equality? rights of self serving selfishness

[Edstock]

Three points: Until science proves that (1) homosexuality is an innate condition; (2) until science can explain why some people somehow discover that they are homosexual only after they have entered into heterosexual marital relationships; and (3) until science can explain why some individuals who have previously considered themselves homosexuals now view themselves as heterosexuals -- it's going to be difficult for the scientific communitiy to reconcile point 1 with points 2 and 3.

It appears that homosexuality has more than one "source", triggering the behavior. Thus the variety of behavior shown in (2) and (3) is just part of the spectrum of homosexual behavior.

 

Given the absence of scientific proof, homosexuality can only be construed as a behavioral characteristic,

That's your opinion. Brain scans indicate a definite structural and operational difference; as well, evidence is appearing of differences in the endocrine system, as well.

[akirby]

Three points: Until science proves that (1) homosexuality is an innate condition; (2) until science can explain why some people somehow discover that they are homosexual only after they have entered into heterosexual marital relationships; and (3) until science can explain why some individuals who have previously considered themselves homosexuals now view themselves as heterosexuals -- it's going to be difficult for the scientific communitiy to reconcile point 1 with points 2 and 3.

 

It's really simple. There is no reason for anyone to WANT to be gay therefore people go to many lengths to hide this from not only society and their friends and family but also hiding it from themselves. If you talk to someone who led a hetero lifestyle initially and is now leading a homosexual lifestyle they all say that even though they were living a hetero lifestyle that it just never felt right. On the flip side, who is to say that the people who "used" to be gay but are not living a hetero lifestyle aren't still gay? They may have simply chosen to abandon it for religious or social reasons. An alcoholic can stop drinking but they're still an alcoholic.

 

Put yourself in their position - pretend that the world is gay and you're hetero and they told you that you were supposed to be gay like them. How would that make you feel?

 

Given that sexual orientation is so obviously genetic (men vs. women) and the fact that this seems to affect an equal percentage of men and women (around 10% IIRC) it just seems like a no-brainer that this is some genetic anomaly.

 

The school decided to cancel the event so that they did not have to deal with it. If they don't want PDAs during the prom then say that and apply it to everyone. I could even live with a dress code that prevents girls from wearing tuxedos (it would still be stupid but at least it would apply to everyone).

 

Same thing happened in Wedowee Alabama where they cancelled the prom because an interracial couple planned to attend. And yes - it is exactly the same thing. School officials did not want to see an interracial couple together at the prom and in this case they did not want to see a lesbian couple together. Period. End of story.

 

I don't want to see ugly people together at a prom. Should we cancel the prom for that, too? What about blondes who date redheads? Can't have that. Catholics dancing with Protestants? Heavens no!

 

Get over it people. It's life. Deal with it.

[Edstock]

I don't want to see ugly people together at a prom.

Me neither. That's why there's Wal-Mart.

[xr7g428]

Is it true that a very rich straight man can turn two lesbians into bi-sexuals?

[RangerM]

An alcoholic can stop drinking but they're still an alcoholic.

But there is no law against being an alcoholic, yet you can/will get arrested if you engage in public intoxication, or drinking when/where it is illegal to do so. That is the difference.

 

The "Behavior vs. Being" difference, yet again.

 

Given that sexual orientation is so obviously genetic (men vs. women) and the fact that this seems to affect an equal percentage of men and women (around 10% IIRC) it just seems like a no-brainer that this is some genetic anomaly.

Perhaps, one could make a case for "equal rights" for gays under the Americans with Disabilities Act?

The school decided to cancel the event so that they did not have to deal with it. If they don't want PDAs during the prom then say that and apply it to everyone. I could even live with a dress code that prevents girls from wearing tuxedos (it would still be stupid but at least it would apply to everyone).

But in this case, the girl was making an issue of accompanying her date in a tuxedo. As far as I know, the school did not say she could not attend the prom as an individual.

Same thing happened in Wedowee Alabama where they cancelled the prom because an interracial couple planned to attend. And yes - it is exactly the same thing. School officials did not want to see an interracial couple together at the prom and in this case they did not want to see a lesbian couple together. Period. End of story.

