These are just some of my thoughts and my inner babblings.
1A). Marriage is a dieing practice anyway. Plus many consider it to be an act of a male taking ownership of a women, so basically it would be a man taking custody of another man and making him his bitch so to speak.
True, and historically true, although not really practiced that way by many (at least in the US)
But it doesn't matter. It's still a symbol to people, and married couples are still given more privileges
2A). Depends on the state.
That was the entire purpose of that point
3A). Many Businesses put a sign right saying they have the right to deny service to anyone they don't like, that bill would be an extension to that right. Just like how a male gay bar could reserve the right to not serve straight people.
Isolated instances of service being denied to individuals is different from a broad-scope banishment of an entire group of people. I've never seen or heard of a single case of the latter happening.
So basically if you are feeling oppressed, why not move to a place that is more tolerant
Because it's not that easy?
Because people don't want to leave their friends and family?
Because people don't want to start over at a new job/school?
Because some people simply don't have access to the means to do so?
Because they shouldn't have to?
This is almost, in a way, victim blaming. "It's your fault, you should just move"
Besides, find me one place where discrimination doesn't exist. Sure, some places would be better than others, but you won't find anywhere where there isn't at least
some1. I was pretty sure the 14th amendment covered this, with the whole all citizens are to be treated equally. I could be wrong on this one.
Yeah, but look around, and see where that's got us
People should be allowed to discriminate.
Limiting the rights of business owners is not the correct solution.
Nobody should have to fear for their job, and by extension, their famiy's well-being, because they could be fired at any moment simply for having a trait they can't help having.
Let's look at it logically
1. People are harmed by discrimination.
2. People are not harmed by a lack of discrimination
Therefore, the most ethical decision to prevent the most people from being harmed is to not allow discrimination
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin
I read a lot of that article, and searched it for "homoloveual" and "gay". No results.
While certain ethnic groups were affected, generally speaking women were made more equal to men. Nothing about gays though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history_in_Russia#LGBT_history_under_Stalin:_1933.E2.80.931953Also, Stalin and his policies don't really represent communism that well.
This. There's many more communist countries than the USSR
