In regard to the Australian gay community, it used to be the case that male and female separatism was much more common. Lesbian separatism was at the height of its popularity in the late 1970s. In the 1980s there was a tendency for gay men and lesbians to form coalitions. The Gay Rights Lobby became the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby. The Gay Mardi Gras became the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras. While there are still organisations and commercial venues which cater to either one sex or the other (and we all need our separate space from time to time), the case is that coalitionism has been been pretty much the norm in the gay movement (or GLBTQ movement if you prefer the up-to-date terminology) and hasn't looked back since.

Many lesbians today have no problems working with their male counterparts - and vice versa. Many lesbians also support same-sex marriage recognition. Timkins, your arguments seem to be outdated regarding the gay community today. And to better rephrase my previous point, why should feminists be taking on men's issues? After all, I'm not about to carry the can for straights. Or feminists for that matter. They can sort out their own issues. Why are you asking OTHER people to be inclusive?

With regard to lobby groups, they will always be a feature of a democratic society. As long as someone is interested in getting other people interested in their ideas, there'll be lobby groups. Democracy has always been about more than just voting every few years.

Are Jews human beings? Who gets to decide?

If Jews are human beings, do human beings have inalienable rights? If so, by virtue of what fact?

well for a starter's how about DNA evidence!

Brazuca
no, you have no rights :) just privileges, which I may, if I feel like it, bestow upon you, Or, I may decide that you are a burden and superfluous to my needs and just liquidate you, u see, I've decided to rule the world :)
I rather like the thought of everyone kowtowing to me.

Of course, I'm speaking from cloud cuckoo land here, but many a truth (about presuppositions) can be conveyed in a jestful manner.

Such is the logical extension of Kenny and company's foundations of life. They just don't admit it (Hi Kenny, where's that email addy mate, I think you are ducking and weaving now ?). Also, they are not strong enough or adventurous enough to follow through on their fundamental life presuppositions.

"If any man would be first among you, he must be servant of all" Jesus.

>>well for a starter's how about DNA evidence!<<

So if Jews have DNA that makes them human? If they have the same DNA as a human that makes them a human also? But what if he's a Jew?

Okay, let's, for argument's sake, assume that Jews really are human, as you suggest. Does that mean they have rights that are inalienable by virtue of their being human beings? If so, why? Or are rights not inalienable and instead granted? But if that's the case, then why complain about certain people not being allowed to enjoy their rights? Because if their rights are granted, then their not being able to enjoy them stems from their not having had them in the first place, since they hadn't been granted to them.

Hey, do carrots have rights? If not, why not? Is it fair that carrots don't have rights while humans (even Jews) apparently do? If rights are granted, should carrots be granted their rights?

Do women have a right to abortion? If so, why? What's a right? Does a foetus have a right to life? Who decides?

Is a Jew a human being? If so, do human beings (including Jews) have a right to life, and is it inalienable? Who says?

Are rights a matter of objective truth or subjective opinion?

Brazuca – why your comparative reference to Jews (I note you have done same on another topic) is wrong is simple

Any reference to differences of treatment between one person and another separate individual person has no basis for comparison when applied to a Woman exercising a decision over something which is developing within her own body – viz – something which is not separate nor individual.

Even when you know the woman’s circumstances, motivation, expectations, desires and sought destiny you still do not have the right to make up her mind for her. She is sovereign of her own body and all that it contains – you are sovereign of your body too – but only yours and not of hers.