I'm Gay, what are my rights?

[tpdncr4christ]

Hey guy's, I need some help. I have this paper to write for school, and I don't know where to start. The assignment is to write an analytical research paper about any topic, I choose gay rights. I'm relativley new to my beliefs and ideas, but I still don't know concrete beleifs as a whole.

I need places to look for valid information, both supporting and against GLBT rights. I also need two court cases that establish precident in the issue, and I don't know where to look. I would like as many concrete facts as I can get, and you all seem to be very good in that aspect of research and debate. Any help will be apreciated.

Thanks a bunches,
-Austin

PS. I plan on titling the paper, "I'm Gay, what are my rights?"

[Zerbie]

How about you look at and compare the US Supreme Court cases, Bowers v Hardwick (1986) and Lawrence v Texas (2003). That's a very interesting topic right there.

Now, is it true that only 22 states have non-discrimination statutes that include "sexual orientation?" I think that's the current stat.

The major lgbt news and advocacy groups (national) that you might surf on web via google would include HRC, Lambda Legal, maybe PFLAG.

That oughtta keep you busy for a few hours. Before Bowers v Hardwick was overturned, a gay friend of mine said "Why do you care so much about gay rights? I'm gay and *I* don't care." I told him about his legal status under Bowers v Hardwick and for a long time he didn't believe me. When he finally realized it was true, he was enraged. Be very very thankful for the Lawrence decision.

[scott snedeker]

Austin you have the brave heart of a Lion! To title a paper like that in high school is far beyond anything I would have had the courage to do at your age!

Love and affirmation,
Scottt:cowboy:

[erubre]

You should have all the rights that everyone else has but due to prejudice and bigotry and discrimination those rights are realized only after a lot of work and struggle. But progress is being made. It is very important for every person, especially young people to become familiar with the law. Laws are different in each state, like Age of Consent, in some states the age is 18, in other states 16. In some countries it is 12, 13, or 14. In some states the age is 18 in some situations and 17 or 16 in other cases. For example: age of consent may be 17 but where a person 17 is involved with a person five years older, or with "an authority figure" like a teacher, the age then is 18. In some states persons under 18 years of age may not have the same rights as a person over 18. In some cases laws are applied differently where same sex people are involved then where opposit sex, though it is discriminatory, for example: a court may recognize as a defense that a young person appeared to be at or over the age of consent where an opposit sex case is involved but not allow that as a defense where a same sexcase is involved.You can find the age of consent for the states and countries by searching the internet. I believe that young people would benefit much if schools taught all students about the laws as they relate to gay issues. That could help a lot of young people avoid difficulty. Also, the laws change frequently in various states so it is necessary to keep tract of possible changes. Generally, my understanding is, that consenting adults have a right to privately engage in any type of sexual relationship or activity they choose in the US. The biggest problem and cause I believe for why there is discrimination and difficulty realizing rights is fundamentalist so-called-Christians. An example of this is the right to marriage which should be available to everyone without regard to gender but there is opposition due largly from fundamentalist s and the like. This same problem is not so strong in other countries many of which do allow same sex marriage .Hey guy's, I need some help. I have this paper to write for school, and I don't know where to start. The assignment is to write an analytical research paper about any topic, I choose gay rights. I'm relativley new to my beliefs and ideas, but I still don't know concrete beleifs as a whole.

I need places to look for valid information, both supporting and against GLBT rights. I also need two court cases that establish precident in the issue, and I don't know where to look. I would like as many concrete facts as I can get, and you all seem to be very good in that aspect of research and debate. Any help will be apreciated.

Thanks a bunches,
-Austin

PS. I plan on titling the paper, "I'm Gay, what are my rights?"

[tpdncr4christ]

So about a few weeks ago I posted a this thread about a paper for school. Here is that paper, and I was wondering if you guys could tell me what you think? And don't be too hard, I am in highschool...

thanks a millions!

