From: ST402341@brownvm.brown.edu (Gary Byma)
Newsgroups: alt.homosexual,alt.sex.homosexual
Subject: Re: Colorado Amendment 2
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 10:23:19 EST
Organization: Brown University - Providence, Rhode Island  USA
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: brownvm.brown.edu
News-Software: BNN via BNN_POST v1.0 beta

In article <1992Nov6.004142.378@mercury.cair.du.edu>, elesatz@diana.cair.du.edu
(Eric LeSatz) said:
>
>Ain't marriage defined as the joining of man and woman? Sure, there
>ought to be some kind of bonding, but watever you want to call it it
>ain't marriage!

You miss the point, Eric. Whatever you might want to call the union
of a same sex couple, there is no such institution that affords the
participants the same legal rights and privileges that marriage
affords a man and a woman. To enumerate a few: filing joint tax
returns, health care benefits for partners, the right to adopt,
the right to immigrate to the country of citizenship of your
partner, etc., etc. THIS is what Melinda meant when she brought
up marriage as a "special right" of heterosexuals.
>
>>2)  freedom from employment discrimination based on
>>    sexual orientation
>
>Hmm...seems to me that many gays have been fired merely for the fact
>that they are homosexual. But they also receive large cash awards from
>the courts when they do. I know of one case where the guy got $5
>million...
>
If gays have received cash awards from the courts for wrongful
dismissal, it's only because their basic rights were protected by
legislation that recognizes sexual orientation is not a reason to
fire someone. Without legislation such as this, courts would not
uphold a wrongful dismissal argument. And as to the claim of a $5 million
settlement, I hate it when people drop unsubstantiated stories such as
this to a public newsgroup. If you know of such a case, give us some
sort of newspaper or magazine article reference or something so we
can verify your story. This kind of bogus information only fosters
the continuing ignorance of homosexual issues by people such as yourself.

>>3)  freedom from housing discrimination based on
>>    sexual orientation
>
>I'll admit I really don't know much about this issue, but HOW would
>someone know if you are gay or not????? It's not like race where
>the various races are easily recognized.

Don't be a dolt, if a same-sex couple comes to look at some housing
they are plenty visible to the average landlord, especially if they're
looking at a one bedroom.
>
>-----
>Finally I would just like to add one comment. One of my best friends
>in High School turned out to be homosexual. We still do stuff together
>and all that...to me it is no big deal. He also agrees that those
>'special' rights are not needed.
>
You still haven't provided a single example what you (or your friend)
would consider a 'special' right. You can't hide behind these vague
unenumberated assertions, thinking that that lends any force to your
argument. The facts are that gays are NOT asking for any special rights
or consideration, just that they receive exactly the same rights and
privileges that straights currently enjoy. Gays can be denied housing,
can be denied credit (e.g. when applying for a mortgage), can be denied
public accomodation, and can be denied employment. Gays are kicked out
of the military and cannot marry and enjoy all the rights of married
couples. This is what the straight world enjoys, this is what gays
want and deserve. THESE ARE NOT 'SPECIAL RIGHTS'!!! And your gay
friend had better wake and buy a clue, because he's denied all those
rights which you now enjoy and has let you brow-beat him into agreeing
with you.
>
>Eric
>______________________________________________________________________________
>
Gary Byma
Newsgroups: alt.homosexual