Those opposed to "gay marriage" will you explain your position to me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think being gay is a choice for most, as I think the straight to gay line is just a continuum based on societal, culrural and genetic factors. To argue otherwise is an insult to gay people. In other cultures, with less of a religious objection to gayness, the percentage is much higher. So, in other words, a small number are 100% gay, but most are somewhere on the scale.

All that said, I think having less gays is better for the society (but not zero), stop I don't want more people making the choice. I'd like to keep it around 2-3%.

This is the dumbest thing I've heard in days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think being gay is a choice for most, as I think the straight to gay line is just a continuum based on societal, culrural and genetic factors. To argue otherwise is an insult to gay people. In other cultures, with less of a religious objection to gayness, the percentage is much higher. So, in other words, a small number are 100% gay, but most are somewhere on the scale.

All that said, I think having less gays is better for the society (but not zero), stop I don't want more people making the choice. I'd like to keep it around 2-3%.

Thank you. Your recommendation will be referred to the International Homosexual Conspiracy, and will be given all due consideration when planning the FY17 recruitment budget. Unfortunately, the FY16 budget has already been finalized and cannot be altered at this time.

I hope that at the conclusion of FY17, you will find an appropriate amount of homosexuality (no more than 2-3% of Gross National Screwing) reflected I THR IHC Annual Report.

We know you are very busy, and appreciate your attention to this matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think being gay is a choice for most, as I think the straight to gay line is just a continuum based on societal, culrural and genetic factors. To argue otherwise is an insult to gay people. In other cultures, with less of a religious objection to gayness, the percentage is much higher. So, in other words, a small number are 100% gay, but most are somewhere on the scale.

All that said, I think having less gays is better for the society (but not zero), stop I don't want more people making the choice. I'd like to keep it around 2-3%.

ROARING with laughter at this.

[Anonymous]

More homosexuality = more AIDS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More homosexuality = more AIDS.

Okeydoke! Please rejoin this conversation when the shuttle lands!

Y'all were pretty scary when your will was the law of the land, but now you're just hilarious anachronisms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More homosexuality = more AIDS.

So does more straight sex. Should we ban sex altogether?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More homosexuality = more AIDS.

why do you care? You clearly aren't getting laid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More homosexuality = more AIDS.

Only people who believe in science agree with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think being gay is a choice for most, as I think the straight to gay line is just a continuum based on societal, culrural and genetic factors. To argue otherwise is an insult to gay people. In other cultures, with less of a religious objection to gayness, the percentage is much higher. So, in other words, a small number are 100% gay, but most are somewhere on the scale.

All that said, I think having less gays is better for the society (but not zero), stop I don't want more people making the choice. I'd like to keep it around 2-3%.

ROARING with laughter at this.

Why is it so funny? Do you think people are either 100% gay or 100% straight?

[Anonymous]

So if we don't allow gay marriage, there will be no butt sex between men?

Yeah, right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think being gay is a choice for most, as I think the straight to gay line is just a continuum based on societal, culrural and genetic factors. To argue otherwise is an insult to gay people. In other cultures, with less of a religious objection to gayness, the percentage is much higher. So, in other words, a small number are 100% gay, but most are somewhere on the scale.

All that said, I think having less gays is better for the society (but not zero), stop I don't want more people making the choice. I'd like to keep it around 2-3%.

ROARING with laughter at this.

Why is it so funny? Do you think people are either 100% gay or 100% straight?

No but I think your quotas are beyond hilarious. Sorry sir, 3% of the population are already declared as gay. I am afraid you will have to be straight until such time as one of them dies…

It is ludicrous beyond belief to think that you can (or that we should want to) set targets for who people fall in love with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think being gay is a choice for most, as I think the straight to gay line is just a continuum based on societal, culrural and genetic factors. To argue otherwise is an insult to gay people. In other cultures, with less of a religious objection to gayness, the percentage is much higher. So, in other words, a small number are 100% gay, but most are somewhere on the scale.

All that said, I think having less gays is better for the society (but not zero), stop I don't want more people making the choice. I'd like to keep it around 2-3%.

ROARING with laughter at this.

Why is it so funny? Do you think people are either 100% gay or 100% straight?

No but I think your quotas are beyond hilarious. Sorry sir, 3% of the population are already declared as gay. I am afraid you will have to be straight until such time as one of them dies…

It is ludicrous beyond belief to think that you can (or that we should want to) set targets for who people fall in love with.

+1. I was giggling because the first paragraph is perfectly reasonable, and then the second paragraph takes a sharp turn into cray-cray. The element of surprise is a key component of humor. Well done.

[Anonymous]

Uh oh... The scientific correlation of homosexuality and exponential rates of AIDs required censoring since it destroys the liberal mindset.
Liberals hate science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More homosexuality = more AIDS.

Only people who believe in science agree with this.

More monogamy = less AIDS. Support gay marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Uh oh... The scientific correlation of homosexuality and exponential rates of AIDs required censoring since it destroys the liberal mindset.
Liberals hate science.

Actually the highest rate of AIDS is in Africa, and it is because of heterosexual promiscuity.