“Well son, when a man loves a woman very much, they come together in wedlock and they… well, they… We can talk this when we get home, can’t we?”
Everyone has heard, said, or gone through the above conversation at least once in their lifetime. In fact, that is not the only standardized conversation we have in society today. We have issues today that were nonexistent fifty years ago, even fifteen years ago. Things like cell phones and laptops have opened up the world to a manageable size, changing the very heart beat of the planet. New issues and arguments spring up, plastic surgery, abortion, war, gun control, pollution, global warming, gay rights, and more and more responses fly soon after. Are you pro-life or pro-choice? Do you support gay marriage, or the fundamental statutes of marriage? Are you Christian or are you atheist? All of these questions imply you know what you are; you know what you believe in. I don’t. You see, I’m gay, and I want to know: what are my rights?
Most kids these days tend to formulate opinions based on simple surface understandings of the issues. The goal is to dig deep into the understanding of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender (GLBT) rights and to formulate an educated opinion on the issue. I hope to answer the following questions: Is it unconstitutional to prevent homosexual sodomy? Is it right? Is marriage only to be between a man and a woman? Is homosexuality a sin that should be outlawed by the government?
Dealing with homosexuality is no easy task. Many people feel uncomfortable in such situations, as most discussions lead to heated political arguments. Socially, we as a society have placed the subject in our “Not for dinner time, not for small talk” bag of topics. Homosexuality is something everyone has an opinion on, but few people want to share it.
First, let us deal with the origin of homosexuality. There are people of the opinion that it is a genetic defect that affects the hormone levels within the body creating an imbalance in the sex hormones estrogen and testosterone. There are other people who believe that orientation is really just a preference, a sort, and that there is no physiological difference between a heterosexual and a homosexual person. A third opinion is that homosexual tendencies are bred into the child, whether by lack of proper fathering, traumatic events as a child, or even so strange a theory as too much soy milk. The thing is, all of these are theories. There is no scientific fact supporting any of the three (though if you ask someone who adamantly preaches one of these opinions they will say there is irrefutable proof). My opinion? It doesn’t matter. Whether it’s a choice, environmental, or genetic, the fact of the matter is homosexuals are people, and no people should be denied any rights. A right delayed is a right denied.
If we believe the cause, or reason of homosexuality is not important then we are forced to move to the reasons homosexuality is considered wrong. Many of these reasons are based in the mainstream conservative Christian faith. In the Bible, there are six verses that are interpreted to condemn homosexuality as a sin worthy of damnation to hell. Fundamentalist Christians, such as Dr. James Dobson, use these passages to demerit and deny rights to the homosexual community. Dr. Dobson attempts to create a view of two men or two women unable to thrive in a lasting healthy committed monogamous relationship. He supports his facts with scientific evidence based on studies and observations of the homosexual community. He preaches love, but not tolerance, penance and not forgiveness. He is against gay marriage.
The other side of the fence presents a similar argument. With no congruent core of collaborators to lead their movement, many opposing Dobson are left highly weakened. Organizations such as Soul Force and the Gay Christian Network attempt to form a head against Dobson’s Focus on the Family. These Gay Christians attempt to preach God’s love and tolerance, as well as forgiveness. They quote many passages from the Bible, such as Luke 6:37. “Judge not and you shall not be judged, condemn not and you shall not be condemned, forgive and you shall be forgiven.” They support gay marriage.
These two sides seem to argue over the legality of marriage based on whether it is right to let two men, or two women engage in sexual relations. Two largely viewed Supreme Court Cases concerning this topic are Bowers vs. Hardwick (1986) and Lawrence vs. Texas (2003). In these cases two men were brought before the court concerning laws in the State legislature that criminalized sodomy.
In the case of Bowers vs. Hardwick, a Georgia man, Michael Hardwick, was arrested in his home for performing sexual relations with his partner. The Georgia State Law said that any and all forms of sodomy were illegal and punishable by law. No charges were filed against him, but he filed a civil suit declaring the Georgia Statute to be unconstitutional. When the case was brought before the court it was ruled by a 5-4 vote in favor of the Georgia law. Justice Lewis Powell cast the deciding vote, saying that since no one was prosecuted no part of the law defied the constitution. For the next seventeen years the Supreme Court allowed the States to decree homosexual relations illegal.
Then, in the case of Lawrence vs. Texas, the ruling of the Court was overturned. In this situation the Texas law was not against sodomy as a whole, but solely against homosexual sodomy, leaving heterosexual sodomy unspoken for. The judges overturned the ruling with a 4-5 vote, decreeing that the law violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote, “…the law had no rational reasoning,” and, “…was based on moral dissentions attributed to homosexuals.”
So essentially, at the moment, homosexual sex is allowed within the privacy of one’s home. The problem we are faced with now is whether it is acceptable for two people of the same sex to get married legally.
Dr. Dobson and his Focus on the Family recently said in an article reflecting on Mary Cheney’s (Vice President Dick Cheney’s Lesbian Daughter) pregnancy, that though Cheney and her partner may be able to have a committed relationship, their household will not be a healthy one to raise a child in. “The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy--any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl.” Dobson goes on to say that since science proves it would be an unhealthy environment for a child to grow up in.
Of course, Soul Force refutes Dobson’s claims in their letter to Dobson by asking Time magazine to check his scientific facts. The argument quickly turns from an analytical to an imperative, and numbers are construed and thrown about as loosely as a basketball in the NBA. No result has come of Time checking Dobson’s facts.
The big issue: gay marriage is it legal? I say no. I don’t believe any that marriage, homosexual or heterosexual, should be a matter of legality. I believe that, like it or not, marriage is a religious practice that should be decided by the church. When two people get married they are coming before God and the world saying they love each other and want only each other for the rest of their lives. The government doesn’t have the right to decide who gets married, the church does, and the government should only recognize what the church says.
So, is it unconstitutional to prevent homosexual sodomy? It is most definitely a violation of the constitution to prevent with any law homosexual sodomy, and heterosexual sodomy for that matter. Is marriage only to be between a man and a woman? Marriage is something that is to be between two people who love each other, and something that should be sanctioned by the church. Is homosexuality a sin that should be outlawed by the government? No human being has the right to deny another human being his or her right to practice a lifestyle that does not directly harm or demoralize any other person.
In summation, this entire argument is simply one that will continuously go in circles until the day that Gandhi rises from the grave. At the moment, a gridlock situation has been reached, but I can tell you how it will end. History likes the oppressed. It might not be today, it might not be tomorrow, but soon, within our generation, gay marriage will be made legal, just like cross-generational marriage in the 60’s. All it takes is time.

