Prop H8 hinders the Autistic Rights movement!
No you miss a key distinction here, homosexuality (and by extension campness) is a lifestyle choice. What they have done is copied a few character traits of our own, stuck it in the package of being gay and now we have people trying to illustrate equivalence. Personally I think its the gay rights movement which are in fact the greater threat.
BTW, the 14th Amendment doesn't cover marriage and marriage isn't referred to in the US Constitution. No Amendment does. Per Amendment 10, marriage is under the perview of the states, but prior case law such as the case against the Mormons in 1890 established marriage as 1 man: 1 woman.
And finally as an Aspie, I take great offense at being told that my rights were taken away via prop. 8. All prop. 8 stated is that marriage is 1 man: 1 woman. That's it. No one's rights were taken away whether they were Autistic or homosexual, which is another matter that is NOT RELEVANT to this forum. I take great offense at being told that as an Aspie I am supposed to support the gay 'rights' movement to support my rights. Nothing that they push for affects my rights at all, but may do damage to society which I oppose.
I pay my taxes, I want the EXACT same rights as straight people. No ifs or buts, and don't give me that semantics crap that marriage is defined as an act between a man and a woman. It was defined that way at the time because homosexuality was inconceivable. Today, it's accepted and legal. How far up your butt are you that you think you can marry the one you love but we can't?
You take great offense to being compared to a misunderstood segment of the population? Of all people, you should understand what it feels like to be different and how horrible and frightening it is that a majority could possibly take rights away from you just because you were born different. I am both aspie and gay, and I definitely see how the struggle to be accepted is similar.
Until 1967, it was still illegal in 17 States for a black person to marry a white person. Most people were disgusted at the mere thought of interracial marriage, but there were some who were brave enough and intelligent enough to see this was wrong and fought to correct it even if they weren't black themselves.
Oh, and by the way, the argument you use that gay marriage will damage society is exactly the same that was used to oppose interracial marriage in the 60's. Hate never changes its true face. They even used the same sleazy trick of using children, like in those revolting Prop 8 ads, saying that all studies prove that a child from an interracial marriage is more likely have mental and self esteem and identity problems, so for the sake of our children, let's not allow black people to marry white people.
You don't believe in same sex marriage? Fine, don't marry someone of the same sex.
It is the absolute height of hypocrisy that religious people are fighting to take away the rights of two people to celebrate their love and commitment by getting married.
The only thing that damages society is bigotry and hatred, and Prop 8 is a direct result of both.
You do have exactly the same right, namely to marry someone of the opposite sex. And don't you dare try and equate a lifestyle choice with the old race laws.
Fair enough; go marry a member of the opposite sex--just like I had to do.
And? Just because blacks and whites were granted that liberty (it's not a right BTW) in no way reflects why two persons of the same sex should. This is like a childish argument, "They got too!"
Love isn't relevant.
1 - It can't be measured, and thus becomes a subjective point to use.
2 - Heterosexuals, according to law, have no commitment to love one another. If the gay community wants to be treated just like the heterosexual community, then "love" simply is not part of the equation.
The gay community is every bit as guilty of bigotry and hatred (if not more) as heterosexuals against same-sex marriage. With instances such as El Coyote in CA where they actively assaulted a business on the basis of what a member of management did on their own time, they are only adding to the problem. Additionally, the bully tactics like suing E-Harmony don't help either.
For homosexuals, their behavior is a choice, even if their sexuality is not. The stereotypes of the flaming, wrist flipping, gay man, and the stocky, flannel-wearing gay woman may have some basis' in reality, but I think they may be largely offensive to the average homosexual person. Mainly, a person whose only offset is their sexuality will very likely both know and understand what constitutes appropriate behavior (although they may not give a rip ).
For Aspies and Auties, not so much. We have disorders of perception, and may not know or understand what appropriate behavior is, and much less understand why it's appropriate.
_________________
For Aspies and Auties, not so much. We have disorders of perception, and may not know or understand what appropriate behavior is, and much less understand why it's appropriate.
