Martin Luther King, Jr. Day

[onodera]

Atheism is protected by the first amendment and atheists seem to do just fine in seeking employment. If some idiot like Kidicious claims that atheists secretly believe in God or have no morals then it's free entertainment. Atheists have no chance of becoming president, which is true for the vast majority of Americans. What discrimination?

HC is talking about Israel.

[Guynemer]

Why can't I be serious?

Potheads are ****ing ARRESTED! Not hypothetically, oh there's still a law on the books, but actually ****ing arrested every single day. They are arrested for a lifestyle choice that hurts no one but themselves.

That is why I said you can't be serious; smoking pot and being gay are in no way comparable things.

On virtually every other point, I agree with you. However, you are making a choice; MrFun is not.

[Felch]

How do you know that I'm not genetically predisposed to favor marijuana? Maybe my brain is wired in such a way that I can't help being a pothead. We know that alcoholics don't choose to be alcoholics, why can't potheads be the same way?

[giblets]

Homosexuals could just choose to not have gay sex. Alby has never had sex and he's still alive. Laws against homosexuality only impact homosexuals who make certain choices.

[Hauldren Collider]

HC is talking about Israel.

Actually, Israel is perfectly fine place to be an atheist. Many if not most jews there are secular. Try again.

[onodera]

Actually, Israel is perfectly fine place to be an atheist. Many if not most jews there are secular. Try again.

You can't marry an atheist there.

[Felch]

Homosexuals could just choose to not have gay sex. Alby has never had sex and he's still alive. Laws against homosexuality only impact homosexuals who make certain choices.

[Pax]

This exception can play a tremendous role in determining the fate of LGBT teens engaging in same-sex sexual activity. In State v. Limon (2004), a Kansas state appellate court applied the exception in order to prosecute an 18-year-old man who, shortly after turning 18, engaged in consensual oral sex with a 14-year-old boy (both of them lived in the same state mental health facility). Wardenski explained how the use of the “minor exception” dramatically increased the 18-year-old’s punishment:

If the younger boy had been female, Kansas's so-called "Romeo and Juliet" law would have applied, subjecting the defendant to a sentence of just thirteen to fifteen months. The Romeo and Juliet statute provided that in statutory rape cases involving voluntary sexual relations between two "members of the opposite sex" where the defendant is nineteen or under and less than four years older than the other youth, the defendant would face significantly shorter prison terms and more lenient attendant penalties, such as reduced post-release supervision periods and sex offender registration requirements. Because the defendant, Matthew Limon, was of the same sex as the younger boy, however, the Romeo and Juliet law's shortened presumptive sentence did not apply, subjecting Limon instead to the severely long prison sentence and to sex offender registration requirements. [Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 95 No. 4, 6/22/05, via Nexis, internal citations removed for clarity]
Sodomy laws establish a basis upon which state governments can punish LGBT people more severely than heterosexuals, even when the crimes they commit are the same.


The fact of the matter is that a 14 yr old in a mental health facility so should not be allowed to have sex with anyone yet alone an adult of the same sex in the same facility.

[MrFun]

That is why I said you can't be serious; smoking pot and being gay are in no way comparable things.

On virtually every other point, I agree with you. However, you are making a choice; MrFun is not.

[molly bloom]

Homosexuals could just choose to not have gay sex. Laws against homosexuality only impact homosexuals who make certain choices.

Homosexuals could just choose to not have gay sex. Laws against homosexuality only impact homosexuals who make certain choices.[/QUOTE]

Simply untrue.

Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 prohibited local authorities from "promoting" homosexuality or gay "pretended family relationships", and prevented councils spending money on educational materials and projects perceived to promote a gay lifestyle.

The section was voted out in the Commons by 356 to 127 votes in March. At the time, the local government minister, Nick Raynsford, said: "For over a decade, Section 28 has cast a cloud of confusion and ambiguity over local authorities' ability to support and provide services to the whole of their community. Repeal means this cloud has been lifted."

Today, the cloud is gone, waved off by a "Goodbye Section 28" party in London.

