<p>that makes no sense. are you a fundamentalist christian?</p>
<p>Well, I may or may not say that BUT homosexuality is a sin...that's all I will say on that topic. I guess we can say that everyone here is open to poligamy...right?? That's what I thought..</p>
<p>No, because if gay marriages are allowed then it will pave the way for a more accepting society for gays - in the same way black people are now accepted into society without question - so, in the unlikely even that a gay child is raised, it won't be a big deal socially.</p>
<p>Which will lead to a society where _<em>insert thing like poligamists or murderers</em> are accepted also. (to raise kids that is...no problems with gay marriage, just the raising kids is all)</p>
<p>so basically you think gay marriage is okay for now, but we better prevent it from happening in the future by stopping gays from having children?
sounds pretty extreme to me. allow it now, but cut it off as soon as possible - whatever, sittingbull.</p>
<p>Just one more point about John R.
When I was a prepubertal 11 year old, I had a letter to the editor published in major newpaper. It expressed a point of view my parents strongly disagreed with. I doubt anyone who read my letter would have guessed I was only 11 years old.
I don't think it's fair to attack John R for his age. He obviosly knows more about the news than 90% of americans. Someones age has little to do with their ability to reason an oppinion. John R. expresses an oppinion shared by millions of people. It's rude personally insault him because you disagree with him.</p>
<p>Sitting bull, your logic is flawed. </p>
<p>Gay marriage has been banned (in the US and other parts of the world) for a long time, but homoosexuals have always been present in society. They will continue to exist (estimates say approx. 10% of the American population identifies as a homosexual), but not necessarily as the product of gay marriage. You can't say that you're against gay marriage for the sake of "protecting impressionable children from the effects of homosexuality" or something ridiculous like that. Having heterosexuals for parents is no guarantee that the kid will be straight, and having homosexuals as parents is no gurantee that the kid will be gay. If anything, I think having gay parents who have struggled with acceptance in society and who have overcome obstacles would be wonderful rolemodels for children, and these subsequent generations would be more tolerant of different lifestyles.</p>
<p>
all people are SINNERS!!! and, if you're not Christian, then that statement means nothing.</p>
<p>Do homosexuals enjoy it up the....? :confused:</p>
<p>L0oool .</p>
<p>"If anything, I think having gay parents who have struggled with acceptance in society and who have overcome obstacles would be wonderful role models for children, and these subsequent generations would be more tolerant of different lifestyles"</p>
<p>well said</p>
<p>This thread has been very enlightening. As a bisexual, I appreciate hotpiece, madd, jackson, and the other posters who have argued passionately for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals.</p>
<p>Sittingbull: that is, bluntly, ridiculous. If the absence of a masculine or feminine figure will cause a child psychological trauma, then shouldn't we ban single-parent families?</p>
<p>Obviously your reasoning is flawed, because there are thousands of homosexuals in America today who had heterosexual parents! My parents are on the verge of anti-gay, yet look what they produced. How do you explain that?</p>
<p>(Maybe it's that "my father influenced me to be gay and will go to hell.")</p>
<p>As for the posters who were arguing that America was founded on Puritanical beliefs. While that may be true, I refer you to article 11 of the Barbary Treaties:</p>
<p>"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion..."</p>
<p>Written 1796, ratified by the US 1797. (<a href="http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/barbary/bar1796t.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/barbary/bar1796t.htm</a>)</p>
<p>Overall, this thread has saddened me. I assumed that by luck of the draw, I just happened to live in a place where the arguments against homosexuality border on White Supremacy-esque reasoning. Now I realize that there truly are ignorant *****ing @$$holes all over the world!</p>
<p>How comforting that some things never change.</p>
<p>Sittingbull, I can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree with you 100%. Homosexuality is a choice. They should NOT be able to raise children. They'll set horrible examples for them.</p>
<p>I'll add to this later when I get home from school. :P</p>
<p>Don't bother, John K. - you'll get crushed.
