normaly I try to keep my political stuff out of this forum but this just pissed me right the hell off
Quote
Dying Lesbian's Partner Denied Access To Her
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
Posted: February 22, 2008 - 1:00 pm ET
(Miami, Florida) Janice Langbehn and Lisa Pond had planned to take their three children on a family cruise. The Olympia, Washington couple had been together 18 years and with their children were looking forward to the holiday.
But just as they were about to depart on the cruise from Miami, Florida. Pond, a healthy 39-year-old, suddenly collapsed. She was rushed to Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami with Langbehn and the children following close behind.
But once Langbehn and the children arrived at the hospital the hospital refused to accept information from her about Ponds's medical history.
Langbehn says she was informed that she was in an antigay city and state, and she could expect to receive no information or acknowledgment as family.
A doctor finally spoke with Janice telling her that there was no chance of recovery.
Other than one five minute visit, which was orchestrated by a Catholic priest at Langbehn's request to perform last rites, and despite the doctor's acknowledgement that no medical reason existed to prevent visitation, neither she nor her children were allowed to see Pond until nearly eight hours after their arrival.
Soon after Pond''s death, Langbehn tried to get her death certificate in order to get life insurance and Social Security benefits for their children. She was denied both by the State of Florida and the Dade County Medical Examiner.
With the help of Lambda Legal Langbehn has notified Jackson Memorial Hospital that she intends to file a lawsuit.
"There is nothing that can make up for what my children and I endured that day," Langbehn says of the day Pond died. "We only want the hospital to take responsibility for how they treated us and ensure that it doesn't happen to another family."
In accordance with Florida law, Lambda Legal is waiting for the hospital to respond to the notice of intent to sue before formally filing a complaint with the court.
"The treatment that Janice and her children received was unethical and discriminatory," said Beth Littrell, Staff Attorney for Lambda Legal.
"This letter puts them on notice that we are advocating for justice for Janice and her children."
That's downright shameful. The doctors and nurses there should have their licenses revoked for that.
Quote from: Ryudo Lee on February 22, 2008, 03:40:18 PM
That's downright shameful. The doctors and nurses there should have their licenses revoked for that.
I think a better solution would be a nice media scandal. Nothing like being put all over national television to make sure you don't do whatever the hell it is you did, ever again.
I suppose that works too. Public humiliation is a great deterrent.
I just don't understand why some people have so much hatred. There was no reason to make a difficult situation even worse. The hospital staff should be ashamed of themselves.
In all honesty I can live with, heck even accept, people who are 'uncomfortable' around people of other sexualities. I mean if their uncomfortable with something they don't truly understand that's fine. Bringing it out in the open in a verbally abusive way, that's taking it a way that's not cool.
However this. This is complete and utter BULLSHIT. The fucking woman was dying! Who the hell denies a dying woman the ability to see her goddam family. I don't give a damn what your fucking views are, who you are, or what diety you think is out there. You. Do. Not. Ruin someone's last moments on this plane just because their sexual choices bother you.
I'm with Ryudo, revoke their goddam licenses. I don't care if losing the ability to engage in the only career you're trained for ruins your life. Ruining the end of someone else's revokes your right to squat.
This happened in my fucking state. This... this baffles me. How the FUCK can somebody justify restricting a dying woman from seeing her family? I feel fucking ashamed to live here now. And fucking ashamed to be a human being.
I am pissed off. Seriously. This is just fucking bullshit. I'm with Ryudo and especially Netrogo. I hope their licenses are revoked and I hope they're turned into laughingstocks. I hope no hospital accepts them on their staff, no matter how unrealistic a wish that is.
Just... augh. I feel angry now.
~Keaton the Black Jackal
I hate to say it but there is alot that goes on in Florida lately thats been pissing me off.
This is the worst one I've heard of definitlythough. It just boggles the mind that some one would do this
Quote from: thegayhare on February 23, 2008, 11:14:36 AM
I hate to say it but there is alot that goes on in Florida lately thats been pissing me off.
This is the worst one I've heard of definitlythough. It just boggles the mind that some one would do this
Bleh, I don't blame you. From what I've heard Florida's terrible when it comes to this "anti-gay" shit. I like living in Florida - if only because I'm slightly biased since I've grown up here and have had minimal experience elsewhere in the States - but bloody hell this news makes me depressed and ashamed to live here. So stupid...
