Gays have a disease, what about it?

To be frank, you state here that your business is none of our business. So far, the gay crowd has done nothing but drag it out into the open. I'd hardly agree that is keeping it in your bedroom. The gay crowd drags their sex life out into the open air and them whine and cry about the way they are treated.
With all the drum beating and braying, I'd say that was anything but private.
If Florida gets 2 foot of snow in an unprecedented event, is that natural? If conjoined babies are born, is that natural?
I hear a lot about how humans aren't the only homosexuals on this planet, that there are other animals that are homosexual in nature as well. Question...If those animals are homosexual by existence, where are they? Extinct, maybe?

 

Read views and my thoughts esp. to disprove Pasithea. People who do gay/lesbian sexual behaviors are more likely to be drug junkies, have copathologies such as antisocial conduct, suicides, etc. Homosexual groups propaganda is that it's societal attitudes but it's more complex. They should make it a crime to do sex changes because that's mutilation, just as if a person thinks they're a dog, it's wrong for a Dr. to mutilate a man to make him a fake woman. With sex abuse, any1 who denies the fact that homosexual rape in youth causes adult homosexual behaivor is dishonest. It doesn't take an expert to understand that sex abuse
damages mind and causes people to behave in ways they wouldn't.

With straight sex, it's my view that once a woman hits menopause, it's best for a man to no longer have sex with her and either become celibate or find younger women to do it with. Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi did the right
thing when he paid young women to have sex with him after his wife became menopausal. Sex is mainly supposed to be about the woman pleasuring the man with viceversa incidental. Once a woman hits menopause, then it;s
best her sex life end with it. But @least that's not homosexuality. Homosexual/lesbian behaviors are bad in and of itself whether it's willing or forced. It's best for gays & lesbians to be celibate even if orientation doesn't change, homosexuality could
be result of sex abuse or if it's biological, it could be result of birth defect. They should look for a cure for homosexuality/lesbianism. It's best not to trust gay/lesbian groups.

 

Except they are not dragging their sex lives out into the open, they are dragging the fact that they cannot marry their significant other into the open. It is the opposition who is constantly bringing up how gay people have sex and how icky they find it. Whether or not two gay people even have sex at all is irrelevant to whether or not they should be allowed to be married, just like whether or not two straight people have sex or not is irrelevant to them being able to marry.

Yes and yes. Climate change and natural cloning of a fertilized egg that did not fully split. It is all very natural if you ask me. It might seem weird to you, but that does not make it any less a product of nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

 

Unless it's caused by some kind of man made behaviours that effect climate change then, yes, it is natural even if unpredictable.

Could be unless the pregnancy has been affected by some kind of drug interaction.

No one has ever suggested a species being exclusively homosexual just that homosexuality has been observed in a small proportion of many species including humans.

 

The events that you reference for the animal portion of this discussion, refers to animals in rut, or heat. Animals cannot tell the difference when rut takes over their minds. Some animals, such as primates in the wild, constantly have females going, in, and leaving heat through out the yearly cycle, driving the males to engage with anything that moves. Animals do not make the conscience thought to engage in same-sex activity, more or less giving in to the first available "target" when aroused by the scent of heat. That is a base animal instinct, not a deliberate thought. If they were thinkers, we'd be the ones sitting in trees.
Like all decisions everyone makes, we choose certain things knowing that the road we take is rife with discourse, but we agree to accept the consequences, socially as well as personally. You know the deal when you start down a road.
You learn in life, you have to take the good with the bad. That rule applies to every individual on this planet.
Just because you hit some bumps or find potholes, you still knew the deal going in. [ "you" is used collectively]
Life is a kitchen. If you can't stand the heat in the kitchen, you get out. I'm not indicating suicide as an answer, I mean leave the battlefield and enjoy what time you can with the one who matters. Since you don't own the kitchen, you have no right to demand the whole kitchen change to oblige a very few.
Not too reasonable to me.

 

So in other words you are okay with the majority being able to oppress the minority?

You also mention just going on with and enjoying life with the "one who matters". How about this then, two gay people have been together for 40+ years. One of them ends up in the hospital with a terminal illness. The partner is denied the right to visit their loved one in the hospital because they are not considered next of kin.

Yeah, that's right. Situations like this; marriage has it covered. But you want to deny people the right to equal protection under the law. It's a bit hard to enjoy the rest of your remaining life with your loved one when they aren't considered your next of kin, your spouse, and they are barred from seeing you.

 

I haven't personally pointed to any evidence up to this point but there are clear examples of animals who will only mate with a same sex partner and have no interest in opposite sex partners.

Source?

You could probably see that phenomena replicated in humans too. Doesn't follow that there aren't humans who are predominantly or exclusively gay.

Then why do certain members of certain species (to varying degrees) only express sexual interest toward the same sex?

You talk about the "scent of heat" but this relies on the subject of attraction having appropriate hormonal receptors. Would you not concede the possibility that things like pheromones that play a part in animal sexual attraction can also do so in humans and just as gay people are subconsciously repelled by opposite sex pheromones, homosexually inclined animals may also be?

Every sexual attraction I have ever had has been a base animal instinct. That doesn't mean I didn't use deliberate thought to chose the woman I would marry and set up home with. Same can apply to gay people. They might not be able to take their eyes of the hot guy pole-dancing in their local bar but that doesn't mean they're stupid enough to realize that the average guy who occasionally buys them a drink is a much better choice in a friend or partner. Things like this are universal dynamics. They apply across the range from straight to gay. Human relationships are not just about sex.

This is just redundant babble. Gay people put just as much thought into their relationships as straight people, often a lot more because they can be completely alone in the process and don't have family and friends helping them along.

If they suspect that their family and friends will reject them, then they need to be doubly sure that the person they're hanging it all on won't.

I see absolutely no reason for gay people to accept any consequence under law that straight people do not. Some may never gain personal or even social acceptance but as long as such discrimination is not backed by force of law then the state has done all it can reasonably be expected to do to remain neutral in the domain.

If you actually speak to any number of gay people you will eventually come to understand that their attraction is innate. I'm straight, I could NEVER chose any circumstance under which I would not be attracted to women. To any genuinely straight guy such a premise is just ridiculous. People don't "start down the road" of being gay. That is their road, they have to deal with it as best they can.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

What makes you think you "own" the kitchen?

What if one day the rules change and suddenly the head chef and all their minions decide there's something about you that doesn't belong on the menu?

You gonna bow your head gracefully and walk away?

Or maybe you're going to point to a set of documents that guarantee your freedom, liberty and pursuit of happiness?

Don't tell me you wouldn't...

 

You know, it strikes me as interesting that the anti-homosexuality crowd claims same-sex marriage/attraction is all about sex...and yet nine times out of ten it's them, NOT the same-sex marriage crowd, that is obsessing over sex.

It's just interesting.

 

There are no guarantees in life. If gays want guarantees that superceed mine, they can kiss my rosey red behind. Many of them that want to encourage that kind of sexuality, decry the injustice when they meet resistance. Tough break. Get in line with everyone else. For example, I pay my taxes in full every year, but I think taxes as such are illegal, unconstittutional, and discriminating, but I pay, just the same. The reason for this statement is, if it weren't for the tax issue (which is the only legal issue that I've found in here) would the gay crowd still be standing up and crowing?
As far as the reference to animals, it ws the gay crowd which started the comparison. So if lower life forms do it, so can they, is a real nice war chant!
If there are any such animals, they are working on their own extinction.
Go ahead and admit it, gays want to rule the world and call all the shots. As for me, I don't rule the word and don't want to but I da*n sure ain't gonna let you call the shots for me.
You cannot procreate as a couple without going outside the relationship. That shoots down the concept of marriage. But that's right, I almost forgot, they would like to change that too to make what they do more accpetable to themselves.
But I ask this again, why would you want the state in your business? When you get married, legally, you are literally incorporating your business with the state and your business becomes their business.
Do you actually believe that making same-sex mariage, legal will make it all ok? If you do, you need more help than what's available, IMO.

 

Taxes are 100% Constitutional and Biblical.

Argument? Undermined.

 

Never meant to imply there were. Just that they should have the same guarantee of opportunity as you. No one can guarantee outcomes.

They don't, they want equal treatment for the provably similarly or IDENTICALLY situated under law. That's how the legal process works.

I'd be careful what you wish for...

There's a difference between encouragement and recognition. Of course people are going to decry injustice; injustice deserves to be decried.

Good job there's a legal remedy then?

They have been for a long time. Now they're getting (very) close to the front of that line.

As do they.

Because that's the current state of law but there is nothing to stop you electing politicians who agree with you or with standing for office yourself. In today's political climate you'll probably find you have many allies and the court system is as available to you as it is to anybody else though, ironically, it's taxpayer money that keeps the doors open.

Yes because there are many other legal reasons to want equal treatment under the law. If you can't be bothered to research what they are then don't expect not to be creamed in court by individuals and organizations that have spent a great deal of time and resources outlining what they are.

Nonsense, it's nearly always started by people insisting that homosexuality is not "natural". The fact that the wide existence of homosexuality in nature points to the fact that it is a natural and widely occurring variation in sexuality is an inconvenient truth to persons who have not chosen to use their words wisely.

It's a statement of fact in rebuttal to the statement that homosexuality is not "natural". Some people like to think they can use the word "natural" as a proxy for what they consider normal and nice. I wash my face and shave my chin daily. That's not natural but it is normal (for most) and it's also nice for many.

Nope because, as has already been pointed out to you clearly, this is a fallacy of percentile. Nobody is arguing that all members of any species is homosexual just that, to varying degrees, some members of nearly every species are. Most species will have a majority of members predisposed to breeding so, if they become extinct, it will be for other reasons beyond their innate reproductive capacity.

Go ahead, admit it, you're paranoid.

Is anybody forcing you to have sexual relations with or to marry someone of the same sex?

Irrelevant.

The ability to procreate is not a requirement of the marriage contract regardless of the sexuality of the signors.

Nope this is a projection. I'm sure most gay people find themselves perfectly acceptable. I'm sure they're pragmatic enough to realize that not everybody is going to feel the same way. They just don't want the law stacked against them. You can carry on disliking gays for ever and I'm sure you won't be alone.

Because, on a day to day basis, it's really necessary to deal with things like wills, hospital visitation, immigration rights etc. Why not go and read some of the plaintiff briefs in the recent batch of DOMA cases that are doing the rounds in Federal court. That will enlighten you as to why they really want what they want.

The concept of government "getting out of the marriage business" is a shining example of libertarian political science but I'm sure that for a lot of people proposing such a solution the real motivation is: "If daddy says you can play with my toys, I'm going to break them before you get a chance to".

Depends what you mean. OK by who's standards? I'm sure a lot of people will be disgruntled just as I'm equally sure that that will subside in the fullness of time just as it has everywhere else same sex marriages are legal. There will always be some people who aren't happy. There's still people who are unhappy that women are allowed to vote for pete's sake!

Everybody is entitled to an opinion, thanks for expressing yours.

 

LOLOLOLOL!!!! YOU ARE DELUDED BY YOUR IDEOLOGY! Its a physical impossibility

 

Same would apply to ANY TWO PEOPLE who are not married. Whats so special about those who happen to be "gay people"?

 

You can say it's not a choice, but then why do so many lesbians spend time hitting on straight chicks trying to convert them? Why do 9 out of 10 women who go to prison straight come out gay? The social dogma surrounding homosexuality in men keeps these things from happening in the male population, so it is to say it is not a choice and believe it. But when studying women, it simply isn't the case.

 

I followed the thread back, all the way to July, looking for what this "oppress"ion you speak of is all about, and I couldnt find anything. Are you by chance referring to the witholding of tax breaks and governmental entitlements of marriage?

 

pretty sure he's referring to the witholding of the civil right of marriage.

 

"Oppress"??? Absurd hyperbole from emotional homosexuals and their supporters

 

Lol. It's not nearly as bad as the emotional hyperbole from Christians and their supporters against same-sex marriage. "Destruction of society"? Give me a break.

 

nope. simple reality for same sex couples wishing to marry.

 

Most american christians are just extremely immature....like the super bowl and the exposed breast, you would have thought a nuclear war had been started

religious people in general are immature, not just christians

 

Who claimed it was "destruction of society"? Perhaps you should respond to their posts

 

Nearly every Christian that isn't cool with teh gayz sites the destruction of society in their reasons for opposition.

 

Im an atheist. I oppose gay marriage on constitutional grounds. And although, as a small government republican, I can tolerate government encouraging marriage to help cut down on the #s of single mothers on their own, struggling to provide and care for her children, I cant tolerate encouraging gay marriage so gays can feel better about being gay.

 

Which is absurd because the Supreme Court has already decided that marriage is a right protected by the constitution.

 

"Marriage" between a man and a woman is a constitutional right. Because

Sex outside of marriage was illegal in many states. Marriage was required in order to procreate without violating the law. So marriage is fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race because procreation is fundamental. The word "marriage" has a meaning.