This is sooo gay

[A Black Falcon]

And the pot calls the kettle black. You're doing exactly what I'm doing, sans proving your point, you're just on the opposite side of the opinion spectrum. Don't get holy on me.

No I'm not. I just see no reason to go find proof of my own when Sacred Jellybean and big guy provided more than enough.

No, it's not the most fair to do. A flat tax means you pay directly based on the money you earn. It's fair to everyone. Punishing someone because they've worked hard enough to become wealthy is as far from fair as you can get. It's almost giving poor people an incentive to not try to become rich.

It isn't fair to let rich people pay small amounts of tax because they are rich. The fact that they are rich means they have more money... more money to give in taxes. Poor people do not have that money... it just isn't fair to them to expect them to give anywhere near the same amount of money in taxes... and it isn't fair to the rest of us to let rich people off so easily...

And? The genes don't pass on because only one parent carries them? You really don't know shit about genetics.

The point was that there is a second, probably heterosexual person who gives half the genetic material...

Sure I can. Who were two of the most famous racists in the civil rights period? Orville Faubus and George Wallace, figures of a Jim Crow south. Both Democrats. Who set up Japanese internment camps in the second world war? A liberal president. Which party advocates racism against white men today in the form of Affirmative Action? Democrats. Which party has a KKK member in the Senate? The democratic party. Who was Trent Lott referring to in the remark that brought him down? Strom Thurmond, a Democrat at the time when he advocated segregation.

I am talking about now, not the past. And now Democrats are (or almost all of them anyway) not racist... while plenty of republicans are. I very, very much doubt that there aren't a whole lot of Republican legislators who behind closed doors completely agreed with Lott...

If it were genetic, NO ONE could be able to stop it! Yet some do! Those that don't stop it usually don't WANT to stop it.

As I said before, almost no one can stop it... and anyone who could wasn't genetically homosexual in the first place. There aren't many people like that out there.

Man, oh man, you just keep putting words in my mouth left and right! I never said any of that! This is borderline slander here, pal. I'm NOT in favor of persecution, and I don't think anyone should be allowed to harm anyone for any reason so stupid. But I also don't think you should be protected for your choices. To make an example, drug users are often denied jobs. One could make the argument that it's wrong to discriminate against drug users because they are addicted and cannot stop... but it was their choice to start in the first place (except in the very rare cases of people born addicted because their mother is a drug user, and that addiction not quelled by adulthood). If that person stops using drugs, they can get any job they are qualified for. Yes, it is hard to stop, but not impossible. Now I realize sexuality isn't exactly the same, but the point is, you cannot be protected from making choices, and if someone doesn't want to hire you because you're openly gay, they have that right. If you're not flagrant about it, they'll never know, and it will never be a freaking issue! As it stands now, if you are fired for being gay, you can sue their asses off anyway, and many employers enact their own policies disregarding sexual preference. It's wrong to fire someone for being gay, and only a real asshole would do that, but it's up to that gay individual not to make their sexuality an issue at work, as sexuality should NEVER be an issue at work.

Besides, when you get right down to it, an employer can fire you for whatever they want, and if they want to fire you because they don't like gays, they can get around any law with sickening easy anyway, as outside of race/creed/age/religion, employers can terminate you at will, and when they want to fire you, they will use the slightest screwup to justify it. So would it make you feel better for there to be a law, only to have the extreme few who would break it do so anyway? Making a law for this purpose is a nice gesture, but useless ultimately, as most employers already practice it, or would find ways around it, and it would embolden the gay activists to push for even more preferential treatment, just as minority advocates do today.

You keep saying I'm not reflecting your opinions... but to me it sure seems like I am after I read your posts. "I don't favor persecution! I just think that persecution is perfectly fine!"

You keep calling it a choice. It makes absolutely no sense at all... I think that there has been plenty of proof to show that it is not from our side of the argument. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that shows your refusal to consider that the other side could even begin to have any valid points.

Drug users? How many criminal groups will you compare homosexuals to? Its very insulting... Drug users can go into rehab and try to solve their problems... homosexuals can pretend to surpress their feelings, but they can't do it fully... you can't control biology that fully...