[scott snedeker]

Wow! A++++

You are really something amazing! What incredible work! I'll bet this paper would get an "A" in an advanced Ivy league college English course. I would like your permission to print this myself to show to some friends of mine

The only change I would recommend (and it is a very small one) is in your paragraph on the origin of homosexuality I would consider replacing "genetic defect" with "genetic trait" or adding "Some consider it to be simply a genetic trait."

Defect implies that homosexuality is an error of nature. I believe it to be a natural force of bonding between individuals that improves survival of a species. On my farm I have obseved sexual intimacy between males (and between females) in ponies, goats, sheep, llamas, peacocks, etc. I believe it is a cohesive social force that strengthens the herd. The same goes for species homo sapiens!

Your writing is breath-taking! I can only imagine if at seventeen you can produce this, what will you do by age 25 or 35! Definite apply to college! I have no doubt that there is a scholarship with your name on it! You are a giant and the "stuff" great colleges look for. I hope some day your parents will see that! You will do great things, Austin!

Love an affirmation,
Scotty:cowboy:

My mini pony and I wish you a Merry Christmas
248

[Daniel]

tpdncr- Kudos to your for posting your paper- brave soul that you are! Two thoughts come to mind.

Of course, Soul Force refutes Dobson’s claims in their letter to Dobson by asking Time magazine to check his scientific facts. The argument quickly turns from an analytical to an imperative, and numbers are construed and thrown about as loosely as a basketball in the NBA. No result has come of Time checking Dobson’s facts.

1) In the paragraph above I wasn't sure who you were referring to when you wrote "The argument quickly turns from an...." Do you mean SF's or Dobson's argument?