In the case of the interracial couple, the question was not one of behavior. The white girl/boy is expected to behave no differently than the black girl/boy. In the case of the lesbian couple, the standards of (the community in question's) behavior would be violated. Yes, the "line of acceptance" was set at a position where many would think it wrong. Whether or not some don't like it is irrelevant, so long as noones civil rights are violated; and they weren't in this case.

I don't want to see ugly people together at a prom. Should we cancel the prom for that, too? What about blondes who date redheads? Can't have that. Catholics dancing with Protestants? Heavens no!

If you can make a case that ugly people, blondes, redheads, Catholics, Protestants are incapable of living up to certain standards of conduct, then yes....ban them from engaging in their behavior. BUT, since there is no case, yours is a straw man argument.

Get over it people. It's life. Deal with it.

Yes, get over it.

 

Tolerance means putting up with that which you may not like. It works both ways.

 

There is far too much intolerance of the "left" point of view by the right, and the "right" point of view from the left.

Edited March 16, 2010 by RangerM

[akirby]

But in this case, the girl was making an issue of accompanying her date in a tuxedo. As far as I know, the school did not say she could not attend the prom as an individual.

 

Does the school district have a dress code that states that girls cannot wear tuxedos? Let's face it - if a girl showed up with a boyfriend wearing a tuxedo nobody would care. This had NOTHING to do with the tuxedo and you know it.

 

 

In the case of the lesbian couple, the standards of (the community in question's) behavior would be violated.

 

If you can make a case that ugly people, blondes, redheads, Catholics, Protestants are incapable of living up to certain standards of conduct, then yes....ban them from engaging in their behavior. BUT, since there is no case, yours is a straw man argument.

 

So what you're saying is that 2 girls attending a prom together with one wearing a tuxedo is "unacceptable behavior"? Let's say they attended, held hands, danced together, took a picture and went home. Where is the "unacceptable behavior"? What you're really saying is the mere fact that they were together as a couple is what was deemed "unacceptable" and I find that ridiculously narrow-minded. Now if they were flaunting their relationship with PDAs and trying to make everyone uncomfortable then I might agree - but you can't just assume that's what would have happened. And for the record I think they were doing a little grandstanding trying to draw attention by wearing the tuxedo. But I don't believe that justifies cancelling the event.

 

And you can't use the "majority doesn't want it" excuse either. If that was ok then we'd still have slavery in the South and separate water fountains for blacks.

 

I simply don't understand why the religious zealots can't keep their religion to themselves and stop trying to dictate it to everyone else. If you don't want to attend an event where same-sex couples are present then don't go. If you don't want to buy alcohol on Sunday then don't buy it.

 

There is only one side being intolerant here and we all know who that is.

[RangerM]

Does the school district have a dress code that states that girls cannot wear tuxedos? Let's face it - if a girl showed up with a boyfriend wearing a tuxedo nobody would care. This had NOTHING to do with the tuxedo and you know it.

Perhaps you are right, but ultimately....No, I don't know it, and unless you can cite something, neither do you.

So what you're saying is that 2 girls attending a prom together with one wearing a tuxedo is "unacceptable behavior"? Let's say they attended, held hands, danced together, took a picture and went home. Where is the "unacceptable behavior"? What you're really saying is the mere fact that they were together as a couple is what was deemed "unacceptable" and I find that ridiculously narrow-minded.

First, I'm not the one determining what IS and what ISN"T acceptable behavior. The school board (presumably as an extention of the electorate) does. I am not defending their decision. I am defending their right to have one that is reflective of their community. There is a difference.

Now if they were flaunting their relationship with PDAs and trying to make everyone uncomfortable then I might agree - but you can't just assume that's what would have happened. And for the record I think they were doing a little grandstanding trying to draw attention by wearing the tuxedo. But I don't believe that justifies cancelling the event.

Agreed, but it is the local communty's decision to cancel it. I'll leave it at that. Maybe the kids/parents will hold their own (non-school sponsored) prom, so they can make whatever rules they choose?

And you can't use the "majority doesn't want it" excuse either. If that was ok then we'd still have slavery in the South and separate water fountains for blacks.

I don't have to excuse anything because the two are different situations. Lesbians aren't exploited for another's benefit, as slaves were.

I simply don't understand why the religious zealots can't keep their religion to themselves and stop trying to dictate it to everyone else. If you don't want to attend an event where same-sex couples are present then don't go. If you don't want to buy alcohol on Sunday then don't buy it.

Then whose values system is best? If we are to all live by one set of values, then whose values shall it be, the "religious zealots" or someone elses, maybe yours?

There is only one side being intolerant here and we all know who that is.

You must be prepared to defend someone's right to be intolerant, unless you are intolerant.

Edited March 16, 2010 by RangerM

[Deanh]

Does the school district have a dress code that states that girls cannot wear tuxedos? Let's face it - if a girl showed up with a boyfriend wearing a tuxedo nobody would care. This had NOTHING to do with the tuxedo and you know it.

 

 

 

 

So what you're saying is that 2 girls attending a prom together with one wearing a tuxedo is "unacceptable behavior"? Let's say they attended, held hands, danced together, took a picture and went home. Where is the "unacceptable behavior"? What you're really saying is the mere fact that they were together as a couple is what was deemed "unacceptable" and I find that ridiculously narrow-minded. Now if they were flaunting their relationship with PDAs and trying to make everyone uncomfortable then I might agree - but you can't just assume that's what would have happened. And for the record I think they were doing a little grandstanding trying to draw attention by wearing the tuxedo. But I don't believe that justifies cancelling the event.

 

And you can't use the "majority doesn't want it" excuse either. If that was ok then we'd still have slavery in the South and separate water fountains for blacks.

 

I simply don't understand why the religious zealots can't keep their religion to themselves and stop trying to dictate it to everyone else. If you don't want to attend an event where same-sex couples are present then don't go. If you don't want to buy alcohol on Sunday then don't buy it.

 

There is only one side being intolerant here and we all know who that is.

I think that is overly complex...FACT...an individual felt it was her right to force HER agenda down non willing participants throats....in retaliation the school flat cancelled the prom, individual feels her rights have been violated...lawsuit!!!!! ...question...what rights does the damn school have?? seems NONE...and THAT is where I call BS...why should the school have no choices?...FACT....I would think some individuals MAY have taken offense to the young girls "statement" of LOOK AT ME I"M SPECIAL....the school had/ has every right to diffuse what they perceive as an event that has potential to create ANY discourse in the slightest...GOOD FOR THEM....they should counter sue and make a damn example, it would make OTHER people that think they should be held to a higher satndard think twice...ridiculous.

[akirby]

Dean - she wasn't forcing her "agenda" down anyone's throat. She simply asked to attend HER prom with HER date and she wanted to wear a tuxedo instead of a dress. It's not like they were planning to have sex on the dance floor.

 

There is no difference between this and an interracial couple back in the 60's (or 90's if you live in Alabama). The school had a policy against same-sex couples just like they used to have against interracial couples. Rather than change the policy they chose to cancel the prom instead which I say is unfair to all of the other students. If there were students who did not want to attend then let them stay home. Isn't that a lot fairer than canceling it for everyone?

 

Had they been allowed to attend it would be nothing more than a local matter with a few outraged parents and students. It was the school that drew all this attention, not the girl.

[Deanh]

Dean - she wasn't forcing her "agenda" down anyone's throat. She simply asked to attend HER prom with HER date and she wanted to wear a tuxedo instead of a dress. It's not like they were planning to have sex on the dance floor.

 

There is no difference between this and an interracial couple back in the 60's (or 90's if you live in Alabama). The school had a policy against same-sex couples just like they used to have against interracial couples. Rather than change the policy they chose to cancel the prom instead which I say is unfair to all of the other students. If there were students who did not want to attend then let them stay home. Isn't that a lot fairer than canceling it for everyone?