Though like you said, this is the worst Florida-related incident I've heard of. This was an outrage.
~Keaton the Black Jackal
Quote from: Ryudo Lee on February 22, 2008, 03:40:18 PM
That's downright shameful. The doctors and nurses there should have their licenses revoked for that.
I would think that it's the higher-ups at the hospital, not the doctors themselves. They should be the ones being court-martialed (or whatever the equivalent is for them).
But I agree with ya'll for the rest of it. There is NO EXCUSE for that. JUST. PLAIN. SAD.
Florida's a pretty underrated state when it comes down to sheer awful. Still doesn't beat Mississippi, though.
Quote from: thegayhare on February 23, 2008, 11:14:36 AM
I hate to say it but there is alot that goes on in Florida lately thats been pissing me off.
This is the worst one I've heard of definitlythough. It just boggles the mind that some one would do this
That's kinda expected since it's the only state with a Fark (http://www.fark.com) tag to itself
:< And some place like this will hopefully be my future work area. Reminds me how the Hypocritic Hippocratic oath is optional for graduating med students nowadays.
I think modelincard has a valid point, it could very well have been a hospital policy that the doctor's job might be in jeopardy for violating. Even then, were I the doctor in question I'd still probably take that as a nice opportunity to stick a fork in the rules, and the doctors and nurses aren't completely guiltless even if they were just following orders.
... it's optional? You wot?
"If you haven't taken the hippocratic oath, you can just take your filthy dirty hands off my child, thankyou."
... insert expletives where they'll take the most effect...
Huh, that couple lives where I live. I'm surprised I haven't heard about this sooner, especially considering the way Olympians get up in arms over anything remotely discriminatory.
Not that this wouldn't deserve it. How can those doctors live with themselves? =/
Their lawyers must be having strokes... unless the lawyers are the same way.
Quote from: Ryudo Lee on February 25, 2008, 04:56:17 PM
Their lawyers must be having strokes... unless the lawyers are the same way.
They probably are. The same way, I mean.
Whether they're the same way or not is irrelevant. Even the most pig-headed and stubborn of lawyers can see a disaster coming a mile away.
Massive power outage hits Florida.
Karma :U
Quote from: BillBuckner on February 26, 2008, 05:08:51 PM
Massive power outage hits Florida.
Karma :U
Actually by now if it was Karma, Florida would have been wiped off the map....
Quote from: Valynth on February 26, 2008, 06:51:48 PM
Quote from: BillBuckner on February 26, 2008, 05:08:51 PM
Massive power outage hits Florida.
Karma :U
Actually by now if it was Karma, Florida would have been wiped off the map....
Hey, while I'm all for Karma, don't you think you should give me an opportunity to move to someplace nicer and less homophobic before Karma wipes out Florida? :<
~Keaton the Black Jackal
Quote from: Netrogo on February 22, 2008, 07:21:15 PM
In all honesty I can live with, heck even accept, people who are 'uncomfortable' around people of other sexualities. I mean if their uncomfortable with something they don't truly understand that's fine. Bringing it out in the open in a verbally abusive way, that's taking it a way that's not cool.
However this. This is complete and utter BULLSHIT. The fucking woman was dying! Who the hell denies a dying woman the ability to see her goddam family. I don't give a damn what your fucking views are, who you are, or what diety you think is out there. You. Do. Not. Ruin someone's last moments on this plane just because their sexual choices bother you.
I'm with Ryudo, revoke their goddam licenses. I don't care if losing the ability to engage in the only career you're trained for ruins your life. Ruining the end of someone else's revokes your right to squat.
See, this is where I disagree. Yes, something should be done. No, we should not punish the general public in the process.
Yes, let's have them all thrown out, and leave the city hospital grossly understaffed for lord knows how long. That's a great idea.
Sorry, Mr and Mrs Thompson, your son will have to wait an extra two hours before his broken arm can be looked at, because half of our staff got fired for being bigots.
I heard that the hospitals in Florida were running off emergency generators, anyway.