The big issue: gay marriage is it legal? I say no. I don’t believe any that marriage, homosexual or heterosexual, should be a matter of legality. I believe that, like it or not, marriage is a religious practice that should be decided by the church. When two people get married they are coming before God and the world saying they love each other and want only each other for the rest of their lives. The government doesn’t have the right to decide who gets married, the church does, and the government should only recognize what the church says.

2) The first sentence is confusing. Gay marriage is, in fact, legal in at least one State: MA. Under our current system, marriage is a civil, not a religious matter. And government does in fact decide who can and cannot enter into this legal arrangement. Your stated wish that the church have authority over marriage- ie "the government should only recognize what the church says"- contradicts what actually exists and what many fear.

[novaseeker]

Very well written and well argued for the most part! Well done!;)

On the marriage part, a bit of history ... marriage was a civil institution, exclusively, for centuries before Christians started to take an interest in it as a matter of ritual. That is, Christians would get married exclusively by the state (which was the Empire at the time). Several centuries in (around the 5th century) the church started blessing civil marriages by Christianizing them. The Catholic Church didn't begin to consider marriage as a "sacrament" of the Church until the 12th Century. So in history, the church initially started more or less with the view that marriage was a matter exclusively of the state, then moved towards a blessing of state marriages, then moved towards its own independent sacrament. Given the harping that we get nowadays from the religious right about marriage and "family values", a look at the actual history of the church reveals a pretty different picture of how Christians in the first several centuries of the church related to marriage.

Of course, the church apparently also blessed same sex unions until the 12th century, but that's a pretty controversial topic because noone really agrees what the nature of these unions was.

[tpdncr4christ]

I wish I knew that! I really didn't spend much time on researching actual marriage, and I just assumed it was a religious statement. If I could I would change that fact in my paper, because my teacher will take any opportunity to dock points... :'( I was refering to legality in hopes that since their are gay affirming churches, that church would sanctify the marriage and the government would have to accept it, and hopefully that would cut out the fundamentalist dissentions. In hindsight, I would change my statement though...

And Daniel,
Of course, Soul Force refutes Dobson’s claims in their letter to Dobson by asking Time magazine to check his scientific facts. The argument quickly turns from an analytical to an imperative, and numbers are construed and thrown about as loosely as a basketball in the NBA. No result has come of Time checking Dobson’s facts.

1) In the paragraph above I wasn't sure who you were referring to when you wrote "The argument quickly turns from an...." Do you mean SF's or Dobson's argument?

I meant both sides. Everyone keeps pulling out these scientific facts, (seemingly) out of nowhere... I'm sure they have validity, but I just don't understand them.

[Daniel]

I wish I knew that! I really didn't spend much time on researching actual marriage, and I just assumed it was a religious statement. .

Oops! :p

I have answers.com on my desktop and use it to check spelling and facts daily. A little research can go a long way. When I was your age, I hardly knew what libraries were for. Now I see them as goldmines. Everything you could every want to know is there. And for the most part free. Can't beat that.

You never know, you might have a book lurking in you. ;)

[Zerbie]

Let's try this again since the computer ate my first reply to this:

Good start Tapdancer!

When you revise this, add a paragraph explaining the difference between civil and religious marriage. Only civil marriage confers a legal marital status. Since we often have ministers sign viable state marriage licenses, the distinction between civil and religious marriage gets blurred in the minds of many. They are two different things and that needs to be clearly explained.

Also - I think you should clean up your introduction - take out the laundry list of modern items (cell phones, laptops) and get right to the two issues you want to address: unconstitutionality of sodomy laws, and marriage. You have such a strong title, don't blurr it with a vague introduction. Zero in on the bullseye immediately.

Z

[erubre]

The paper is good and reports the subject well. I agree that marriage should be a matter for religion or the church and not the state. Fundamentalist so-called Christians are probably at the core of the whole problem of intolerance, bigotry, prejudice and discrimination. It is my opinion that all forms of sexuality including homosexuality and homosexual activity that is not intended to harm another person is both moral and good. A definition of sin is an intentional unnecessary act or omission purposed to harm another person. The nature and Character of God in Universal and Unconditional Love. God Loves everyone and no one can be separated from God or fall out of favor with God for any reason. In the mind of God all are the same. God dosen't discriminate against people. God is not bigoted, not intolerant, not prejudiced with regard to sexual orientation. I believe a time will come, and hopefully not long from now, when people will live in peace and tranquillity and not unduly concern themselve with differnces such as sexual orientation, but see other people as God sees.