What isn't a choice are innate characteristics, and denying someone a legally state sanctioned service/condition based on innate characteristics is illegal. If marriage was a purely religious concept w/ no associated state and/or federal legal rights, then this wouldn't be an issue, but it is, so here we are.
You miss a very key difference here, no one is born to act camp, nor born with an instinct to find someone of the same sex attractive. If we assume the latter then by extension we would have to say that those into bestiality or paedophillia are acting on instinctive attraction.
On the other hand, people are born on the spectrum.
Evidence, Please?
_________________
basically from my limited understanding it dissallowed gays to marry. Only unions between same sex couples are recognized.
Now I don't believe the issues are related autism and asds with homosexuality but personally I feel they need to get the same rights as anyone else. I don't understand the problem with gays marrying people don't have to like it quite frankly it doesn't affect them.
You miss a very key difference here, no one is born to act camp, nor born with an instinct to find someone of the same sex attractive. If we assume the latter then by extension we would have to say that those into bestiality or paedophillia are acting on instinctive attraction.
On the other hand, people are born on the spectrum.
Pedophilia and bestiality are different because even if they are innate instincts, they are actions that by definition can and likely do cause lasting harm and cannot have the consent of another party, which is why they are illegal. If a homosexual person gets married to a member of the same sex, that member has to consent to the marriage. Even if pedophilia did not result in lasting psychological harm to a child, which it demonstrably does, a child cannot consent due to legal conditions regarding their existence as an autonomous member of society, and an animal can't communicate in a way we understand at all, so they can't consent either. In both cases we are looking at very likely to possible harm, as well as lack of consent, which is why both are illegal.
You miss a very key difference here, no one is born to act camp, nor born with an instinct to find someone of the same sex attractive. If we assume the latter then by extension we would have to say that those into bestiality or paedophillia are acting on instinctive attraction.
On the other hand, people are born on the spectrum.
too bad this post is not only incorrect but the most incoherent point I have ever seen someone try to make. I can only hope those people who share your viewpoints on gay marriage are as incorrect and incoherent as you are they will get their rights in no time then.
When gays claim that the Marriage Protection Act inhibits the Autistic Rights Movement, it makes about as much sense as PETA claiming that eating meat causes Autism.
There simply is no real, reapeatably verifiable evidence to back up the either claim. They are only lame attempts by the claimants to attach their agendas to the completely unrelated problems that Aspies and Auties face.
Only this, and nothing more.
_________________
Evidence, Please?
Lets assume the opposite, that someone is born to act camp, or born to find someone of the same sex attractive. Then there would be clear evidence for its heritability. In the same way that someone on the spectrum is likely to have someone with at least the character traits in their own family.
There simply is no real, reapeatably verifiable evidence to back up the either claim.
Like most public statements it tends to be a bit over the top. A realistic version would be that if upheld it sets a precedent that could be used to inhibit Autistic Rights, just like it could help inhibit any other minority w/ some innate characteristic, but we're talking PR here, so I doubt we'll see much realism.
There simply is no real, reapeatably verifiable evidence to back up the either claim. They are only lame attempts by the claimants to attach their agendas to the completely unrelated problems that Aspies and Auties face.
Only this, and nothing more.
It doesn't but in the end both groups have similar agendas and the banding together could help that movement in the future. Now that won't feasibly happen because gay rights is more about individuals religious affilation and all but in the end its kind of like how hispanics and blacks band together at times in New York.
Evidence, Please?
Lets assume ...
No.
Let's not assume anything. Let's not play games with words, either.
Instead, provide evidence - real, measureable, and repeatably verifiable evidence - to support your claim.
_________________
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Disability Rights |
26 Feb 2024, 10:03 pm |
Handbook for autistic-autistic social interactions |
08 Feb 2024, 1:31 pm |
A counterpoint to Autistic Supremacy? Autistic Inferiority? |
26 Feb 2024, 1:46 pm |
Are autistic people expected to like famous autistic people? |
01 Feb 2024, 10:31 pm |