Time to play devil's advocate You people do realize it is a law all over America that if someone is in critical condition, only family can see them. Seeing as the city didn't recongize the marriage they wheren't consider family and are fully legal to do so. I'm not saying it's right so don't be coming after me about being a bigot or that crap. I have several friends who are gay. I'm just saying if this was between a straight man and woman it wouldn't be as big a deal. Hate me all you want for saying it but it's the truth. It's being made such a big deal cause they where lesbians. I know I'm gonna be Public Enemy Number 1 for saying it but it's true. Yes I know the hospital is in the wrong for doing it. If you want to get mad about anything get mad about the city not recongizeing the marriage. Don't start dumping on the hospital.
I've said my peace and probobaly alienated myself from most if not all of the forum. More than likely anger an Admin. Remember I'm not being a bigot here, I'm just pointing out the facts that people seem to ignore.
No, I grant that you're likely right here. I know that there are some limits on who can visit a person in the hospital, although I am not familiar with the specifics. I don't see that you're being a bigot. There is a problem, I think we can all agree on that. If you try to deny that, then you're a bigot. Anyway, we'll see what happens.
With this, I now direct a few expletives. Fuck Florida and its idiotic & backwards laws. (Although not our Floridian forumites & some others, as they generally seem distant from the laws of the aforementioned state.)
Quote from: Daimien on February 26, 2008, 11:16:38 PM
Time to play devil's advocate You people do realize it is a law all over America that if someone is in critical condition, only family can see them. Seeing as the city didn't recongize the marriage they wheren't consider family and are fully legal to do so. I'm not saying it's right so don't be coming after me about being a bigot or that crap. I have several friends who are gay. I'm just saying if this was between a straight man and woman it wouldn't be as big a deal. Hate me all you want for saying it but it's the truth. It's being made such a big deal cause they where lesbians. I know I'm gonna be Public Enemy Number 1 for saying it but it's true. Yes I know the hospital is in the wrong for doing it.If you want to get mad about anything get mad about the city not recongizeing the marriage. Don't start dumping on the hospital.
I've said my peace and probobaly alienated myself from most if not all of the forum. More than likely anger an Admin. Remember I'm not being a bigot here, I'm just pointing out the facts that people seem to ignore.
Out of interest, I went through that and bolded every portion of it that was excessively apologetic. ;) I doubt anyone minded you pointing that out! It's an excellent point. Blame ought to be given to those who deserve it!
Although I'd like to say that the reason it wouldn't be a big deal if it happened to a straight man and woman is that it
wouldn't happen to a straight man and woman! As you stated, heterosexual marriages are recognized in Florida and so the partner would be recognized as family!
Mark my words, we're going to have a gay rights movement just like the black rights movement. There's no way it won't happen. I mean it's so stupid wha people are doing. I mean like how "God hates gay people!" Tell me, if we have a fair, just, loving God then why would he send people to hell over something they can't control? People who go into how it ruins the sanctity of marriage, marriage is only as sacred as you make it. I mean you can go t Las Vegas and get a drive through marriage with somebody you just met. If you ask me the world isn't going to hell in a handbasket, it's already there.
Rakala, I believe the argument behind the sending of gay people to hell is not over what they can't control, but over what they can.
Ah.. that's not exactly clear, so I'll try and rephrase. The argument goes, God doesn't send gay people to hell for being gay. God sends gay people to hell for -acting- on the desires, and being sexually active.
Of course, this implies that God sends anyone to hell who has sex outside of marriage, hetero or otherwise. Which strikes me as a little bit overkill for a kind, loving God. But that's a totally other argument, and I don't really want to get into it.
I'm -mildly- surprised that the hospital refused to let the children in - after all, "that's my child, out of wedlock" type thing should be acceptable, even if "that's my wife" isn't... but then, I stopped being majorly surprised at how stupid people can be years ago...
I don't believe it's necessarily sex outside of marriage. I think it's sex without love that's what God meant. But still, what would be wrong with having sex with someone I love? Gay or not? I guess it's impossible to fathom the will of God, but I'm sticking strong with my beliefs that it's not wrong. I don't mean to be bigoted myself but ore often than not I've noticed that homosexual people sleep around more.
Sex without love?
Where's the reference for that, please? I'd be fascinated to read up on it...