[erubre]

Your choice of the word sodomy is correct in the context that you use it, but I would like to point out that when homosexual activity of whatever sort is describes as sodomy it has a negative connotation. Where legal language and those intolerant use "sodomy" they may use it to imply that the activity is wrong, evil, sinful, and immoral. Because, in my oinion no form of sexual activity, that is not intended to harm another person, is immoral, sinful, evil, and it is not wrong, - so I would not use the word sodomy except to point out that the activity is what some others might say, but the activity is not sodomy at all in the negative context.So about a few weeks ago I posted a this thread about a paper for school. Here is that paper, and I was wondering if you guys could tell me what you think? And don't be too hard, I am in highschool...

thanks a millions!

“Well son, when a man loves a woman very much, they come together in wedlock and they… well, they… We can talk this when we get home, can’t we?”
Everyone has heard, said, or gone through the above conversation at least once in their lifetime. In fact, that is not the only standardized conversation we have in society today. We have issues today that were nonexistent fifty years ago, even fifteen years ago. Things like cell phones and laptops have opened up the world to a manageable size, changing the very heart beat of the planet. New issues and arguments spring up, plastic surgery, abortion, war, gun control, pollution, global warming, gay rights, and more and more responses fly soon after. Are you pro-life or pro-choice? Do you support gay marriage, or the fundamental statutes of marriage? Are you Christian or are you atheist? All of these questions imply you know what you are; you know what you believe in. I don’t. You see, I’m gay, and I want to know: what are my rights?
Most kids these days tend to formulate opinions based on simple surface understandings of the issues. The goal is to dig deep into the understanding of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender (GLBT) rights and to formulate an educated opinion on the issue. I hope to answer the following questions: Is it unconstitutional to prevent homosexual sodomy? Is it right? Is marriage only to be between a man and a woman? Is homosexuality a sin that should be outlawed by the government?
Dealing with homosexuality is no easy task. Many people feel uncomfortable in such situations, as most discussions lead to heated political arguments. Socially, we as a society have placed the subject in our “Not for dinner time, not for small talk” bag of topics. Homosexuality is something everyone has an opinion on, but few people want to share it.
First, let us deal with the origin of homosexuality. There are people of the opinion that it is a genetic defect that affects the hormone levels within the body creating an imbalance in the sex hormones estrogen and testosterone. There are other people who believe that orientation is really just a preference, a sort, and that there is no physiological difference between a heterosexual and a homosexual person. A third opinion is that homosexual tendencies are bred into the child, whether by lack of proper fathering, traumatic events as a child, or even so strange a theory as too much soy milk. The thing is, all of these are theories. There is no scientific fact supporting any of the three (though if you ask someone who adamantly preaches one of these opinions they will say there is irrefutable proof). My opinion? It doesn’t matter. Whether it’s a choice, environmental, or genetic, the fact of the matter is homosexuals are people, and no people should be denied any rights. A right delayed is a right denied.
If we believe the cause, or reason of homosexuality is not important then we are forced to move to the reasons homosexuality is considered wrong. Many of these reasons are based in the mainstream conservative Christian faith. In the Bible, there are six verses that are interpreted to condemn homosexuality as a sin worthy of damnation to hell. Fundamentalist Christians, such as Dr. James Dobson, use these passages to demerit and deny rights to the homosexual community. Dr. Dobson attempts to create a view of two men or two women unable to thrive in a lasting healthy committed monogamous relationship. He supports his facts with scientific evidence based on studies and observations of the homosexual community. He preaches love, but not tolerance, penance and not forgiveness. He is against gay marriage.
The other side of the fence presents a similar argument. With no congruent core of collaborators to lead their movement, many opposing Dobson are left highly weakened. Organizations such as Soul Force and the Gay Christian Network attempt to form a head against Dobson’s Focus on the Family. These Gay Christians attempt to preach God’s love and tolerance, as well as forgiveness. They quote many passages from the Bible, such as Luke 6:37. “Judge not and you shall not be judged, condemn not and you shall not be condemned, forgive and you shall be forgiven.” They support gay marriage.
