Yuku free message boards

shiza h minelli wrote:

---

I also love that Tee's idea of a 'dissenting opinion' is a thinly veiled homophobic opinion that limits the right's of others. The reality is that giving those rights would in no way change the life styles of the people with the dissenting views. They just don't seem to understand this VERY important fact no matter how hard they try to extrapolate it.

You see... A few years ago, there were all kinds of people here in Canada who also felt they needed to 'protect' marriage from the gays. They fought as hard as they could keep marriage safe but to no avail... because you cannot fight progress as hard as you try.

I bet if you asked all those people now, how their lives have changed since we were given equal access to marriage they would say, not one bit. Becasue it hasn't. Why? Because same-sex marriage has nothing to do with straight people. Same sex couples get married in Canada everyday without any harm done to the millions of straight people living here.

The same can't be said for straight folk and marriage though. You would think with the way divorce rates today are skyrocketing, people would be starting campaigns to save marriage from them.

You, shiza, are brilliant.

Violence on the basis of sexual orientation is a symbolic crime against a community.

The 'crime-is-a-crime-is-a-crime-is-a-crime' group is either ignorant of that symbolism, intellectual dishonest of it, or simply incapable of rationality.

There's no doubt that most people understand why crimes against the state are punished more severely than crimes against the individual. What they have hard time understanding is that crimes against a community are more serious than crimes against an individual but less serious than crimes against the state.

If somebody kills another person in the first degree independent of sexual orientation, then that's a crime against an individual.

If somebody kills another person in the first degree, and that person was homosexual, but it was independent of sexual orientation, then that's a crime against an individual.

If somebody kills another person in the first degree, because they believed that that person was homosexual, then that's a much more serious crime - because it's not only directed against an individual but an entire community.

If somebody kills another person in the first degree, because they believed they were attacking the state, then that's the most serious crime. You recognize this as being an act of either terror, treason, or both.

This shouldn't be nuanced at all.

I can only hope the likes of Teeny can understand it, and either reply with an idiotic statement, or, will let their true homophobic self come out and say "the homosexual community is not one that deserves any sort of 'symbolic' judgment attached to it. I would hope that he wouldn't throw the red herring and say "what about Christians" - because I would rightly reply "Yes - violence directed on religious grounds is awful and should be treated by authorities - as they are directed to under the law - to treat it as a hate crime".

Pretty simple right guys?