As for "what's wrong?", I have no idea. I don't claim that a God even exists, let alone that I have any idea what he or she really thinks. I was merely explaining what certain enthusiasts think he thinks. Or, at least, I think so. ;-]
I could be completely off on this, but I think the belief most people get about God and sex is that God intends for you to only have sex to make babies, and thats it. Not even to do it for fun. You're not even supposed to enjoy it (HAHAHA That's gonna happen...)
And since homosexual sex can't make babies....
Quote from: Rakala on February 27, 2008, 10:30:07 AM
I don't mean to be bigoted myself but ore often than not I've noticed that homosexual people sleep around more.
now I take exception to that. Gay folks are no more likely to sleep around then are any other folk. It's a stereotype strictly by the numbers straight folks are more likely to sleep around then gay folks simply do to there greater numbers and greater chioces.
Quote from: Kenji on February 27, 2008, 11:20:15 AM
I could be completely off on this, but I think the belief most people get about God and sex is that God intends for you to only have sex to make babies, and thats it. Not even to do it for fun. You're not even supposed to enjoy it (HAHAHA That's gonna happen...)
And since homosexual sex can't make babies....
Where did you get this?
Quote from: thegayhare on February 27, 2008, 02:06:16 PM
Quote from: Rakala on February 27, 2008, 10:30:07 AM
I don't mean to be bigoted myself but ore often than not I've noticed that homosexual people sleep around more.
now I take exception to that. Gay folks are no more likely to sleep around then are any other folk. It's a stereotype strictly by the numbers straight folks are more likely to sleep around then gay folks simply do to there greater numbers and greater chioces.
Personally, I think it's more a matter of the folks who are -obviously- gay - ie, the flamboyant types - appear to sleep around more; however, this is not backed up by any numbers, but is rather simply a matter of, because they're obvious, they get noticed more.
In other words, the ones you notice, you notice having more sex. But that's a totally self-fulfilling statistic - simply because you notice them more, you'll notice when they choose a new partner. On the other hand, the quiet type you don't notice, you have no idea how many partners they've had because they keep quiet about it.
And the same goes for heterosexual people, of course. The married man who is keeping his mistress hidden from his wife isn't going to tell everyone who he's sleeping with...
Quote from: BillBuckner on February 27, 2008, 02:17:00 PMQuote from: Kenji on February 27, 2008, 11:20:15 AM
I could be completely off on this, but I think the belief most people get about God and sex is that God intends for you to only have sex to make babies, and thats it. Not even to do it for fun. You're not even supposed to enjoy it (HAHAHA That's gonna happen...)
And since homosexual sex can't make babies....
Where did you get this?
from logical deduction I believe.
Catholicism says "grow and multiply". And as far as I know several other religions says you're supposed to marry and have children as well. Therefore gay sex is out because you can't have children out of it.
It
IS a fact that some extremist religions claim homossexualism to be work of satan and there are some (ridiculous) cases of gays and lesbians who went straight after following some religion
I'm talking about the claim that the bible forbids the enjoyment of sex, not the claim that sex should only be for procreation, which seems to be mainly a catholic thing, as far as Christianity is concerned.
God made sex. God made pleasure, for that matter.
It was designed to be enjoyable.
The Church's stance, over the years, has been unfortunate and sometimes wrong. I cannot speak for specific denominations, but it is my belief that sex should happen within marriage, and within those confines, was made to be enjoyed. There is nowhere in scripture where it says that sex should not be enjoyed or not be done. A reference calling for married couples not to withhold sex from each other, in fact, comes to mind.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on February 27, 2008, 10:25:48 AM
I'm -mildly- surprised that the hospital refused to let the children in - after all, "that's my child, out of wedlock" type thing should be acceptable, even if "that's my wife" isn't... but then, I stopped being majorly surprised at how stupid people can be years ago...
The dying woman might not have been the childrens birth mother, and florida law makes it illiegal for gay people to adopt.
It's the only state in the country that singles out gay folks
Oh.
Oh, how stupid. Nuff said.
Florida is a delightful land of sunshine and insanity, if you haven't figured out yet.
Quote from: Cogidubnus on February 27, 2008, 03:25:34 PM
God made sex. God made pleasure, for that matter.
It was designed to be enjoyable.
Yes, but I think he also intended for you to share that pleasure with people you
truly love.
