House expands Civil Rights Act!!!

That is because affirmative action is government oppression and discrimination against some and in favor of others.

If they had any integrity they would repeal any efforts to stop discrimination which is a basic human right

 

If you can't see the difference between two consenting adults being allowed to marry, and an adult marrying a child, then there's no hope for you,.

 

No, but wanting it legal to refuse to rent an apartment to someone because they are gay does. Ot being allowed to refuse to hire someone because they are gay.....all of which is legal currently, and all of which republicans want to keep legal.

 

Age of marriage tends to follow the same rules as age of consent. For example, restricts marriage which is under the age of consent to 15,and no younger, and the other person can be no older than 4 years older than the minor. So a 15 year old can legally marry a 19 year old. This is also how our age of consent laws work, with someone 14 or older legally being able to consent to sex with someone no more than 4 years older than them. And in Indiana the age of consent and marriage are the same thing. If you are over 16, you are considered an adult for both sex and marriage, and you do not need parental consent.

 

As to marriage? Tip, my church still refuses to officiate over any homosexual marriage.

Why should we be forced to? We also do not marry 12 year old children. (officiate as well)

 

As your church has every right to do. The bill will not require any church to do so.

 

Both sideovs, the far right and far left, have proven a LONG time ago that they don't care about equal treatment or equality. They simply want their side to be on top.

That's why it's mostly the moderates who push sensible laws, and while the extremists push insanely overreaching BS.

 

No one is saying your church, or any other church should be forced to perform gay marriages. There are plenty of churches who have no issues with gay marriage, and there are plenty of non-religious ways of getting married.

However Republicans for years wanted it to be illegal for ANY church to perform a homosexual marriage ceremony. They wanted christian dogma enforced on every else. I'm not a Christian, and I am a ordained minister for my religion, but the Christian right want it illegal for me to perform a homosexual marriage. They want to force their religion on me.

And let me ask you a question. What is it in two consenting adults, who happen to be of the same sex, getting married that makes you think that it means that adults can marry 12 year olds?

 

Simple as that. There won't be any meaningful legislation until 2021 at the earliest. Good news in my view.

 

I see your point about renting but to counter that, the owner has at all times legal ownership. The renter rents space but never owns it. For instance, the tax collector can't tell the tenant to pay the tax bills yet orders the owner to pay such. Each party has different rights.

My now dead brother was a homosexual. He did complain. But not about being hired nor about renting. We talked a lot. But never mentioned your topics. But Democrats boiled the pot and now want to talk about this all the time.

 

It is illegal to refuse to rent property or fire someone, or refuse to hire them based on race, religion, age, gender, nationality, ethnicity, and a array of other things. Sexual orientation and gender identity are literally the only legal discrimination when it comes to housing and employment.

You can literally legal be fired just because you are gay and your employer will face no legal backlash..

And it;s the same with housing. Real Estate agents, for example, who are licensed by the state, and who are not allowed to discriminate against federally protected classes, are allowed to refuse to work with gay or transgender clients.

 

Far more than republicans. Millions of Democrats also rejected the concept that
1. two males need marriage
2. two females need marriage

They want but do not need.

As you say, churches have abandoned why marriages exist and now want anybody seeking one to have one.

Similar to wanting males allowed in whe women's toilets. We have a lot of male toilets so why enter womens private spaces? At our home, a male may indeed enter the same toilet as the female but what public interest is served by the male using the women public toilet?

To wrap this up, marriage is a legal construct of the state when it and only it is the official rule maker. Churches are not allowed to make rules as to the way state uses it.

To explain, I have nothing to show anybody that any marriage I perform has any legal standing. I could not say it was done in the church and get away.

But in the office of Government the person doing the ceremony is not required to prove to the people getting married he or she has legal authority. It is assumed.

So the idea is why marry homosexuals?

Could it be due to tax laws? I maintain that is the reason. If they can get tax advantages and just fake they are married, i doubt it would matter. Divorce makes marriages non permanent.

Who grants divorce? The state grants those. In marriages the requirement is the licence.Not issued by the Church, but by the state.

My first marriage also had to have blood tests. But my church did not require it, state did.

 

Silly question requires silly answer.
When the pets start applying for jobs.

 

Actually it would matter, since most states specifically restrict tax benefits to legally married couples.

Also, biblical marriage was nothing but a slave trade, a father selling his daughter to another man. THat's all. In fact, according to the bible, if a man rapes an unmarried virgin, SHE isn't the victim, it's her father, who had her virginity stolen from him, and the punishment is having to marry the girl, and pay her father.

 

I take your statements as generic and not to me. I happen to be a licensed CA real estate broker. What you discussed was on the two tests I took at the State of CA department of Real Estate.

But to boot the ball a bit, what if you were told that upon asking, a person had the right to examine your wallet, you pull it out of your pocket, due to you requesting credit?

How would you think about a law forcing you to do that?

We here in CA were ahead of the rest of the nation as to anti discrimination. Before Johnson signed the 64 civil rights law, we already had the laws in CA law. I have been totally educated on that issue since 1971. CA had the Unruh Act that predated what Johnson signed.

 

One would hope so.

 

Gay marriage hurts no one.

Robert, if someone is forcing you to marry a man, I will put on my cape and fly to rescue you.

No one is going to force your church to marry homosexuals to each other.

Just let it go and live your life.

 

Oh but we do see the difference we just aren't sure about you and your allies...

 

My favorite gender ID was 'His Majesty", but then gender ID lends itself to ridicule.

 

Get back to me when there are five foot four midgets playing center in the NBA and the FBI starts recruiting lifers from the state pen. Gay ain't a race creed or color it is a behavior. Behavior is voluntary. We penalize and criminalize all sorts of behaviors in this country.

 

When is the Civil Rights Act going to be expanded to include white male heterosexual Christian gun-rights-supporting conservatives?

 

How about people being judged by their hairstyle or pants around their knees? Gotta add that to the bill.

 

Tough, garyd.

 

This modification to the law is a Trojan Horse, as explained in the other thread.

It will hurt business and result in very expensive stupid lawsuits.

 

The right sure is homophobic.

What group don't they hate?

Oh I know...their own poor little group...they just don't win anymore.