion and that by preventing a group of people from enjoying these rights your are no better than the fat white governor sitting his office laughing as firefighters spray water hoses at civil right supporters.

It is an issue of both. But like I stated in another post, I haven't voted since 2000 and don't plan to at this point in time. My vote, which only counts for one, is technically non-existent.

So again...what are you all so worried about? Yes I have my religious beliefs, but I also believe in practicing tolerance. I don't know how I have written that so many times, yet it is consistently ignored. It seems many are only "hearing" what they want to. At least Deviant and I can get along because he actually is really reading what I'm posting. Were that to ever to be on a Michigan ballot, AND in the unlikely event that I would vote, I probably would leave that blank. But in the end, if I chose to cast a vote contrary to what everyone here wants me to do, it is my vote. So go ahead and call me names and do what you will. At the end of the day, you are the ones that make yourselves look like fools.

[ionic_angel]

I think I've stated this before, but Auriel, arguing with Joker is like wrestling with a pig, and etc. It's not worth it, because he isn't operating from a rational standpoint as much as he is from a belief-driven standpoint - and on this board, hardly an original one.

Now, I disagree with your interpretation of belief in the Christian faith and your mixing it with other religions. I also disagree with a good many of your presuppositions and your conclusions. However, I'm not going to call you a c--- for believing those things.

When faced by people like joker, you can either ignore them, allow them to get to you, or mock them for amusement. Personally, I think you're doing too much of the middle one and not enough of the other two. It's an internet message board...it is very unlikely anything you say here will change anyone's mind, so don't take things too seriously.

Lastly, I was under the impression that the Matthew Shephard act had passed. My mistake. In any case, my point holds true - in America at least, some people's lives are held to be more valuable than others, and I disagree with that. Unless they consider single white males most valuable, because that's what I am. ::snicker::

[x-deviant-x]

Auriel, I understand your desire to preserve the religious concept of marriage, while still providing those of us who aren't religious, or heterosexual, with equal rights. In that light I wish there were more christians who saw it the way you do. At first your words irritated me, but you've taken the time to try, repeatedly, to explain your standpoint and while it may be difficult for most here to grasp, I get it, and I respect you for it. I wouldn't mind calling you a friend. ;-)

.

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by ionic_angel

because he isn't operating from a rational standpoint as much as he is from a belief-driven standpoint

Says the right wing conservative christian.

[ionic_angel]

Originally Posted by Joker_in_the_Pack

Says the right wing conservative christian.

Yep yep. Of course, I actually ADMIT what beliefs of mine are, actually, beliefs. You embrace non-rational causes and call it "progress", or "anarchy".

Also, as I've said before, you aren't even entertaining about it.

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by ionic_angel

Yep yep. Of course, I actually ADMIT what beliefs of mine are, actually, beliefs. You embrace non-rational causes and call it "progress", or "anarchy".

Also, as I've said before, you aren't even entertaining about it.

Anarchy would be progress. You're too god damned hedonistic and destructive to see that. The day you stop seeing life as nothing but your chance to exploit everyone you come across, then we can talk about anarchy, until then, you continue to be the self righteous jackass that you are and fuck off.

[ionic_angel]

Originally Posted by Joker_in_the_Pack

Anarchy would be progress. You're too god damned hedonistic and destructive to see that. The day you stop seeing life as nothing but your chance to exploit everyone you come across, then we can talk about anarchy, until then, you continue to be the self righteous jackass that you are and fuck off.

See the other thread for why this day will never come.

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by x-deviant-x

Auriel, I understand your desire to preserve the religious concept of marriage, while still providing those of us who aren't religious, or heterosexual, with equal rights. In that light I wish there were more christians who saw it the way you do. At first your words irritated me, but you've taken the time to try, repeatedly, to explain your standpoint and while it may be difficult for most here to grasp, I get it, and I respect you for it. I wouldn't mind calling you a friend. ;-)

.

I hope you don't mind, me adding you to my buddy list then?

