Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Putting the gay in ugag
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AE 87" data-source="post: 159013" data-attributes="member: 195"><p>First, I agree with you that outside of our current historical context, there are much bigger issues than the sexual preferences of 2-3% of the population. </p><p></p><p>However, you made your statement within the particular historical context in which a private bakery lost a judgment in lawsuit because they did not want to provide a cake for a same sex wedding. </p><p></p><p>So, "sexual orientation" as construct for discussion has one of the most important issues today. It has been recognized as bringing 14th Amendment protection even though it's very problematic and subjective. </p><p></p><p>That's what prompted my response. However, you seem to misunderstand how the Constitution was designed to work. It can be amended. For example, the 14th Amendment said no man over the age of 21 not guilty of rebellion etc must be allowed to vote, and the 19th gave suffrage to women. So, though tic, your response betrays a buy-in to rhetoric of those who want to use the courts to by-pass the democratic process. </p><p></p><p>It also misses the bigger point that I was making about the political philosophy from rule of law based on natural law and natural rights to rule of lawyers based on elitist whim. </p><p></p><p>If the rights come from the government rather than being natural, then they can be taken away by the government. Your response, "Let them go to court," I suspect is shared by many.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AE 87, post: 159013, member: 195"] First, I agree with you that outside of our current historical context, there are much bigger issues than the sexual preferences of 2-3% of the population. However, you made your statement within the particular historical context in which a private bakery lost a judgment in lawsuit because they did not want to provide a cake for a same sex wedding. So, "sexual orientation" as construct for discussion has one of the most important issues today. It has been recognized as bringing 14th Amendment protection even though it's very problematic and subjective. That's what prompted my response. However, you seem to misunderstand how the Constitution was designed to work. It can be amended. For example, the 14th Amendment said no man over the age of 21 not guilty of rebellion etc must be allowed to vote, and the 19th gave suffrage to women. So, though tic, your response betrays a buy-in to rhetoric of those who want to use the courts to by-pass the democratic process. It also misses the bigger point that I was making about the political philosophy from rule of law based on natural law and natural rights to rule of lawyers based on elitist whim. If the rights come from the government rather than being natural, then they can be taken away by the government. Your response, "Let them go to court," I suspect is shared by many. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who was Georgia Tech's starting QB in 2023?
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Putting the gay in ugag
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top