If LGBT says they are a religious institution and that homosexuality and transexuality is nothing more than religion than the state would more readily protect them because there are amendments, laws and acts that protect against discrimination and assault on people for their religion. None of what LGBT claims is found in science and is nothing more than a hoax but as a religion it can have it's own standing.
The constitution states it will not raise up or recognize one religion over another which at its root means Christianity, Islam, Judaism, every other religion and even Satanism are equal (whether people personally believe that or not). 503 status for religion exemption only requires them to be non-profit, have a meeting address and routine religious services. The qualification has no basis in doctrine, does not require a history of doctrine or be considered a major religion. (You can make a religion worshipping spoons and it would be allowed so long as you have routine services at Tuesday at 3:15 PM to worship said spoons.) There is no law on what constitutes a belief, but lawmakers should be wary about making laws on the basis of "personally held deeply religious beliefs" because that opens a can of worms that could be construed the other way than their intended purpose (in the bill creator's viewpoint only protecting Christians). Sure you here about bakers saying "religious exemption" but they couldn't deny a Satanist a custom wedding cake because they don't like Satanism. It's a religion and deny them services based on their religion is a violation of the Satanist's religious freedom. Transgender folks might have a better argument for ADA protection than equal opportunity laws. By definition, it is a medical condition that WHO is planning to remove from mental illnesses and move to medical. To naysayers of gay rights or marriage, I would just remind them, that by allowing marriage doesn't mean they have to marry someone of the same sex, attend their wedding or give them a wedding present. Your approval or disapproval is not required. If you wouldn't allow someone to tell you how to live your life, what gives you the right to do it to someone else.
Homosexuality is not something you believe in, it is what you choose (and in some cases don't choose) to be. The government and entire society should understand that homosexuality is just a personal choice and to back off. Are they affecting you in any way? They made a choice to be gay just like you made a choice you wanted to live.
The Government, at it's highest point of recognition, would only grant the religion a tax-free status. Separation of Religion and State doesn't grant anything else. So they'd only have the benefit of being tax-free, and while I'm sure that would help the cause, it wouldn't give them a head start in any meaningful way.
Many people do not support homosexuality. I find it unnatural and wrong, and I am not afraid to say that I don't support it, even when the people around me get confused at my opinion. They don't agree, and they support gay marriage.
Well, just because a group of homosexuals are rioting in front of a building doesn't mean that others should change their opinions about the topic. We should be allowed to say whatever we want, and just like how anyone can say how they support it, we should be allowed to say that we don't support it. So, here: Gay marriage is wrong, and should not be legalized. Homosexuality, too, is wrong.
That is final. I will not change my opinion because others are trying to convince me. I will stand firm in my beliefs, and yes, we should be allowed to express our opinions on these topics.
The state would not give them any support because they are not officially a religion. If they are talking about gay being religion that it not true. Not many people follow. (I do not have anything against gay) but gay cannot be a religion, it is an origination but it is a sexuality