kbeverina
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 25, 1999
- Messages
- 3,106
As has been pointed out, no you don't have the right to not be called a bigot.Along with this right, people also have the right to NOT be called a bigot because they don't agree with a lifestyle.
Take the gay/straight/transexual issue off the table--how about if we had a large group of people in the US fighting for zero population growth. Overpopulation is a strain to our natural resources, usable water is slowing diminishing, fossil fuel production and use is killing our environment, etc. This group now wants to limit people to having one child and you can only have that child between the ages of 25 and 30... So, are you a bigot because you want to have 3 children or are you a bigot because you think that no one should have more than one child?
I cannot even follow this argument in the context of this discussion. How ridiculous.
Where do MY rights start in this. What if I don't want to be exposed to the gay lifestyle? What if I want to be able to walk down the street and not see two men kissing? Where are my civil rights???
We actually had an interesting discussion on this thread about this:
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2629134&page=22
Your rights start with you. And end where someone else's begin.
Keep in mind this is all for argument sake......it isn't as easy as you are making it out to be. We DO, as a country, need to define what is morally acceptable or eventually society will turn into chaos.
This particular issue is actually pretty easy.
Exactly--and say that same sex marriage does effect my life--what if I don't want to watch same sex partners....where is the line of my rights vs their rights???
The line begins with you and ends where someone else's begin.
When do we as a society as a whole draw the line though? By allowing everything, the only result will be chaos. What if someone has the belief that they should be able to kill their own children if they don't like something that child did, doesn't effect your life so why should it matter, right???
See above. A child has a right to life. You can't infringe on that. No matter what someone's belief is. There are basic rights that we're born with. They're not granted to us because society has come to a consensus that we should have them.
Exactly, that is where we as a society need to decide what is morally right and wrong. If society as a whole finds golf objectionable, close up the golf courses.
Not the same. There's no right to have a golf course available to you.
No where in the first amendment does it say that people in the US can call other people a bigot because they don't agree with you...
The Constitution protects rights. It doesn't grant them.
As for the apples to oranges, no, it ins't, it is still talking about what is considered morally acceptable in our society. It is morally acceptable in other societies to kill your children does that make it wrong there too?? Our society as a whole, however, has decided that it is NOT ok to do this but what if there was a movement to change this just like there has been a movement in recent years to "accept" the gay lifestyle. Not to turn this into a religious post but even the Catholic church accepts gay people, they do NOT agree with the gay sex--that is a HUGE distinction. Our society as a whole has not decided that the gay lifestyle is morally acceptable. People are trying to change that.
You're looking at this the wrong way. The right to live is inherent. It doesn't matter that our society has decided it's not okay to kill children. What matters is that our society has decided to protect a child's right to live.
First, protesting and name calling are two different things. Again, why is it not ok to stand up for what you find morally objectionable, no one seems to be able to answer that...
Asked and answered many times. It's fine to find something morally objectionable. It's also fine for someone to think you're a bigot because of your objections.
I have been trying to follow this discussion and failing miserably.
Same here. I think it's difficult to follow because this poster has been trying to back away from her original statement about it being shoved down our throats.