Also on a side note: I am gay myself which is why I really hated to say what I did earlier in this particular topic.
I honestly can't remember where I got the info. Coulda been one of few sunday schools, coulda been a book in American Lit class. Either way, sounds Puritan in nature.
Quote from: BillBuckner on February 27, 2008, 06:36:46 PM
Florida is a delightful land of sunshine and insanity, if you haven't figured out yet.
.. and just like a granola bar - chock full of fruits and nuts...
It's just insane. There are times when I wonder just when somebody is going to say we've had enough.
When a person's dying, let them see whomever the hell they want. They're dying. What harm is it going to cause exactly?
There's following one's religion, and then there's fanaticism. This is clearly fanaticism, and this is coming from a guy who's Seventh Day Adventist. (See? We're not crazier than everyone else! Ha! ;P )
I don't think we need as many restrictions as we do in the US. I recently learned that it is actually against the law to curse in public. While I see where that would make sense it also needs to be changed because the entire world is changing. I mean we've made huge technological advances in just the past 10 years. Who doesn't think that from VHS to DVD was a huge change? I was baffled for a little bit but I adapted. Point is times are changing and people need to get rid of their old fashioned views of the world and take up one that is more tolerant.
a changing world is something that comes up often
for example those who claim that homosexuality is forbidden cite certain parts of the bible- often the same parts that demonstrate the correct way to beat your wife, who you can and cant own as slaves, and that hamburger, polyester, garden vegetables, and bunny rabbits are all Abominations Unto God (Leviticus, king of the fruitcakes) and also state it is forbidden to lend money at interest- not just high interest, any interest. the only portions of the holy scripture other then Leviticus that can at all be called anti gay are a few passages condemning people who were same sex prostitutes, and the scripture clearly states that its condemning the prostitution and barely mentions the fact it was same sex.
as you can see i have read into this, some of you may have found out i once studied to join the clergy and i was privy to some knowledge not commonly available.
now, the church has more money in banks at interest then most corporations do, no longer promotes beating your wife, doesn't even want to mention slavery, and supported generations of monks with little to do but grow vegetable gardens.... and often claims that much of the specific rules no longer apply because we live in a different world- for example slaves of the time had been treated well, were servants and often friends of their masters, and it was understood that anyone at anytime could be a slave by being in debt or loosing a war as opposed to the way africans were enslaved with far more cruelty.
so, we live in a different world, but people now think that living documents like the constitution or the bible cannot be changed... i say bull, they can be changed and should be changed regularly to be relavent.
don't believe that gays should marry because its an affront to god? let the local judge marry them legally and they don't have to step foot in your church once, where apperantly you don't pay much attention otherwise you would have heard about that hippie dude saying 'love one another' and 'don't be a hater'. read a little deeper and you might have heard that jesus himself attended the wedding of two men, blessed their union, and i think he brought a gift but i forget what it was.....
QuoteYou love who you love, whats in their pants is just a bonus
Uhm, be careful about calling the Constitution a living document.
That's how we can get free speech eventually restricted should the country take a hard swing to the right. Be careful what precedent you set up, because it can very easily backfire.
I'm opposed to any changes to the core of the Constitution, and the whole gay marriage issue is for the people to vote on in their individual states. That's something society must decide on, not the courts and certainly not legislators who always have an ulterior motive for their own personal gain.
The Bible isn't a living document either. It's already been written and really hasn't changed much in the past half-century.
And much of the Levitical law was re-stated in Numbers as well, as well as being part of the latter chapters in Exodus, so all those things were pretty much cemented into Jewish law.
By the way, there was also a law against bestiality... does that mean we should legalize that now? I'm playing devil's advocate here. Once you start picking and choosing what laws to change based on religious preferences, you run into serious trouble, because virtually all moral code has religious basis. There must be a common base code that is inflexible, basic rights which cannot be changed. That's why the Constitution should not be viewed as 'living', it outlines the basic rights of the people in the country. Making foolish, self-centered, personal-choice-related changes to it are disasterous. Just look at Prohibition. That again should have been left to states whether to keep alcohol legal or not in the individual states. Instead, it was thrust into the Constitution where it didn't belong and chaos ensued.