 

Had they been allowed to attend it would be nothing more than a local matter with a few outraged parents and students. It was the school that drew all this attention, not the girl.

the simple fix would have been for HER to stand down realizing it may cause issues....instead I hold HER responsible, it was the actions of ONE individual that forced the schools hand....so lets flip this kirb....say two Ambiguously gay ( thats a segue for SOMEONE ) flambouyant gay gentlemen decided to attend...potential for problems?...you bet, theres ALWAYS a few objectionable homo-phobes....so as a school I would rather cancel than to deal wit A) potential physicality from incensed Jocks B) public outcry C) media focus.......I kinda see it like a bar fight, if you have the oppurtunity to walk away unscathed, do it......

Edited March 16, 2010 by Deanh

[grbeck]

It's really simple. There is no reason for anyone to WANT to be gay therefore people go to many lengths to hide this from not only society and their friends and family but also hiding it from themselves. If you talk to someone who led a hetero lifestyle initially and is now leading a homosexual lifestyle they all say that even though they were living a hetero lifestyle that it just never felt right.

 

Apparently you missed the latest interview with Meredith Baxter (the mother on Family Ties). She recently said that she is in love with a woman.

 

Previously, she had been married three times (each time to a man). When asked if she had really been a lesbian during all of those years, and had been hiding her true orientation during her marriages, she replied that this wasn't the case. She simply met this woman and fell in love with her.

 

On the flip side, who is to say that the people who "used" to be gay but are not living a hetero lifestyle aren't still gay? They may have simply chosen to abandon it for religious or social reasons. An alcoholic can stop drinking but they're still an alcoholic.

 

So...if someone decides to come out of the closet, they are merely living out a repressed wish, but if someone goes the other way, it is just because of social pressure?

 

I guess this is called having it both ways. You obviously have never met anyone who has taken the latter course.

 

Given that sexual orientation is so obviously genetic (men vs. women) and the fact that this seems to affect an equal percentage of men and women (around 10% IIRC) it just seems like a no-brainer that this is some genetic anomaly.

 

There has never been any solid proof that same-sex attraction is genetic in origin. Even the people who were solidly on the side of "nature" in the nature-versus-nurture debate now say that it is likely a mixture of the two.

Edited March 16, 2010 by grbeck

[akirby]

the simple fix would have been for HER to stand down realizing ity may cause issues....instead I hold HER responsible, it was the actions of ONE individual that forced the schools hand

 

So you want her to give up the opportunity to go to her prom because school officials don't like homosexuals? What would have happened if they allowed them to attend? A few students may have boycotted and some parents would have objected. So what? Isn't that allowing everyone to exercise their own rights as they see fit - rather than having the school decide for them?

 

To me this sounds exactly the way interracial couples were treated in the 60's.

[Deanh]

So you want her to give up the opportunity to go to her prom because school officials don't like homosexuals? What would have happened if they allowed them to attend? A few students may have boycotted and some parents would have objected. So what? Isn't that allowing everyone to exercise their own rights as they see fit - rather than having the school decide for them?

 

To me this sounds exactly the way interracial couples were treated in the 60's.

agreed, its a volatile subject...thus the posting...my point is the actions of one caused a REACTION, thus the onus lays with the instigator, and because of ONES selfishness, MANY paid the price....the school didnt want to deal with the headaches, cant say I blame them for taking the high road....what happened to the saying "We reserve the right to refuse service".....the LAWSUIT is the icing boo hoo, I'm different but I have rights...translation...ITS ALL ABOUT ME!....truly a selfish act IMO. Knee jerk reaction from the school? probably, but, where wre THEIR rights...where is THEIR authority....where exactly does one draw the damn line?

Edited March 16, 2010 by Deanh

[Deanh]

So you want her to give up the opportunity to go to her prom because school officials don't like homosexuals? What would have happened if they allowed them to attend? A few students may have boycotted and some parents would have objected. So what? Isn't that allowing everyone to exercise their own rights as they see fit - rather than having the school decide for them?

