Your argument is one of Immutable Characteristics vs. Chosen Behavior
1) race is a social construct. there are no genes that determine what race you belong to. nor can you name a single feature that solely determines what race you belong to. and the definition of race changes over time and place. Until very recently, white meant northern european.
You are not entirely inaccurate. Race isn't as cut and dried as people think. But there are certain biological traits and genetic markers that express themselves in varying frequencies among the human population. The obvious one being Black skin for Blacks yet there exists "Light Skinned" blacks. But this is what the goal is for the progressive. To blur or eliminate all distinctions. If you feel you are a woman you can be a woman and have to be treated as a woman. Or the recent case of a White woman, who has no history of any relative stemming from Africa, can call herself Black because she feels Black.
Many think this is a good thing. I don't. That's why we have these discussions. That why we have conflict in our society.
2) sexual orientation is something you're born with. no behavior is required. My first sexual experience was when I was 20. I was not heterosexual the day before and homosexual the day after.
Yes, I agree. Just like a heterosexual virgin or someone who takes the vow of chastity is still a heterosexual. Conversely, and this is something that most people can't understand; acting out a sexual behavior does necessarily mean you are of this bent. Specifically, for the sake of this discussion, engaging in gay behavior does not automatically make you gay as such. Again this is presuming that homosexuality is defined as being sexually attracted to a member of the same sex. A definition I except. In certain segments of our culture, if not the majority of our culture, being bisexual is now seen as chic and hip and many engage in such behavior so as to be in the "In" or "Cool" crowd. Another example is the amount of homosexual behavior that goes on in prison. It's not like when you become a felon your innate sexual orientation changes. There are a myriad of factors that determine one's sexual behavior and practices other than just physical attraction.
3) religion is something people choose, yet it is a protected class. Lots of special privileges given to religions. (don't pay taxes on income, employers have to give reasonable accommodation, for example time off on religious holidays, dress code, facial hair)
Yes, and I am against the majority, if not all, of those accommodations. I don't believe an employer in most cases has a legal obligation to observe other people's beliefs or practices -- religious or otherwise. I don't even believe an employer has a legal obligation to pay for maternity leave. Having a child is a personal choice and no one else should be forced to finance that decision. If an employer chooses do it should be view as an employee BENEFIT and not an entitlement. And the idea that a woman should have a legal right to wear a burka if she wants to work at Hooters is just silly. You do give up some of your rights when you work for an employer
No one had the legal right to marry someone of a different race. Everyone had the right to marry someone of the same race.
Now everyone has the right to marry the one that they love. (as long as they are of legal age and not too closely related) #loveWins
"As long"? So there are limits. It's just that you want your limits to trump mine.
If love is a sufficient criteria to get married that leaves open endless possibilities. I can say with the utmost sincerity that I love my dog. But now that the definition of marriage has been redefined it now becomes an issue as to why other unions are nor permitted (legal age (marriage does not always imply or even include sexual relations and isn't "legal age" just another social construct?) or relatives (how close is too close?)).
But this is a discussion I want to pursue from your previous posts and reasons given. Understand, it's just me against the board defend my views and beliefs. Even though I believe I represent the majority once the arguments are understood and as reflected on elections and referendums it is the complacency of the majority that is causing them to lose. By varying estimate from a variety of groups and organization, the percentage of actual gay and lesbians are estimated to be between 2-5%. You would think it would be closer to 50% given their disproportional political clout. But when you are in the minority you are far more motivated to fight and be more active in your cause. You are the little guy that everyone wants to keep down. The majority, comfortable in their majority, are complacent. They only roused into action often when it's too late. There are many on this very board that agree with me. But they remain silent. They don't want to be bothered. They want to check out the Crossfit babes and make fun of Hurricane Beef. And it's not just because of the kind of board this is. They are like that in their everyday life. Just preoccupied doing their own thing and "will worry about it later".
Though it's a vastly different situation this is what has happened to Greece. Socialism is great. You live high on the hog at someone else's expense and beyond your means. It's a nice comfortable life -- until the money runs out. But there were only a few that were warning of this inevitability. But no cared because they were enjoying their constant vacations enjoying their wine and cheese.