Generally, people who says homosexuality is a sin get their information from the Bible. Plenty of people don't practice Christianity - these people would not see it as a sin. I really hate how people try to spread their beliefs to other people when they're so oppressive - what do you care if a gay couples hundreds of miles away gets married? Why are you getting mad? It doesn't affect you personally or at all. No one's asking you to be gay. It is their choice and you have no part in it.</p>
<p>Sometimes I wonder why people even care about other's preferences. seriously, deal with your own life and if you want freespeech so much y don't u just talk to some people who actually care or agree with you. if you post this kind of stuff on an internet forum then there are bound to be people who will disagree. johnnyK.if you are really in 7th grade then I hope u will eventually learn to be more open.</p>
<p>Ok Nishant, I've heard your arguements, so I'll bite:</p>
<p>The issues of abortion, and gay rights are just a reflection of our transformation as a species. We are approaching a point in which we will leave the natural backgrounds we have come from, and began evolving again, except this time we will evolve ourselves. Over the years, science has gained more and more popularity, and along side it, rationalism. The never ending debate between conservatives and liberals is necessary for our own survival. It forces us to progress very slowly and with caution, while thinking out our opinions carefully.</p>
<p>Personally, I support Gay Rights. However, I will not try to press them onto you because you have every right to hold onto your beliefs. </p>
<p>Do I think Gay Rights will be achieved? Yes. How fast? Very slowly. I suspect they will gain small advances over the next 20 years. Similarily, when the slaves were freed, it was a hundred years before they got their rights. Even then, it took a while for them to be accepted.</p>
<p>As per the argument that having Gay parents can bias a childs sexuality, you cannot propose that because 99% of society is straight, and the child will definetely get both perspectives. In fact, he or she might have a better perspective on what is happening.</p>
<p>Over the next couple years, we are going to face moral clashes with our religions. How will we precede? Probably with a lot of debate and name calling. But its all good, because it prevents us as a species from making rash decisions.</p>
<p>
How so? by showing them that it is okay to love whomever you want, by proving to them how that it is possible to overcome huge societal obstacles, by loving them unconditionally, by providing for them the way heterosexual parents would?</p>
<p>Whew! I just read this entire thread.</p>
<p>Some of the thoughts I have managed to retain are these:</p>
<p>On Religion: Should we condemn religion wholesale, though it has enunciated some important, universal truths, simply because it is run by (gasp) imperfect people and as such has a long history of failing to follow its own truths? People need to try harder...</p>
<p>On Love and Sex: Since when are these terms synonymous? Is it possible for two people of the same gender to love eachother? Can it be unconditional? For the homosexual, is it unconditional? Or, is it conditional based on having sex together? What is pure love? Is it total clarity and union between two people of something spiritually divine -- or is it simple animal, physical pleasure? My question is, If one man loves another man in the former sense -- why in the world would he want to insert the part of his anatomy, that was created/evolved for the express dual function of ridding the body of urine and for the propagation of the species, into the other man's part that was expressly created/evolved for the singular function of eliminating solid waste (I will leave oral sex out altogether)?! Would that not be a desecration of the pure love that the relationship is based on? If it is based on the latter, do we really want to dignify it by calling it "love" --- something, one hopes, is the most precious commodity we can offer?</p>
<p>On Marriage: Is marriage not based on the ideals of pure love --- never mind that ideals, per se, are never achieved --- how could we ever survive as human beings without them?! If that basis is true then isn't the ideal, pure form of love the real master of the marriage while the neccesary sexual part (for reproductive purposes - ideally speaking of course) is subordinate to it? I will call that a good marriage. Further, can a "good marriage" get along without sex if there is love? I think so. Can a "good marriage" get along without love if there is sex? How long will that last? Few marriages it is safe to say have lived up to the ideal, though many strive for it continually and for that I commend them. Marriage also means the sharing of life's everyday, practical challenges which can severely test the strength of the union, and more often than not can obscure the purity of it. </p>
<p>On Gay Marriage: Can civil unions not provide the same practical benefits to gay couples that married ones enjoy? I think so. Do married people have a problem with gay marriage in that it makes a mockery of marriage by not being procreative while using a procreative process, and while apparently placing love as the subordinate of sex, which assumes the role of master? Are there any same gender relationships that do not engage in sex -- even though they can, yet love eachother? If so, I would welcome them without reservation. </p>
<p>Final Thought: Physical love is so frought with barriers and pitfalls. Does "gayness" strongly imply a preference for the physical rather than the spiritual/divine -- which, while far more dificult to achieve is even more rewarding --- and if so, why should it be celebrated any more than the hard surface of a table is celebrated? Is our love for one another ultimately based on our physicality? How tragic is that? Can we rise above our physical limitations and find divine bliss on this earth? It has been done. Once that is reached do we really want to settle for mere animal "love" with some one else, much less some one of the same sex?!!! Wouldn't we see the absurdity of it?</p>
<p>I personally feel that homosexuals are just like anyone else and should be given the same consideration and rights as anyone else. I don't understand why people view gays as so different from themselves. They are just like you and me. We are all people here and they should be treated as such.</p>
<p>Also, I don't understand why people are all up in arms about marriage. I think as long as there is love between the two people involved then who cares. Finding someone who you truly love and care about (and who feels the same about you) is a rare and special thing in life and all people should be allowed to express this bond to others through the institution of marriage. </p>
<p>Still, reading some of the posts on here makes it seem as if gays would be desecrating the oh-so-pure institution of marriage. I would say the desecration of marriage lies in people who marry for monetary gain, fame, outward appearances, etc...but that is okay as long as the two people involved are a man and a woman...</p>
<p>I also don't understand the logic that two gay parents will "mess" up a kid. Anyone can mess up a child...whether you are straight, gay, bi...Sexual orientation does not determine parenting skills. Crappy parenting skills affects people from all walks of life whether you are rich, poor, black, white, gay, straight...it doesn't discriminate.</p>
<p>"They are just like you and me."</p>
<p>No they're not. It's a WHOLE different culture.</p>