[x-deviant-x]

not at all.

[~~Auriel~~]

[quote=ionic_angel]I think I've stated this before, but Auriel, arguing with Joker is like wrestling with a pig, and etc. It's not worth it, because he isn't operating from a rational standpoint as much as he is from a belief-driven standpoint - and on this board, hardly an original one.

Now, I disagree with your interpretation of belief in the Christian faith and your mixing it with other religions. I also disagree with a good many of your presuppositions and your conclusions. However, I'm not going to call you a c--- for believing those things.

When faced by people like joker, you can either ignore them, allow them to get to you, or mock them for amusement. Personally, I think you're doing too much of the middle one and not enough of the other two. It's an internet message board...it is very unlikely anything you say here will change anyone's mind, so don't take things too seriously.

*Snip*[\QUOTE]

You're right about that. My ignore list has grown a lot in the past week or so. While I have tried to thoroughly explain my point of view, it seems many on here enjoy twisting my words, putting them in my mouth, or simply ignoring the fact that despite my religion, I don't want to force that on others. More than that it's not that I want to change anyone's mind. Each person is entitled to their own beliefs and I haven't done anything to tell anyone what they believe is wrong, despite it's been done to me constantly. I've also noticed the age difference between myself and those who constantly criticize. Not just from their posts, but from their profiles. While I'm only 27, this does give me a few years of life experience that they have yet to go through. And for the most part Ionic, I realize that most of them are just doing it because they have nothing better to do than try to piss people off. I don't get a thrill out of that as there is enough drama and conflict in the world, I realize I don't need to create more.

Thanks for the advice!

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by ~~Auriel~~

You're right about that. My ignore list has grown a lot in the past week or so. While I have tried to thoroughly explain my point of view, it seems many on here enjoy twisting my words, putting them in my mouth, or simply ignoring the fact that despite my religion, I don't want to force that on others. More than that it's not that I want to change anyone's mind. Each person is entitled to their own beliefs and I haven't done anything to tell anyone what they believe is wrong, despite it's been done to me constantly. I've also noticed the age difference between myself and those who constantly criticize. Not just from their posts, but from their profiles. While I'm only 27, this does give me a few years of life experience that they have yet to go through. And for the most part Ionic, I realize that most of them are just doing it because they have nothing better to do than try to piss people off. I don't get a thrill out of that as there is enough drama and conflict in the world, I realize I don't need to create more.

Thanks for the advice!

What'd you say?

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by Albert Mond

What'd you say?

LMAO Nice one

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

[quote=~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by ionic_angel

I think I've stated this before, but Auriel, arguing with Joker is like wrestling with a pig, and etc. It's not worth it, because he isn't operating from a rational standpoint as much as he is from a belief-driven standpoint - and on this board, hardly an original one.

Now, I disagree with your interpretation of belief in the Christian faith and your mixing it with other religions. I also disagree with a good many of your presuppositions and your conclusions. However, I'm not going to call you a c--- for believing those things.

When faced by people like joker, you can either ignore them, allow them to get to you, or mock them for amusement. Personally, I think you're doing too much of the middle one and not enough of the other two. It's an internet message board...it is very unlikely anything you say here will change anyone's mind, so don't take things too seriously.

*Snip*[\QUOTE]

You're right about that. My ignore list has grown a lot in the past week or so. While I have tried to thoroughly explain my point of view, it seems many on here enjoy twisting my words, putting them in my mouth, or simply ignoring the fact that despite my religion, I don't want to force that on others. More than that it's not that I want to change anyone's mind. Each person is entitled to their own beliefs and I haven't done anything to tell anyone what they believe is wrong, despite it's been done to me constantly. I've also noticed the age difference between myself and those who constantly criticize. Not just from their posts, but from their profiles. While I'm only 27, this does give me a few years of life experience that they have yet to go through. And for the most part Ionic, I realize that most of them are just doing it because they have nothing better to do than try to piss people off. I don't get a thrill out of that as there is enough drama and conflict in the world, I realize I don't need to create more.