These two sides seem to argue over the legality of marriage based on whether it is right to let two men, or two women engage in sexual relations. Two largely viewed Supreme Court Cases concerning this topic are Bowers vs. Hardwick (1986) and Lawrence vs. Texas (2003). In these cases two men were brought before the court concerning laws in the State legislature that criminalized sodomy.
In the case of Bowers vs. Hardwick, a Georgia man, Michael Hardwick, was arrested in his home for performing sexual relations with his partner. The Georgia State Law said that any and all forms of sodomy were illegal and punishable by law. No charges were filed against him, but he filed a civil suit declaring the Georgia Statute to be unconstitutional. When the case was brought before the court it was ruled by a 5-4 vote in favor of the Georgia law. Justice Lewis Powell cast the deciding vote, saying that since no one was prosecuted no part of the law defied the constitution. For the next seventeen years the Supreme Court allowed the States to decree homosexual relations illegal.
Then, in the case of Lawrence vs. Texas, the ruling of the Court was overturned. In this situation the Texas law was not against sodomy as a whole, but solely against homosexual sodomy, leaving heterosexual sodomy unspoken for. The judges overturned the ruling with a 4-5 vote, decreeing that the law violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote, “…the law had no rational reasoning,” and, “…was based on moral dissentions attributed to homosexuals.”
So essentially, at the moment, homosexual sex is allowed within the privacy of one’s home. The problem we are faced with now is whether it is acceptable for two people of the same sex to get married legally.
Dr. Dobson and his Focus on the Family recently said in an article reflecting on Mary Cheney’s (Vice President Dick Cheney’s Lesbian Daughter) pregnancy, that though Cheney and her partner may be able to have a committed relationship, their household will not be a healthy one to raise a child in. “The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy--any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl.” Dobson goes on to say that since science proves it would be an unhealthy environment for a child to grow up in.
Of course, Soul Force refutes Dobson’s claims in their letter to Dobson by asking Time magazine to check his scientific facts. The argument quickly turns from an analytical to an imperative, and numbers are construed and thrown about as loosely as a basketball in the NBA. No result has come of Time checking Dobson’s facts.
The big issue: gay marriage is it legal? I say no. I don’t believe any that marriage, homosexual or heterosexual, should be a matter of legality. I believe that, like it or not, marriage is a religious practice that should be decided by the church. When two people get married they are coming before God and the world saying they love each other and want only each other for the rest of their lives. The government doesn’t have the right to decide who gets married, the church does, and the government should only recognize what the church says.
So, is it unconstitutional to prevent homosexual sodomy? It is most definitely a violation of the constitution to prevent with any law homosexual sodomy, and heterosexual sodomy for that matter. Is marriage only to be between a man and a woman? Marriage is something that is to be between two people who love each other, and something that should be sanctioned by the church. Is homosexuality a sin that should be outlawed by the government? No human being has the right to deny another human being his or her right to practice a lifestyle that does not directly harm or demoralize any other person.
In summation, this entire argument is simply one that will continuously go in circles until the day that Gandhi rises from the grave. At the moment, a gridlock situation has been reached, but I can tell you how it will end. History likes the oppressed. It might not be today, it might not be tomorrow, but soon, within our generation, gay marriage will be made legal, just like cross-generational marriage in the 60’s. All it takes is time.

[tpdncr4christ]

i got an A+ on this paper! all two hundred points! thanks so much for all your help!

:weee: :aparty: :rainbow: :sing: :rainbow: :aparty: :weee:

[scott snedeker]

Congratulations! You must be very proud and deserve to be! Great writing and courageous! I'll bet your teacher shows this around and will save it as an example for future students! There may be other writing websites to submit this to to spread the word! This is more than just a school assignment!

Love and affirmation,

scotty:cowboy: