Regardless of all the fluff that gets brought up here and elsewhere regarding this issue... let's not lose sight of what this is really all about: a homosexual couple's RIGHT to have the State recognize their "marriage" legally and bestow upon this union the same privileges that are given to hetero-sexual couples that are bound by law. They want the same rights as you and I (as heterosexual married couples) have in terms of property, taxes, children, etc. Should they be granted those rights?

I say "NO". I believe that marriage is between MAN AND WOMAN. I think it was MEANT to be this way. No... most hetero marriages are not perfect. But most of us KNOW deep down in our conscience/soul/heart/logical mind/whatever that homosexuality is NOT A NATURAL LIFESTYLE and there is something WRONG about it. Some don't feel that way, but there's nothing I can do or say that will bring them back to THE TRUTH.


Incidentally, it's interesting to see how far we've "come" (or is it GONE!) regarding this issue. The fact that it's even being debated is seen as a big "win" by activists and a huge LOSS by those who know better. People didn't even bother asking for legal recognition for such deviances up until the past few decades.

Quoted: Regardless of all the fluff that gets brought up here and elsewhere regarding this issue... let's not lose sight of what this is really all about: a homosexual couple's RIGHT to have the State recognize their "marriage" legally and bestow upon this union the same privileges that are given to hetero-sexual couples that are bound by law. They want the same rights as you and I (as heterosexual married couples) have in terms of property, taxes, children, etc. Should they be granted those rights? I say "NO". I believe that marriage is between MAN AND WOMAN. I think it was MEANT to be this way. No... most hetero marriages are not perfect. But most of us KNOW deep down in our conscience/soul/heart/logical mind/whatever that homosexuality is NOT A NATURAL LIFESTYLE and there is something WRONG about it. Some don't feel that way, but there's nothing I can do or say that will bring them back to THE TRUTH.

actually what this is really about is analyzing how any change would affect the population, the economy and the political culture in general....
I realize the actual subject of gay rights is HOT  but I was discussing how it affects things not the right/wrong  or moral/immoral of gay rights...

and also the realization that this analysis can be applied to any group who want recognition...whether it be card holding NRA members ,the medical marijuana groups or right todie groups.

Quoted: question for y'all... how do Gay rights affect the following: Constitution Population the economy political culture

Depends on what rights your talking about.
Aside from marriage, they have all the same rights I do. In practice, probably more. So in other words, since gays already have their rights, the culture, economy, etc is ALREADY affected by them.

Quoted: Quoted: Regardless of all the fluff that gets brought up here and elsewhere regarding this issue... let's not lose sight of what this is really all about: a homosexual couple's RIGHT to have the State recognize their "marriage" legally and bestow upon this union the same privileges that are given to hetero-sexual couples that are bound by law. They want the same rights as you and I (as heterosexual married couples) have in terms of property, taxes, children, etc. Should they be granted those rights? I say "NO". I believe that marriage is between MAN AND WOMAN. I think it was MEANT to be this way. No... most hetero marriages are not perfect. But most of us KNOW deep down in our conscience/soul/heart/logical mind/whatever that homosexuality is NOT A NATURAL LIFESTYLE and there is something WRONG about it. Some don't feel that way, but there's nothing I can do or say that will bring them back to THE TRUTH. actually what this is really about is analyzing how any change would affect the population, the economy and the political culture in general.... I realize the actual subject of gay rights is HOT  but I was discussing how it affects things not the right/wrong  or moral/immoral of gay rights... and also the realization that this analysis can be applied to any group who want recognition...whether it be card holding NRA members ,the medical marijuana groups or right todie groups.

Just wait another page or two and we can move it to the Bear Pit or the Religion forum.  Should go get some popcorn but I have to go to work.

same rights and treatment as everyone else no more no less.

[Slingblade] The Bible says two men ought not lay together, ummm hmm. [/Slingblade]

Quoted: Regardless of all the fluff that gets brought up here and elsewhere regarding this issue... let's not lose sight of what this is really all about: a homosexual couple's RIGHT to have the State recognize their "marriage" legally and bestow upon this union the same privileges that are given to hetero-sexual couples that are bound by law. They want the same rights as you and I (as heterosexual married couples) have in terms of property, taxes, children, etc. Should they be granted those rights? I say "NO". I believe that marriage is between MAN AND WOMAN. I think it was MEANT to be this way. No... most hetero marriages are not perfect. But most of us KNOW deep down in our conscience/soul/heart/logical mind/whatever that homosexuality is NOT A NATURAL LIFESTYLE and there is something WRONG about it. Some don't feel that way, but there's nothing I can do or say that will bring them back to THE TRUTH. Incidentally, it's interesting to see how far we've "come" (or is it GONE!) regarding this issue. The fact that it's even being debated is seen as a big "win" by activists and a huge LOSS by those who know better. People didn't even bother asking for legal recognition for such deviances up until the past few decades.

And that's it right there.  Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman.

When I was young, my parents bought a big house from two fancy guys. Let me tell you, some of them know how to decorate lol...

Quoted: same rights and treatment as everyone else no more no less.

+1

They (homosexuals) are sexual deviates - not an ethnic minority...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: TO MrsDrFrige. Just disregard any post where god or the bible is mentioned more than once and I suspect you will find more substance.  Their actually is intelligent thought in the Psychological aspects, by that I mean Nature Vs. Nurture. God and the Bible is the main Substance.  If you believe nothing else, you atleast HAVE to recognize the moral and ethical fiber derived from the bible from the genuises of our time such as, oh, our forefathers... Read the first ammendment.  Ethics and morality are good, religion divides our forefathers knew this.  The constitution should not be used as a pulpit for religous bigeotry.  Furthermore elaborate on how civil unions erode our culture anymore than religion does?  I am not talking shit to you I am actually wanting to hear you explain it.

I'm speaking of what our forefathers thought of the Bible and God.  Do you know?  They interjected it into everything they did.  And, we hold them in high esteem for their wisdom.  They opened their sessions in prayer, closed in prayer, and wrote with honor to the God of the bible and His teachings.  This is the same God who as specifically in the Bible, does not condone homosexuality.  God loves everyone - white, black, gay, straight, but he intended what he intended in His word.  Period.  As a nation found by God-fearing men, we should learn more from their lives than soley their plan for the U.S.A.

I want to talk about affect on politcs and how this particular political grouping affects the political climate
not if they are right or wrong

if y'all want to discuss that make a new thread....

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: TO MrsDrFrige. Just disregard any post where god or the bible is mentioned more than once and I suspect you will find more substance.  Their actually is intelligent thought in the Psychological aspects, by that I mean Nature Vs. Nurture. God and the Bible is the main Substance.  If you believe nothing else, you atleast HAVE to recognize the moral and ethical fiber derived from the bible from the genuises of our time such as, oh, our forefathers... Read the first ammendment.  Ethics and morality are good, religion divides our forefathers knew this.  The constitution should not be used as a pulpit for religous bigeotry.  Furthermore elaborate on how civil unions erode our culture anymore than religion does?  I am not talking shit to you I am actually wanting to hear you explain it.   I'm speaking of what our forefathers thought of the Bible and God.  Do you know?  They interjected it into everything they did.  And, we hold them in high esteem for their wisdom.  They opened their sessions in prayer, closed in prayer, and wrote with honor to the God of the bible and His teachings.  This is the same God who as specifically in the Bible, does not condone homosexuality.  God loves everyone - white, black, gay, straight, but he intended what he intended in His word.  Period.  As a nation found by God-fearing men, we should learn more from their lives than soley their plan for the U.S.A.

Then I suggest that we all start collecting the slaves that our foundiong fathers intended that we have.

I am not trying to demean the great men of our history, but what they gave us was a political framework for our republic, not a religious edict and not a social example of how we should live our lives.

SBG

I'm very sorry.  Seriously.  I retire fom this thread.  Not it's intended purpose.  I didn't mean to be so rude.

Quoted:  This is the same God who as specifically in the Bible, does not condone homosexuality...

Nor was he too keen on eating shellfish or pork.

I didn't read all of the replies because I am lazy, but here is how I see it:

Every citizen should have the same rights.  I don't care if you are straight, gay, black, white, purple, or pewter.  It should not matter!  two people want to get married...fine, I don't care if it is two guys or two girls  They want to adopt, fine, as long as they are required to meet the same standards as everyone else.  Bottom line begins here ---->  As long as they are contributing members of society, I don't give a shit if they like to take it in the pooper or not.

Quoted: ok ok ok geesh I want to talk about affect on politcs and how this particular political grouping affects the political climate not if they are right or wrong if y'all want to discuss that make a new thread.....

Sorry ma'am.  

I guess the subject was a little broad so the natural AR15.com debate ensued.  

Actually, the lessons of this thread could be applied to your clarified question.  Obviously, the issue is a hot-button topic that the county is deeply divided upon for various reasons.  Some view it as a moral question, others view it as a question of individual liberty and others view it as a biological issue.  I would be interested to study why this particular issue is so divisive within a population that is very supportive of personal liberty.  

SBG

Read the new testament, it states that nothing under the sun is bad for man to eat. I think that it state this somewhere near where Saul is first converted from the Jewish faith to Christianity.

now back to the question at hand. I don't believe thst gays have any right to special status and treatment just because they can't stifle abnormal urges. Do they deserve the same rights as my wife and I not no but Hell no. There can be no real marriage between people of the same sex. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Gays are another abominatio in this country that are a cancer and are killing this nation with their retoric about equal rights.

Rights are for the people.

Gays are people.

Therefore they should have the same rights.

Pretty simple.

If you fight against that you're either a homophobe, hater or a theocrat.

As for marriage, the goverment shouldn't be involved in heterosexual marriage either.
A marriage license, please.   Perhaps they should require a license to shit too.

This is without reading many posts but....Lets get this correct people....


GAYS do NOT have fewer rights then the rights afforded you and I.  

Their lifestyle is a behavioral and moral CHOICE.

Genetics aside, you have to make a conscious decision to take another human's body part inside your body.

Just like smoking crack, doing drive-bys, speeding, poaching deer..... these things are CHOICES that people make that can cause them to lead lives that get restricted on the basis that their BEHAVIOR is RISKY to others.

The main reason that gays want "RIGHTS" is to adopt children.  Just as man and woman were told go forth and multiply (and spread their beliefs) GAYS want to be able to do the same....  In other words, KEEP THEIR LIFESTYLE ALIVE.  Just like the Quakers who did not believe in sex, gays can't procreate.

My view is that homosexuality is going to be around forever, as it has been around throughout our history.  As long as you don't go parading around like you are "special" because you take a cock up the ass and can decorate well....you have my respect as a PERSON.  Your actions towards others is what makes you worthy of respect and friendship, not your actions in the bedroom.  

No such thing as "gay" rights.

We all have the same rights, freedoms and responsibilities.  Calling some of these rights "gay" would offend most people.

Now.... There are certain groups (gays included) that have had their rights infringed upon. This isn't right, and never has been.

...and that's all I have  to say about that.

Quoted: I'm very sorry.  Seriously.  I retire fom this thread.  Not it's intended purpose.  I didn't mean to be so rude.

maybe I misused the smileys.....
maybe my edit will be better

wasnt directed at anyone....

just trying to stop the down hill spiral it was heading too

:)  (using old fashioned smileys)

Mrs

Quoted: Sorry ma'am.   I guess the subject was a little broad so the natural AR15.com debate ensued.   Actually, the lessons of this thread could be applied to your clarified question.  Obviously, the issue is a hot-button topic that the county is deeply divided upon for various reasons.  Some view it as a moral question, others view it as a question of individual liberty and others view it as a biological issue.  I would be interested to study why this particular issue is so divisive within a population that is very supportive of personal liberty.   SBG

actually I think the fact that it is a "hot" topic is why it was choosen.... I got the chance to see the other topics and they were all just as controversial.....
but I think that is the point....looking beyond the hot personal debate to the politcal implications of the actions...

(my first thought when I saw the basic assignment had me saying damn liberal teachers ...then I saw the accompanying material....)

Quoted: Rights are for the people. Gays are people. Therefore they should have the same rights. Pretty simple. If you fight against that you're either a homophobe, hater or a theocrat. As for marriage, the goverment shouldn't be involved in heterosexual marriage either. A marriage license, please.   Perhaps they should require a license to shit too.

Hmmm... M'kay... than I guess that would make you a homo-lover. Right? Is that where this is leading? Labeling someone something because of their view on this subject? Marriage has always been defined as being between parties of the OPPOSITE sex. So you want to change that definition. I DON'T. I'm not a "hater". I'm not a "theocrat". And I'm NOT a "homophobe" (not afraid of homo's, just don't think it's right).

Quoted: Quoted: Rights are for the people. Gays are people. Therefore they should have the same rights. Pretty simple. If you fight against that you're either a homophobe, hater or a theocrat. As for marriage, the goverment shouldn't be involved in heterosexual marriage either. A marriage license, please.   Perhaps they should require a license to shit too. Hmmm... M'kay... than I guess that would make you a homo-lover. Right? Is that where this is leading? Labeling someone something because of their view on this subject? Marriage has always been defined as being between parties of the OPPOSITE sex. So you want to change that definition. I DON'T. I'm not a "hater". I'm not a "theocrat". And I'm NOT a "homophobe" (not afraid of homo's, just don't think it's right).

If you want to restrict people from doing things with their lives that don't effect your rights to live your own, then you have an issue of some sort - I don't care what you label it.

If homosexuals marry, it doesn't effect you.  It doesn't do anything to you except maybe offend your beliefs/sensibilities.   Thats too bad, because in a truly free society that is a price that has to be paid.   Tolerance is required at the door.

Anything else isn't really then a free society.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Rights are for the people. Gays are people. Therefore they should have the same rights. Pretty simple. If you fight against that you're either a homophobe, hater or a theocrat. As for marriage, the goverment shouldn't be involved in heterosexual marriage either. A marriage license, please.   Perhaps they should require a license to shit too. Hmmm... M'kay... than I guess that would make you a homo-lover. Right? Is that where this is leading? Labeling someone something because of their view on this subject? Marriage has always been defined as being between parties of the OPPOSITE sex. So you want to change that definition. I DON'T. I'm not a "hater". I'm not a "theocrat". And I'm NOT a "homophobe" (not afraid of homo's, just don't think it's right). If you want to restrict people from doing things with their lives that don't effect your rights to live your own, then you have an issue of some sort - I don't care what you label it. If homosexuals marry, it doesn't effect you.  It doesn't do anything to you except maybe offend your beliefs/sensibilities.   Thats too bad, because in a truly free society that is a price that has to be paid.   Tolerance is required at the door. Anything else isn't really then a free society.

Affect.

And it does.  It implies all kinds of benefits that are for the basic building block of this society and human civilization:  a man and a woman and the family they create.
From health coverage to immigration benefits, there are mechanisms in place not for the individual but for opposite sex couples...the building block of human progress.

Quoted: I love the jump that is always made when gays come into the equation. Gays = Necrophiliacs, Pedophiles, and Rapists. Whereas is one is questionable whether or not you approve (gays) and the others are illegall. As soon as someone uses the rights for gays = rights for child-rapers argument I stop listening. There are many arguments to use, but that one is just stupid.

+1 I can't stand that arguement, it's the same as someone saying anyone who owns guns is a mass murdering, government hating, survivalist crazy person.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Rights are for the people. Gays are people. Therefore they should have the same rights. Pretty simple. If you fight against that you're either a homophobe, hater or a theocrat. As for marriage, the goverment shouldn't be involved in heterosexual marriage either. A marriage license, please.   Perhaps they should require a license to shit too. Hmmm... M'kay... than I guess that would make you a homo-lover. Right? Is that where this is leading? Labeling someone something because of their view on this subject? Marriage has always been defined as being between parties of the OPPOSITE sex. So you want to change that definition. I DON'T. I'm not a "hater". I'm not a "theocrat". And I'm NOT a "homophobe" (not afraid of homo's, just don't think it's right). If you want to restrict people from doing things with their lives that don't effect your rights to live your own, then you have an issue of some sort - I don't care what you label it. If homosexuals marry, it doesn't effect you.  It doesn't do anything to you except maybe offend your beliefs/sensibilities.   Thats too bad, because in a truly free society that is a price that has to be paid.   Tolerance is required at the door. Anything else isn't really then a free society. Affect. And it does.  It implies all kinds of benefits that are for the basic building block of this society and human civilization:  a man and a woman and the family they create. From health coverage to immigration benefits, there are mechanisms in place not for the individual but for opposite sex couples...the building block of human progress.

Wow, you really believe that homosexuals are a threat to society.

Sad.

Edited to add:  Who taught you that?

all about equal protection that's why they deserve the right to marry to me..

how do Gay rights affect the following:

Constitution

they don't

Population

I don't see where they affect this either

the economy

AKA double income no kids (dinks), they help the economy by paying more in taxes having to file 2 X single statusinstead of as a "family"

political culture

I don't know, other than fighting for their equal protection and  going against some people who no matter what, wish to control someone elses lives by force or theocracy.


Just my $.02

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Rights are for the people. Gays are people. Therefore they should have the same rights. Pretty simple. If you fight against that you're either a homophobe, hater or a theocrat. As for marriage, the goverment shouldn't be involved in heterosexual marriage either. A marriage license, please.   Perhaps they should require a license to shit too. Hmmm... M'kay... than I guess that would make you a homo-lover. Right? Is that where this is leading? Labeling someone something because of their view on this subject? Marriage has always been defined as being between parties of the OPPOSITE sex. So you want to change that definition. I DON'T. I'm not a "hater". I'm not a "theocrat". And I'm NOT a "homophobe" (not afraid of homo's, just don't think it's right). If you want to restrict people from doing things with their lives that don't effect your rights to live your own, then you have an issue of some sort - I don't care what you label it. If homosexuals marry, it doesn't effect you.  It doesn't do anything to you except maybe offend your beliefs/sensibilities.   Thats too bad, because in a truly free society that is a price that has to be paid.   Tolerance is required at the door. Anything else isn't really then a free society. Affect. And it does.  It implies all kinds of benefits that are for the basic building block of this society and human civilization:  a man and a woman and the family they create. From health coverage to immigration benefits, there are mechanisms in place not for the individual but for opposite sex couples...the building block of human progress. Wow, you really believe that homosexuals are a threat to society. Sad.

+1 Gays are the same level of threat to society as gun owners.

Gay people should have the SAME rights that "straight" citizens have.  

The exact same rights.  No less.

The right to marry, etc.

Gay citizens shouldn't be treated as if they were "mental" or as if they were from another planet.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Rights are for the people. Gays are people. Therefore they should have the same rights. Pretty simple. If you fight against that you're either a homophobe, hater or a theocrat. As for marriage, the goverment shouldn't be involved in heterosexual marriage either. A marriage license, please.   Perhaps they should require a license to shit too. Hmmm... M'kay... than I guess that would make you a homo-lover. Right? Is that where this is leading? Labeling someone something because of their view on this subject? Marriage has always been defined as being between parties of the OPPOSITE sex. So you want to change that definition. I DON'T. I'm not a "hater". I'm not a "theocrat". And I'm NOT a "homophobe" (not afraid of homo's, just don't think it's right). If you want to restrict people from doing things with their lives that don't effect your rights to live your own, then you have an issue of some sort - I don't care what you label it. If homosexuals marry, it doesn't effect you.  It doesn't do anything to you except maybe offend your beliefs/sensibilities.   Thats too bad, because in a truly free society that is a price that has to be paid.   Tolerance is required at the door. Anything else isn't really then a free society. Affect. And it does.  It implies all kinds of benefits that are for the basic building block of this society and human civilization:  a man and a woman and the family they create. From health coverage to immigration benefits, there are mechanisms in place not for the individual but for opposite sex couples...the building block of human progress. Wow, you really believe that homosexuals are a threat to society. Sad.

Not at all.  Now you're trying to put words in my mouth.  I don't believe they are a threat.

I believe heterosexual couples are what allows society to continue so there are some ways that is reflected.  Like marriage and the health insurance "advantages" that come with that (i.e. a man can work and have coverage for his wife if she were to, say, bear their children and take care of them at home which homosexuals have no need to worry about).

Quoted: question for y'all... how do Gay rights affect the following: Constitution Population the economy political culture

When you make them a protected class you know can potentially prosecute those that speak out against them.  Those Churches that speak out against them at the pulpit could be branded as promoting "hate speech".  Perhaps you could go as far as having them (the Churches) lose their tax expempt status because of this.  It opens a pandoras box.

Economy....well, I would say that it could affect health care premiums at work because now you would have to offer health care to "life partners".  

Population....CDC still puts the homosexual culture at the greatest risk for STD's.

Constitution....well, you have protected speech with your spouse, doctor's, lawyers etc.  Do people who engage in homosexual activity now have protected speech with their "life partners" and have them not compelled to testify in a criminal proceeding?

Economy....if they become a protected class will they grow in lobbying power?  WIll they then be able to inflict pressure on those business's that do not cater to the homosexual lifestyle?


Pandora's box.

Quoted: Quoted: question for y'all... how do Gay rights affect the following: Constitution Population the economy political culture When you make them a protected class you know can potentially prosecute those that speak out against them.  Those Churches that speak out against them at the pulpit could be branded as promoting "hate speech".  Perhaps you could go as far as having them (the Churches) lose their tax expempt status because of this.  It opens a pandoras box. Economy....well, I would say that it could affect health care premiums at work because now you would have to offer health care to "life partners".   Population....CDC still puts the homosexual culture at the greatest risk for STD's. Constitution....well, you have protected speech with your spouse, doctor's, lawyers etc.  Do people who engage in homosexual activity now have protected speech with their "life partners" and have them not compelled to testify in a criminal proceeding? Economy....if they become a protected class will they grow in lobbying power?  WIll they then be able to inflict pressure on those business's that do not cater to the homosexual lifestyle? Pandora's box.

the same was said about women voting, blacks getting rights, etc,etc. on down the line of folk who "didn't deserve to be concidered equal"

now it comes around again.

Quoted: question for y'all... how do Gay rights affect the following: Constitution Population the economy political culture

#1. The rights of the constituation are for all american citizens. There exist no class distinctions in the constitution and therefore no party can have rights that all other citizenry do not. Inotherwords gays and lesbians have the same rights as everyone else but not more or 'seperate' rights.

#2. There is the possibility that it could have a bad effect on the population growth. As more and more gay couples adopt children there is a growing possibility that in the future a larger part of children will become gay therefore leading to less children being born. However even in this event gay men could continue to donate sperm cells and gay women continue to donate eggs or be birthing participants so it is unclear whether or not gay rights would have any effect at all on the population.

#3. Not much that I can see, although if my suspicions listed in #2 come to be true then the birth control industry could suffer a little loss, however it would probably be very little, if any.

#4. Depends on the people. There are some gay people that are conservative on all counts except homosexuality. It could go in either of about two directions. It could either cause a shift more toward liberal ideas or else could cause conservative ideas to be dilluted with some liberal ideas as well as cause religious beliefs to become diluted as more and more gays ignore commands against their lifestyle and seek to join a religion anyway and possibly to shape it to fit their needs.




By and large im not as bothered by the idea of homosexuals as what I was a few years ago. I dont really care what they do in the privacy of their own homes, God will judge them not me. What I do have a problem with is when they try to claim to be a Christian when their life style is expressly forbidden by God or when they try to dilute conservative ideas with liberal ideas in little doses. I have thankfully had very few encounters with either of these types of people and some of the gay people I have met havnt been as bad as what I thought they would be. I get along with them but that is only because we never talk about their sexuality which I dont now nor ever will agree with or accept.

Quoted: I love the jump that is always made when gays come into the equation. Gays = Necrophiliacs, Pedophiles, and Rapists. Whereas is one is questionable whether or not you approve (gays) and the others are illegall. As soon as someone uses the rights for gays = rights for child-rapers argument I stop listening. There are many arguments to use, but that one is just stupid.

Sexual perversion is all the same to me. Doesn't matter what flavor. I don't give a damn what secular law says.

It's no coincidence many of the priests who raped young boys they entrusted with were gay. Once you cross the line and become morally bankrupt, there are no restraints to what you will do.

However if you are a defender of homosexuality, you would never be able to understand that.
It's all foul, shameful behaviour, and it will render our society rotten to its core no matter how much misguided individuals try to justify it.

Quoted: Quoted: I love the jump that is always made when gays come into the equation. Gays = Necrophiliacs, Pedophiles, and Rapists. Whereas is one is questionable whether or not you approve (gays) and the others are illegall. As soon as someone uses the rights for gays = rights for child-rapers argument I stop listening. There are many arguments to use, but that one is just stupid. Sexual perversion is all the same to me. Doesn't matter what flavor. I don't give a damn what secular law says. It's no coincidence many of the priests who raped young boys they entrusted with were gay. Once you cross the line and become morally bankrupt, there are no restraints to what you will do. However if you are a defender of homosexuality, you would never be able to understand that. It's all foul, shameful behaviour, and it will render our society rotten to its core no matter how much misguided individuals try to justify it.

so is drinking, but you don't seem to be up in arms about that.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I love the jump that is always made when gays come into the equation. Gays = Necrophiliacs, Pedophiles, and Rapists. Whereas is one is questionable whether or not you approve (gays) and the others are illegall. As soon as someone uses the rights for gays = rights for child-rapers argument I stop listening. There are many arguments to use, but that one is just stupid. Sexual perversion is all the same to me. Doesn't matter what flavor. I don't give a damn what secular law says. It's no coincidence many of the priests who raped young boys they entrusted with were gay. Once you cross the line and become morally bankrupt, there are no restraints to what you will do. However if you are a defender of homosexuality, you would never be able to understand that. It's all foul, shameful behaviour, and it will render our society rotten to its core no matter how much misguided individuals try to justify it. so is drinking, but you don't seem to be up in arms about that.

I don't see how drinking is a sexual perversion, or even morally wrong in any way. In moderation, alcohol consumption has been shown to reduce heart disease and have many healthful effects.
Overuse or abuse of any substance is a physical problem, but not a morale issue, although abuse of it can cloud judgement or remove inhibitions and lead to immoral behaviour. It is still not the root cause of homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia or any other perverse behaviour.

Hi all,

Constitution - Unless it is amended, nothing.

Population - Some theorize that homosexuality is a natural population control.  Put too many sheep on a plot of land and some of them turn gay...

Economy - No effect.

Political Culture - I'm a gay conservative (and I get told by my "real" gay friends that I hate myself for it) and I kept telling my liberal gay friends that Gavin "Twosome" Nusome was causing such a stir in straight society that it would lead to a backlash.  Sure enough, Bush gets re-elected (I voted for him) and 10 states pass laws defining marriage.  I think the main political effect gays have is being stupid and getting straight people out to the polls.

Those of you who say that you don't have to proclaim your heterosexuality should try working on a construction crew for a summer.  It is pretty amazing.  And how many times have you walked down the street holding your wife/girlfriend's hand and not given it a second thought?  There are reasons that gay people act the way they do, and the main one is advertisement.  I go to a Seventh Day Adventist school, and in a hostile environment like that, it is natural to attempt to gather others who are the same by acting in ways that will attract them.  I never really changed my behavior, although I did start talking openly with my friends after I came out.  Another thing is after you come out you reach a point where you are no longer afraid of being identified, and a lot of guys overreact to its liberating effect.

What if all your guns were so frowned upon by society that you couldn't shoot them for awhile, then you finally broke free and found a place to shoot?  Wouldn't you shoot up a bunch of shit and waste all kinds of rounds at the range?  I know I would.  Kinda poor analogy but thats how it is in my mind.

My personal feeling is that the marriage issue was created by lesbians.  The first couples married in SF by Nusome were lesbians, and the majority of couples in Mass. who have been getting married are lesbians.  I don't know a single gay man who wants to marry, and Enigma pointed out to me that MEN don't generally want to marry if they could have it their way.

Thats all.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I love the jump that is always made when gays come into the equation. Gays = Necrophiliacs, Pedophiles, and Rapists. Whereas is one is questionable whether or not you approve (gays) and the others are illegall. As soon as someone uses the rights for gays = rights for child-rapers argument I stop listening. There are many arguments to use, but that one is just stupid. Sexual perversion is all the same to me. Doesn't matter what flavor. I don't give a damn what secular law says. It's no coincidence many of the priests who raped young boys they entrusted with were gay. Once you cross the line and become morally bankrupt, there are no restraints to what you will do. However if you are a defender of homosexuality, you would never be able to understand that. It's all foul, shameful behaviour, and it will render our society rotten to its core no matter how much misguided individuals try to justify it. so is drinking, but you don't seem to be up in arms about that. I don't see how drinking is a sexual perversion, or even morally wrong in any way. In moderation, alcohol consumption has been shown to reduce heart disease and have many healthful effects. Overuse or abuse of any substance is a physical problem, but not a morale issue in and of itself.

yeah, but in the bible Jesus said it was wrong, and should not be done.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I love the jump that is always made when gays come into the equation. Gays = Necrophiliacs, Pedophiles, and Rapists. Whereas is one is questionable whether or not you approve (gays) and the others are illegall. As soon as someone uses the rights for gays = rights for child-rapers argument I stop listening. There are many arguments to use, but that one is just stupid. Sexual perversion is all the same to me. Doesn't matter what flavor. I don't give a damn what secular law says. It's no coincidence many of the priests who raped young boys they entrusted with were gay. Once you cross the line and become morally bankrupt, there are no restraints to what you will do. However if you are a defender of homosexuality, you would never be able to understand that. It's all foul, shameful behaviour, and it will render our society rotten to its core no matter how much misguided individuals try to justify it. so is drinking, but you don't seem to be up in arms about that. I don't see how drinking is a sexual perversion, or even morally wrong in any way. In moderation, alcohol consumption has been shown to reduce heart disease and have many healthful effects. Overuse or abuse of any substance is a physical problem, but not a morale issue in and of itself. yeah, but in the bible Jesus said it was wrong, and should not be done.

This is false. Christ never said we should not drink alcohol containing beverages, in fact he provided wine for a wedding feast in one miracle he performed. He spoke against drunkeness. There is a difference.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I love the jump that is always made when gays come into the equation. Gays = Necrophiliacs, Pedophiles, and Rapists. Whereas is one is questionable whether or not you approve (gays) and the others are illegall. As soon as someone uses the rights for gays = rights for child-rapers argument I stop listening. There are many arguments to use, but that one is just stupid. Sexual perversion is all the same to me. Doesn't matter what flavor. I don't give a damn what secular law says. It's no coincidence many of the priests who raped young boys they entrusted with were gay. Once you cross the line and become morally bankrupt, there are no restraints to what you will do. However if you are a defender of homosexuality, you would never be able to understand that. It's all foul, shameful behaviour, and it will render our society rotten to its core no matter how much misguided individuals try to justify it. so is drinking, but you don't seem to be up in arms about that. I don't see how drinking is a sexual perversion, or even morally wrong in any way. In moderation, alcohol consumption has been shown to reduce heart disease and have many healthful effects. Overuse or abuse of any substance is a physical problem, but not a morale issue in and of itself. yeah, but in the bible Jesus said it was wrong, and should not be done. This is false. Christ never said we should not drink alcohol containing beverages, in fact he provided wine for a wedding feast in one miracle he performed. He spoke against drunkeness. There is a difference.

valid point.  But what about "unclean" meat?  Is that morally wrong to consume?

Quoted: Those of you who say that you don't have to proclaim your heterosexuality should try working on a construction crew for a summer.  It is pretty amazing.  And how many times have you walked down the street holding your wife/girlfriend's hand and not given it a second thought?  There are reasons that gay people act the way they do, and the main one is advertisement.  I go to a Seventh Day Adventist school, and in a hostile environment like that, it is natural to attempt to gather others who are the same by acting in ways that will attract them.  I never really changed my behavior, although I did start talking openly with my friends after I came out.  Another thing is after you come out you reach a point where you are no longer afraid of being identified, and a lot of guys overreact to its liberating effect.

Interesting points.  So basically what you're saying is behavior is altered and the use of innocuous things such as rainbows are more of an outreach to other gays, than an attempt to put the fact in your face?  That makes sense, though most gays I know are liberal and do not have a sense of how much is too much.  Makes me think sometimes "Yes I know you're gay, you make it so blatantly obvious, what the hell else defines you?"  Some people make their orientation the center of their personality, and that is deplorable and boring, and that applies to both heterosexuals and homosexuals.

Quoted: Hi all, Constitution - Unless it is amended, nothing. Population - Some theorize that homosexuality is a natural population control.  Put too many sheep on a plot of land and some of them turn gay... Economy - No effect. Political Culture - I'm a gay conservative (and I get told by my "real" gay friends that I hate myself for it) and I kept telling my liberal gay friends that Gavin "Twosome" Nusome was causing such a stir in straight society that it would lead to a backlash.  Sure enough, Bush gets re-elected (I voted for him) and 10 states pass laws defining marriage.  I think the main political effect gays have is being stupid and getting straight people out to the polls. Those of you who say that you don't have to proclaim your heterosexuality should try working on a construction crew for a summer.  It is pretty amazing.  And how many times have you walked down the street holding your wife/girlfriend's hand and not given it a second thought?  There are reasons that gay people act the way they do, and the main one is advertisement.  I go to a Seventh Day Adventist school, and in a hostile environment like that, it is natural to attempt to gather others who are the same by acting in ways that will attract them.  I never really changed my behavior, although I did start talking openly with my friends after I came out.  Another thing is after you come out you reach a point where you are no longer afraid of being identified, and a lot of guys overreact to its liberating effect. What if all your guns were so frowned upon by society that you couldn't shoot them for awhile, then you finally broke free and found a place to shoot?  Wouldn't you shoot up a bunch of shit and waste all kinds of rounds at the range?  I know I would.  Kinda poor analogy but thats how it is in my mind. My personal feeling is that the marriage issue was created by lesbians.  The first couples married in SF by Nusome were lesbians, and the majority of couples in Mass. who have been getting married are lesbians.  I don't know a single gay man who wants to marry, and Enigma pointed out to me that MEN don't generally want to marry if they could have it their way. Thats all.

Well see I told you guys I wasn't the only "gay [conservative] in the village"

Quoted: Quoted: Hi all, Constitution - Unless it is amended, nothing. Population - Some theorize that homosexuality is a natural population control.  Put too many sheep on a plot of land and some of them turn gay... Economy - No effect. Political Culture - I'm a gay conservative (and I get told by my "real" gay friends that I hate myself for it) and I kept telling my liberal gay friends that Gavin "Twosome" Nusome was causing such a stir in straight society that it would lead to a backlash.  Sure enough, Bush gets re-elected (I voted for him) and 10 states pass laws defining marriage.  I think the main political effect gays have is being stupid and getting straight people out to the polls. Those of you who say that you don't have to proclaim your heterosexuality should try working on a construction crew for a summer.  It is pretty amazing.  And how many times have you walked down the street holding your wife/girlfriend's hand and not given it a second thought?  There are reasons that gay people act the way they do, and the main one is advertisement.  I go to a Seventh Day Adventist school, and in a hostile environment like that, it is natural to attempt to gather others who are the same by acting in ways that will attract them.  I never really changed my behavior, although I did start talking openly with my friends after I came out.  Another thing is after you come out you reach a point where you are no longer afraid of being identified, and a lot of guys overreact to its liberating effect. What if all your guns were so frowned upon by society that you couldn't shoot them for awhile, then you finally broke free and found a place to shoot?  Wouldn't you shoot up a bunch of shit and waste all kinds of rounds at the range?  I know I would.  Kinda poor analogy but thats how it is in my mind. My personal feeling is that the marriage issue was created by lesbians.  The first couples married in SF by Nusome were lesbians, and the majority of couples in Mass. who have been getting married are lesbians.  I don't know a single gay man who wants to marry, and Enigma pointed out to me that MEN don't generally want to marry if they could have it their way. Thats all. Well see I told you guys I wasn't the only "gay [conservative] in the village"

yeah stoner, I think he might even be more hard corps than you

I think the only positive things gay people bring to the table are reminders of what happens when morals are removed and replaced with perversions. I do think that homosexuals are a major threat to our society. Homosexuals do not need any more rights, they need mental help.

Thats MHO.

I guess in places where homosexuals live and congregate the local businesses benefit, but if they were not there, other people would be there in their place. So nothing gained/ nothing lost.

Just because someone is a homosexual and likes gun does not make them a conservative in my book. It only makes them a homosexual who likes guns.

Quoted: yeah stoner, I think he might even be more hard corps than you

And he spells better too.......

Quoted: Quoted: Those of you who say that you don't have to proclaim your heterosexuality should try working on a construction crew for a summer.  It is pretty amazing.  And how many times have you walked down the street holding your wife/girlfriend's hand and not given it a second thought?  There are reasons that gay people act the way they do, and the main one is advertisement.  I go to a Seventh Day Adventist school, and in a hostile environment like that, it is natural to attempt to gather others who are the same by acting in ways that will attract them.  I never really changed my behavior, although I did start talking openly with my friends after I came out.  Another thing is after you come out you reach a point where you are no longer afraid of being identified, and a lot of guys overreact to its liberating effect. Interesting points.  So basically what you're saying is behavior is altered and the use of innocuous things such as rainbows are more of an outreach to other gays, than an attempt to put the fact in your face?  That makes sense, though most gays I know are liberal and do not have a sense of how much is too much.  Makes me think sometimes "Yes I know you're gay, you make it so blatantly obvious, what the hell else defines you?"  Some people make their orientation the center of their personality, and that is deplorable and boring, and that applies to both heterosexuals and homosexuals.

Pretty much yeah.  I have very little use for flamey fags who act effeminate all the time.
I agree that some guys want to put it in your face, and that you do need something else to define you.  Same with heterosexuals.

I just mostly don't want queers standing too close in case some lightning bolts or brimstone starts raining down; I want to die naturally.

We all should have the same rights as each other. Straight,gay,lesbian,Black all the same. We all should have the right to persue happiness whatever we choose. There is no logical reason why a homosexual couple should not be allowed to get married or adopt a kid. Really how is their marrige going to affect you ,I mean come on get over yourself, You let porn stars and swingers get married. Most men cheat on there wives and over half of marraiges end within three years. Why not have kids  if two people love eachother then what does it matter. How many kids are born by single mothers and molested by their STRAIGHT uncle.

Just my opinion.

 

There is no logical reason why a homosexual couple should not be allowed to get married

You post uses no logic.

Just my opinion.