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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the opposition to gay marriage is over the word marriage. Gay marriage by any other name would receive a lot less resistance.

That's right. Marriage has religious connotations . Gays are more interested in changing the bible and convincing the majority that sodomy is not a sin than in getting married. Everybody knows why AIDS and STDs flourish in the gay community. Sometimes sin is actually dangerous and unhealthy.

Fine, let's call it wedlock.

And everyone knows that herpes & hpv flourishes in the straight community. Better outlaw hetero sex outside of marriage. Ooops I mean wedlock.

[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?

So how about we go 3% gay, 5% bisexual, and another 10% only that time when I was drunk in college. Do we have a deal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So uncivilized areas are similar to the gay community?

[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%.

And I assume you also feel that being heterosexual is a choice as well, right? You chose to be hetero rather than to be gay?

[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%.

And I assume you also feel that being heterosexual is a choice as well, right? You chose to be hetero rather than to be gay?

Unless we have exceeded the heterosexual quota. In which case, wha-wha, sorry you will have to be gay for now.

[Anonymous]

Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

I'm pro evolution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

I'm pro evolution.

That's great, me too. It seems to be working just fine despite there being gay people around for thousands of years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

I'm pro evolution.

That's great, me too. It seems to be working just fine despite there being gay people around for thousands of years.

Nope, we need to evolve to a much higher level and homosexuals are slowing us down with their circle jerk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

I'm pro evolution.

That's great, me too. It seems to be working just fine despite there being gay people around for thousands of years.

And also gay animals. Every couple years various scientists do studies and conclude that among various animal populations -- penguins are the one I read most recently, I think -- there's something like 5 to 10% of the population that engages in what we would characterize as gay behavior. Same-sex pairings, that is. There are various theories why. At least one is that it is actually a positive adaptive trait -- not for the individual, who isn't spreading his or her genes, but for the community at large.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

I'm pro evolution.

That's great, me too. It seems to be working just fine despite there being gay people around for thousands of years.

Nope, we need to evolve to a much higher level and homosexuals are slowing us down with their circle jerk.

Well you sure need to evolve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

I'm pro evolution.

That's great, me too. It seems to be working just fine despite there being gay people around for thousands of years.

Nope, we need to evolve to a much higher level and homosexuals are slowing us down with their circle jerk.

Well you sure need to evolve.

You hate science and logic. Must be a liberal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

I'm pro evolution.

That's great, me too. It seems to be working just fine despite there being gay people around for thousands of years.

Nope, we need to evolve to a much higher level and homosexuals are slowing us down with their circle jerk.

Well you sure need to evolve.

You hate science and logic. Must be a liberal.

YOu call this science?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being heterosexual is the basis of evolution.

Cool. So?

I'm pro evolution.

That's great, me too. It seems to be working just fine despite there being gay people around for thousands of years.

And also gay animals. Every couple years various scientists do studies and conclude that among various animal populations -- penguins are the one I read most recently, I think -- there's something like 5 to 10% of the population that engages in what we would characterize as gay behavior. Same-sex pairings, that is. There are various theories why. At least one is that it is actually a positive adaptive trait -- not for the individual, who isn't spreading his or her genes, but for the community at large.

I saw a bull having anal sex with another bull.


Not.