I believe we're to the point where no one can be trusted to make any changes to the Bill of Rights. Everyone in power has agendas which they wish to further no matter what the cost to the nation as a whole, along with a general addiction to power. Their addenums will do nothing but damage.
Bestiality is something else entirely. Even people I know who are into bestiality admit it's unnatural. Animals cannot give consent because they don't speak in the same way we do. However, back to the issue at hand. I think yes, states should be able to vote on this but I don't think it should ever be entirely banned. Maybe I'm just a little biased being gay myself.
Quote from: Alondro on February 29, 2008, 09:53:56 AM
I'm opposed to any changes to the core of the Constitution, and the whole gay marriage issue is for the people to vote on in their individual states. That's something society must decide on, not the courts and certainly not legislators who always have an ulterior motive for their own personal gain.
I'd argue this point with you
If you put the rights of an unpopular minority up for a popular vote the results will usually not fall in the favor of that minority.
The courts exist to protect the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority.
most civil rights cases have proceeded first through the courts. the fact that we still have on the books in several states examples of laws that are patently unconstitutional and discriminatory. Laws like 5 indians together constitute a war party and could be shot on site.
more recently laws like the texas sodemy law and texas's ban on the sale of sex toys how a magority can infringe on the rights of an unpopular group were it not for the interevention of the courts
Quote from: Alondro on February 29, 2008, 09:53:56 AM
The Bible isn't a living document either. It's already been written and really hasn't changed much in the past half-century.
http://eddirt.frozenreality.co.uk/index.php?id=444
My point is, the Constitution should not have things added to it every time some small group demands some other right.
The point about Native Americans is a perfect case. The laws regarding them get repealed, but nothing is put into the Constitution specifically regarding their rights.
The Constitution deals with broad rights, not specific things for specific small groups, otherwise it'd be a disasterous mess of barely interpretable sub-clauses, like the regular legal code.
And Rakala, some animal rights groups would argue that certain species of animals ARE able to give consent (namely those that they want excluded from medical research), and actual research does in fact give some credence to this: chimapnzees and gorillas can learn sign language and are able to communicate wants and emotional states.
Then there is the issue itself of what exactly constitutes 'consent' and also what constitutes sentience and sapience. It's rather amusing to watch PETA and other groups try to worm their way around the issue, since the very rights they want to give animals are the very same things bestialists claim to support their opinion that animals can give consent!
Religious morality is the only barrier there. There is a reason such things were lumped under 'Sodomy', due to the entire moral code of Western Civilization being based on Judaeo-Christian beliefs. I think you'd be quite shocked to learn what is legal in other parts of the world.
I would also like to note that a great number of bestialists do not think themselves abnormal or unnatural. Someone believing himself to be normal does not make it so, regardless. Delusional people often feel they are 'normal' and something is wrong with everyone else. Personal judgement is a very poor measure of mental state.
I should also bring up the fact that bestiality is legal in certain countries! That is a fact kept silent in many such discussions since it raises very uncomfortable issues of nationality.
I must also note that homosexuality is not exactly 'normal', no matter how you look at it. It represent a small percentage of the population and has specific alterations of several brain regions with very statistically significant occurrence in that group. In fact, it fits very well into the category of personality disorders. It just so happens that it is not a destructive behavior in general.
Animal models also demonstrate it as an anomaly. Purely homosexual mammals are very uncommon. Bisexual behavior may in fact be the natural norm, if one goes by statistics. Many many species demonstate bisexuality, with increasing frequency in the more social animals. Homosexuality remains very low, never more than 4%, unless the animals are kept in unusual conditions (homosexuality increases dramatically in rats kept in crowded cages, possibly a hormonal feedback mechanism for natural population control).
We could also bring up the case of pedophilia. Who determines the age at which a person can give consent? Not to mention, the age differs drastically between cultures, some allowing marriage at the age of 12, so is that culture a culture of pedophiles? And if not, why is it ok to do it there and not here? And does the law impinge on the rights of someone from another culture that has a lower age limit? In this day of everyone in the country wanting to keep their own cultural traits and language (and the law bendign over backward to accomodate them), a religious morality is the only thing that holds that law in place.
Am I the only one who was thinking of the "Phoenix Wright is on a roll" music while reading Alondro's post?