Thanks for the advice!

Shut it with your age crap, I'm four years older than you.

[raggedyanne]

Oh stuff it you all! Auriel has her views, no matter how distressing. And Auriel, tolerance is putting up with something you disagree in just because you "have to". Like I 'tolerate' my neighbors' Pomeranian, as much as I want to punt it into the next county, because I have to to stay in good relations with my neighbors. Christians are supposed to practice acceptance, which is coming to terms with and respecting others' viewpoints or desisions. Sorry, just a bit of a pet peeve of mine when people get those two words mixed up. Because what you've been trying to say all along is that you ACCEPT and respect the gay community's desire to marry and have the same rights as hetero christian couples, but you don't TOLERATE them actually doing that. Am I right? I just wanted to make sure I didn't misinterpret you before I give up on this thread completely. It has gotten a bit too illogical for my tastes.

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by raggedyanne

Oh stuff it you all! Auriel has her views, no matter how distressing. And Auriel, tolerance is putting up with something you disagree in just because you "have to". Like I 'tolerate' my neighbors' Pomeranian, as much as I want to punt it into the next county, because I have to to stay in good relations with my neighbors. Christians are supposed to practice acceptance, which is coming to terms with and respecting others' viewpoints or desisions. Sorry, just a bit of a pet peeve of mine when people get those two words mixed up. Because what you've been trying to say all along is that you ACCEPT and respect the gay community's desire to marry and have the same rights as hetero christian couples, but you don't TOLERATE them actually doing that. Am I right? I just wanted to make sure I didn't misinterpret you before I give up on this thread completely. It has gotten a bit too illogical for my tastes.

Yes!! Acceptance would be a better word. I respect freewill and respect the right that other's have- to choose how to live their lives, whether they are muslim, homosexual, black, white, or green. I believe in "take it or leave it," that is to say, accept people for who they are and don't try to change them based on what you have decided is right for you. You can't dictate that for anyone else but yourself.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Let me ask you something.
If gays shouldn't marry because it's about the sanctity of it according to your religion, why do you find it acceptable that others worship other deities, which stain the sanctity of what ought to be the closest connection to the one true god (at least according to religious people)?

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Let me ask you something.
If gays shouldn't marry because it's about the sanctity of it according to your religion, why do you find it acceptable that others worship other deities, which stain the sanctity of what ought to be the closest connection to the one true god (at least according to religious people)?

Because people treat religion like an all you can eat buffet.

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Let me ask you something.
If gays shouldn't marry because it's about the sanctity of it according to your religion, why do you find it acceptable that others worship other deities, which stain the sanctity of what ought to be the closest connection to the one true god (at least according to religious people)?

It's not that I think GLBT's shouldn't be allowed to get married. Gay marriages should leave the religious aspect out. From the homosexuals I have known, I don't think too many would be upset about that. I think the Feds need to sit down and go through line by line what religious aspects of hetero marriages should be preserved, and how they can amend Civil Unions to provide gays with something similar.

For example, the church has complete autonomy when it comes to marrying heterosexual couples. I don't think it is likely that a priest would marry a gay couple anyways. So leave that religious aspect in tact for hetero couples, thus preserving the sanctity according to God, and give gays the options of Justices or Captains. Estate rights on the other hand aren't really a religious principle. I don't see why gays can't have the right to that.

[Lolly PopMuzik]

Originally Posted by ~~Auriel~~

Above, no comment on Jillian's question

Woman, it was a simple question.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by ~~Auriel~~

I don't think it is likely that a priest would marry a gay couple anyways.

Please do a little research and clarify your statement.

The fact is that Presbyterian, Episcopalian and Lutheran and even certain Catholic churches do support gay marriage.

Here is a list of gay friendly churches in California:

http://www.gaychurch.org/Find_a_Chur...california.htm

And in the rest of the U.S.

http://www.gaychurch.org/Find_a_Chur...ted_states.htm