 

To me this sounds exactly the way interracial couples were treated in the 60's.

sounds like the reactions or desires of students take precedence and out weigh ANY authority the school has...so there we go, NO rules, no regulations, no punishments, no dress code, guns/ drugs/ knives all ok, hell, come if you want, theres no accountability....we are renaming the School Camp Run Amok

[akirby]

There has never been any solid proof that same-sex attraction is genetic in origin.

 

So how do you explain the brain scans?

 

The only people who think it's not genetic are religious people who can't accept that their God created gay people. So they seek out and proclaim all other causes and ignore the most obvious one.

 

Most people who now live a gay lifestyle say they knew they were gay their entire lives but couldn't admit it. Or they just wanted natural born children. You hear about that all the time. But you hardly ever hear of someone being gay for 30 years and suddenly realizing they weren't unless religion is involved. Convincing someone they're going to hell can scare people into making all kinds of changes in their behavior.

[akirby]

the LAWSUIT is the icing boo hoo, I'm different but I have rights...translation...ITS ALL ABOUT ME!....truly a selfish act IMO. Knee jerk reaction from the school? probably, but, where wre THEIR rights...where is THEIR authority....where exactly does one draw the damn line?

 

In other words Rosa Parks should have just kept quiet and sat in the back of the bus and not been so selfish wanting to sit in the front...................

 

How about we draw the line at the point where we don't discriminate against people due to their sexual orientation - PERIOD?

[Deanh]

So how do you explain the brain scans?

 

The only people who think it's not genetic are religious people who can't accept that their God created gay people. So they seek out and proclaim all other causes and ignore the most obvious one.

 

Most people who now live a gay lifestyle say they knew they were gay their entire lives but couldn't admit it. Or they just wanted natural born children. You hear about that all the time. But you hardly ever hear of someone being gay for 30 years and suddenly realizing they weren't unless religion is involved. Convincing someone they're going to hell can scare people into making all kinds of changes in their behavior.

brain scans?...hmm, I discovered during an abduction I was an Alien....now I have my green card.... anyways, I have worked with many gay workmates./ bosses.....NEVER an issue, and not ONCE was their opinion or "agenda" as such forced upon me in any manner....this instance parallels such increasingly volatile subjects as politics, religion, race...etc etc etc.....someone holds up their "card" as such and demands special treatment/ privilidges ALWAYS raises my ire....funny though, there was one time i was getting harassed by an "ethnic minority card holding member' and i basically asked him if he was being belligerent due to the fact I was white.........stopped him in his tracks and he started laughing...everything was fine from then on in.... ..

Edited March 16, 2010 by Deanh

[akirby]

sounds like the reactions or desires of students take precedence and out weigh ANY authority the school has...so there we go, NO rules, no regulations, no punishments, no dress code, guns/ drugs/ knives all ok, hell, come if you want, theres no accountability....we are renaming the School Camp Run Amok

 

The school should have complete authority over behavior. If they don't want PDAs at the prom - no problem. If they want a dress code - great. A tuxedo is nothing more than slacks, a blouse and a jacket - all perfectly normal attire for women.

 

I do not think it's ok to tell one student they can bring a date and another student that they can't. That is discrimination, plain and simple.

[akirby]

brain scans?...hmm, I discovered during an abduction I was an Alien....now I have my green card.... anyways, I have worked with many gay workmates./ bosses.....NEVER an issue, and not ONCE was their opinion or "agenda" as such forced upon me in any manner....this instance parallels such increasingly volatile subjects as politics, religion, race...etc etc etc.....someone holds up their "card" as such and demands special treatment/ privilidges ALWAYS raises my ire....funny though, there was one time i was getting harassed by an "ethnic minority card holding member' and i basically asked him if he was being belligerent due to the fact I was white.........stopped him in his tracks and he started laughing...everything was fine from then on in.... ..

 

So let's put this in context. Let's say your company was hosting a huge Christmas party and one of your gay co-workers wanted to bring their partner to the party since everyone else was bringing their spouses or significant others. And let's say the company decided to cancel the party altogether because they simply didn't want a gay couple at the party. How would you feel?

