Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
-The conservatives you speak of are Liberatarians(sp).
-Sarcasm detected aside, look at the statistics (which I will not at this point in time throw out, too lazy on a thirsty thursday, forgive), homosexuals are the largest growing group as far as carrying(sp) the HIV/AIDS virus, and they account for a sizeable percentage of the total carriers in the country.
|
And what exactly does this have to do with anything? Is hiv carrying rate now the new determinant in who gets to get married? In that case, according to this:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/2004SurveillanceReport.pdf
Texas, New York, and Florida are the biggest states in terms of diagnosis of hiv. Perhaps it would make sense if we bar citizens of these states the special right of marriage.
Quote:
|
-To the best of my knowledge this is still a democracy, and so long as people abide by the laws and regulations afforded them, there is no reason to knock them or attack them. I am getting pretty fed up of the thought that gays are constitutional afforded the same rights, read the laws, its there in plain black and white.
|
While this is true, i don't see anywhere in the constitution where it says that the definition of both marriage and discrimination shall be decided by a heteromajority.
Quote:
|
I get it that everyone is an arm chair justice, but this activist intent is getting ridiculous. No where in the constitution are gays rights expressly affirmed, nor are they denied, nor is there any implicit language that "makes them discriminated against" because they cannot marry. The right is deffered to the state, because it is upheld and within the spirit of the constitution.
|
I don't need a constitutional basis for claiming discrimination. Nowhere in the constitution does it say that the constitution is the sole arbiter of righteousness in terms of human behavior.