No one here is talking about amending the constitution Alondro
In fact it's the right wing ant-gay folks who keep pushing for constitutional amendments in this case.
I don't think the referance to the fact that the constitution is a living document is out of line either. The constitution can be ammended if needed, and it's rather hard to do just so it can't be amended for frivelous reasons.
But the interpretation of constitution does constantly evolve, in fact it's one of the primary duties of the supreme court.
Quote from: Alondro on February 29, 2008, 03:35:20 PM
Bisexual behavior may in fact be the natural norm, if one goes by statistics.
I happen to be of the belief that this is true, many people who believe they are gay think they only have a choice of one or the other, never both, and that by liking the same sex the opposite sex is suddenly forbidden.
there are, of course, those who simply are not attracted to the opposite gender at all, or not attracted in the slightest to the same gender. however the majority of homosexual people i have talked to were either heterosexual or bisexual and chose homosexuality after a traumatic experience... i actually have one friend who went from hetero to bi and then to homo after a sequence of bad relationships and mental scars.
after all, is it really that hard to appreciate the beauty of a human body regardless of its gender? and who is to say that the personality/soul you will fall in love with can only be housed in a person of fixed physical description?
also, my statement of the bible being a living document is based on the concept that in christianity god has three 'forms'- theres god the father, most commonly portrayed in cartoons and such, god the son AKA jesus, and the holy spirit. i dont know why people who have attended mass their whole lives or studies theology keep forgetting whats chanted almost every time you even look at a christian- the 'holy spirit' according to the bible is a portion of god within each human. the bible is in two sections, one devoted to god the father and the other to god the son- but whats unofficially dubbed 'the living testament' is essentially the bible that is written every day.
think how much better the image of the catholic church would be if they were preaching the book of Mother Theresa and the words of Ghandi, JFK, Martin Luther King, and the guy who was shot for saying 'peace will live forever'.
but sinse they don't, im not part of that religion technically- so please forgive me getting theological on everyone. in practice i am a mix between agnostic, aesir, hari krishna, and Benedictine monk...... should that particular religious mix ever have an actual building for worship you can bet it'll be a party there.
Quote from: Brunhidden on February 29, 2008, 05:36:22 PM
there are, of course, those who simply are not attracted to the opposite gender at all, or not attracted in the slightest to the same gender. however the majority of homosexual people i have talked to were either heterosexual or bisexual and chose homosexuality after a traumatic experience... i actually have one friend who went from hetero to bi and then to homo after a sequence of bad relationships and mental scars.
My neighbor's sister had an experience like that. She was married to a guy who decided that he was gonna beat her. She then kicked his butt, divorced him, and is now living with her girlfriend. She's coming up for a promotion to captain in the police department here.
Quote from: Alondro on February 29, 2008, 09:53:56 AM
Uhm, be careful about calling the Constitution a living document.
That's how we can get free speech eventually restricted should the country take a hard swing to the right. Be careful what precedent you set up, because it can very easily backfire.
Hard right, hard left, they're both the same in that regard really.
no matter what we won't agree... yes there is people who love people of the same sex and yes there are people who loathe people who love people of the same sex, but it brings up something my mother always says when confronted with this: "love the person hate the sin" or rather don't despise a person simply because they are gay, if you need to hate something then hate the sin.
yes what the florida hospital did was wrong, no one should ever be treated that way ever! in fact i might just have to beat the living daylights out of anyone who tries that when i'm near! the doctors should lose their licenses, why? because no one deserves that regardless of their sin or belief.
personally i do not believe that being bi or gay is right, it conflicts with not only my religouse beliefs but with my regular beliefs that say "hey that orifice is not for penetration"! BUT THATS ME I know that every person in the world doesn't believe that so i'm not going to hold your decision against you just like i'm asking you not to hold my decision against me!
while i'm in the ranting mood, i'll start with something we all know and hate, hypocrisy, oh how i loathe that action. those doctors had about as much right to do that as the police men trying to stop the african americans from walking! now i need to get some sleep good day to all!
There are some interesting believes you got there ghost.
Quote from: Joe3210 on March 06, 2008, 07:15:34 AM
There are some interesting believes you got there ghost.
why thank you joe i live by them as best as i can and then some.
How very unpleasant and bigoted.
Oh, and the original story's appalling too.