[Deanh]

In other words Rosa Parks should have just kept quiet and sat in the back of the bus and not been so selfish wanting to sit in the front...................

 

How about we draw the line at the point where we don't discriminate against people due to their sexual orientation - PERIOD?

personally I dont, but I respect the fact the school didnt roll over....and things have come a long way since Rosa Parks kirb.....AND slavery, so burn that card its oveused....interesting though that as life gos on "hurdles" as such change....whats next?...this is a blip, but will eventually be passe...then somone else will be waving a discrimination flag with inflated expectations of acceptance..if not SUE BABY SUE....

Edited March 16, 2010 by Deanh

[suv_guy_19]

personally I dont, but I respect the fact the school didnt roll over.

 

Ok, I can't help but post here in response to this. What? You seem to think that us becoming more accepting of diversity is a bad thing...that we should fight it all the way. Why?

 

What is wrong with people being gay? What is wrong with people seeing gay people? Nothing, that's what, and if the school somehow thinks that it's wrong, well, they can stand over there and join us in the 21st century when they're finally ready.

 

Homosexuality is a reality, it is natural, and it is widely practiced in many different species. There are obvious differences in brain scans of homosexuals as well as hormone balances. I'm not sure what the fight is about anymore. If some people are offended by homosexuality....they can also stand over there in the corner, and join us when they're ready.

[suv_guy_19]

....

Edited March 16, 2010 by suv_guy_19

[Deanh]

Ok, I can't help but post here in response to this. What? You seem to think that us becoming more accepting of diversity is a bad thing...that we should fight it all the way. Why?

 

What is wrong with people being gay? What is wrong with people seeing gay people? Nothing, that's what, and if the school somehow thinks that it's wrong, well, they can stand over there and join us in the 21st century when they're finally ready.

 

Homosexuality is a reality, it is natural, and it is widely practiced in many different species. There are obvious differences in brain scans of homosexuals as well as hormone balances. I'm not sure what the fight is about anymore. If some people are offended by homosexuality....they can also stand over there in the corner, and join us when they're ready.

please SUV, read my posts, not once have i said anything even REMOTELY saying ANYTHING untoward towards gay people....my point is AGENDAS for those that seem to deem themselves worthy because of differences from societies norm....I really dont give a rats, I have worked besides and for gay people, I NEVER judged my workmates, ( however if their agenda and beleifs were forced upon me, I would have stood my ground ) but I also do not beleive that for a SECOND their differences should come with privilidges...hey, I'm from new Zealand so I'm special...bullshit! So whats next SUV?....do we open special schools with idivisulastic rulebooks, we could have gay schools, designated religious schools, Black schools ( oh wait ), White schools ( oh shit thats racist ..ARRRRG ) pink schools...seriously WHERE IS THE LINE DRAWN before this type of crap snowballs uncontrolably and there is a NASTY reaction?...

[Deanh]

Ok, I can't help but post here in response to this. What? You seem to think that us becoming more accepting of diversity is a bad thing...that we should fight it all the way. Why?

 

What is wrong with people being gay? What is wrong with people seeing gay people? Nothing, that's what, and if the school somehow thinks that it's wrong, well, they can stand over there and join us in the 21st century when they're finally ready.

 

Homosexuality is a reality, it is natural, and it is widely practiced in many different species. There are obvious differences in brain scans of homosexuals as well as hormone balances. I'm not sure what the fight is about anymore. If some people are offended by homosexuality....they can also stand over there in the corner, and join us when they're ready.

the last part of your post is interesting....embrace them so as not to segregate...if not go stand in the corner....is THAT not the pot calling the kettle..... :shades: maybe we can give them some special privilidges becaus they are different too....

Edited March 16, 2010 by Deanh

[RangerM]

.....and if the school somehow thinks that it's wrong, well, they can stand over there and join us in the 21st century when they're finally ready.

 

If some people are offended by homosexuality....they can also stand over there in the corner, and join us when they're ready.

 

The epitome of "tolerance" as defined by the political left; a better example could not be found.