As a non-believer and a skeptic, the concept of "sin" is irrelevant to me. The concept of treating each other justly and equally in the only life we have to live is relevant. Our government has forbidden establishment of religion in the First Amendment. Therefore, the concept of "sin" is not the basis for law. The concept of equal rights for all is the basis for law.
Using gods to defend human rights is OK with me. Using gods to defend oppression, inequality, or bigotry is un-American.
Yes, Mark, I was immersed in the bible until I nearly drowned when I was younger. I understand what many christians think it means. Neither Jesus nor Paul say that the government should treat people unequally. Never. US law, including the highest law in the land, the Constitution, demands equality under the law. Since you used the bronze to early iron age book, I used it back at you. Either way, it's completely irrelevant. This is not a religious issue.
Equality is my argument. Nobody has refuted that. Religion should be irrelevant here.
Mark, do you follow ALL of the biblical law? Do you eat pork or shellfish? Do you wear fabrics of mixed fibers? A person who tries to enforce the law on others without following ALL of it himself is called a hypocrite in the very book you quote. You accuse yourself. I'm just pointing out where your words take you.
April, that health insurance increased due to the greed of insurance companies, not because of coverage of same-sex spouses. Blaming the increase on those who aren't even covered yet is blatantly false. As Reagan would say, "there you go again..." If you want to reduce costs and have equality, remove partner benefits for all workers. That would save a lot. You insist that heterosexuals should get special rights. I disagree with special rights on basic American principles. What's empty about that?
And no, I don't believe in magic. No talking snakes or donkeys, no water into wine, no undead saviors. I'll leave that to others. If you try to make a point using numbers, I will always ask you to provide proof. You presented the numbers, not me. I'm a skeptic. The burden of proof lies with those who discriminate.
Wow, April. Me discriminating against older workers? Have you read my comments? I've done nothing to discriminate. YOU have been the person advocating discrimination. In my opinion, the Chattanooga City Council needs to honor its responsibilities to ALL of its workers, retired, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and straight.
$168,000. Thanks for finally presenting a number far closer to the truth. I knew the lies could not continue once the light of truth was turned on.
Hmmm, hypocrisy is also a sin. Matthew 23 clearly shows how "Jesus" felt about religious hypocrites trying to force their code on the poor and on those who don't agree with them. There's no hate towards people here. My code is to hate the belief, not the believer.
April, the $2 million number is wrong. The "less than 1%" applies only to the benefits budget, not the entire annual city budget. Stop throwing lies out there to hide your animus toward the LGBT community. The estimated amount is LESS THAN 0.1% of the annual City budget. Let's do the right thing, not the religious thing.
aae1049, the issue you speak of is wrong as well. I'm not arguing that. Equal benefits are morally right. Compounding wrong on wrong doesn't make things right. The City Council should answer for their stripping of benefits. They should also approve equal benefits for all city workers.
2 million? That's an absurdly high number. Please back it up with facts. How many gay and lesbian employees do you think the City of Chattanooga has? Prove your numbers.
The religious arguments need to be thrown out. We live in a society governed by law, not some perverted Christian version of Shari'a.
The argument that it costs money is ridiculous as well. All benefits to city workers cost taxpayer money. It is part of a fair compensation package for services rendered. Why is fair compensation withheld for the same work just because of the gender of one's life partner? Special rights for heterosexuals are wrong. Equal rights for all are American.
Representative Floyd is adamant about this. I'm so glad Senator Watson has dropped his support. Yes, the way the bill is worded, a 6 month old baby boy could be fined $50 if his mom has the gall to take him in the bathroom to change his diaper.
How many other women out there have used an empty men's room when the line is thiiiiiiis long for ours? I have. Does that mean I owe Rep "Flush" Floyd $50?