It is not going without a fight, though. Tory-led Kent county council has chosen to maintain the spirit of the legislation by being the only authority in Britain to fashion it into the curriculum of its 600 schools. Michael Howard, the leader of the Conservatives, has refused to condemn Kent for keeping elements of the clause, which was introduced by Margaret Thatcher.

Mr Howard, whose Folkestone and Hythe constituency is in Kent, was local government minister when Section 28 was introduced and in March voted against its aboli tion. In a statement to the Guardian, Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart, leader of Kent's council, denied he was keeping Section 28, saying the council's position had been "misrepresented".

"In July 2000 Kent county council agreed a policy ... which said, 'KCC shall not publish, purchase or distribute material with the intention of promoting homosexuality'.

"This in no way was a statement against homosexuality, and it certainly was in no way against school sex education including an understanding of homosexuality. It was against the 'intentional promotion', which is very different.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/nov/17/uk.gayrights

and:

Last year Michael Gove, the shadow schools secretary, said that the (Conservative) party had got it badly wrong on gay issues. 'I think we indulged prejudice in the 1980s and missed the point,' he said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/5710650/David-Cameron-says-sorry-over-Section-28-gay-law.html

In the 1970s & 1980s, the Chief Constable of Manchester, a fundamentalist Christian, resurrected Victorian laws concerning 'licentious' dancing to prosecute gay men:

But the law continued to concern itself with public behaviour. In the late 1970s, men were convicted for licentious dancing at Napoleon’s, the city’s oldest gay nightclub. Sir James Anderton, chief constable of Greater Manchester from 1975 to 1991, made his views of homosexuality very clear, and policed accordingly.

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1456525_pride-at-21-celebrating-manchesters-tradition-of-tolerance

You might well wonder if this was really the best use of police time and resources.
Anderton also claimed that his god spoke to him.

Clearly not very loudly, because Anderton failed to realize his own daughter was a lesbian.

[Uncle Sparky]

MLKJ was a gay pothead...???

[giblets]

Homosexuals could just choose to not have gay sex. Laws against homosexuality only impact homosexuals who make certain choices.

Simply untrue.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/nov/17/uk.gayrights

and:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/5710650/David-Cameron-says-sorry-over-Section-28-gay-law.html

In the 1970s & 1980s, the Chief Constable of Manchester, a fundamentalist Christian, resurrected Victorian laws concerning 'licentious' dancing to prosecute gay men:

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1456525_pride-at-21-celebrating-manchesters-tradition-of-tolerance

You might well wonder if this was really the best use of police time and resources.
Anderton also claimed that his god spoke to him.

Clearly not very loudly, because Anderton failed to realize his own daughter was a lesbian.

Some foreign country I don't care about...? You might as well start posting about the laws in Iran. Also, I fail to see how any of those quotes describe a law that punished someone for something that was involuntary.

[Tupac Shakur]

Felch

MrFun

[molly bloom]

Some foreign country I don't care about...?

I wasn't aware that homosexuality was restricted to your country.

You might as well start posting about the laws in Iran.

I'm more familiar with those of the U.K., thanks.

Also, I fail to see how any of those quotes describe a law that punished someone for something that was involuntary.

I didn't choose to be gay. I may choose to have sex, but sex and sexuality aren't the same thing- as any heterosexual virgin could tell you. Section 28 (for instance) affected gay men and lesbians whether or not they had had sex, remained virgins or had yet to even come out.

The ludicrous 'don't ask, don't tell' policy encourages people to lie too.

[giblets]

I wasn't aware that homosexuality was restricted to your country.



I'm more familiar with those of the U.K., thanks.



I didn't choose to be gay. I may choose to have sex, but sex and sexuality aren't the same thing- as any heterosexual virgin could tell you. Section 28 (for instance) affected gay men and lesbians whether or not they had had sex, remained virgins or had yet to even come out.

The ludicrous 'don't ask, don't tell' policy encourages people to lie too.

Really? I don't know much about Section 28 but as far as I know it only restrained the actions of the government. At least, that's how I would interpret this:

Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 prohibited local authorities from "promoting" homosexuality or gay "pretended family relationships", and prevented councils spending money on educational materials and projects perceived to promote a gay lifestyle.

Being a government official is a choice. Oh, and joining the military is a choice too. Just as smoking pot is a choice, huh.