Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It does not fit the definition of a mental illness. Homosexuals are no different then heterosexuals.

How do you explain those kids that already have the gay lisp and are designing clothes and sashaying around at 10 years old? This shit definitely didn't happen when I was a kid--nor did boys trying to kiss boys on the elementary school playground.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a hetero man, but I'm sure in different circumstances I would have a gay relationship. Say I was raised in ancient Greece or Rome and it was accepted. Or say I was in jail with all men for 20 years. Whatever, a mouth is a mouth. I just think it is not that obvious, and to say there is no choice just insults gay people even more so.

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for making me wonder if some of our straight friends secretly think our marriage should be recognized.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm convinced it is a choice, but that societal pressures repress many from making that choice. So while I don't really care about it, I don't think we should provide civil, protected-class, type rights on something that is basically a choice.

And by "choice", what I mean is that there is some homo-hetero spectrum. Maybe less than 1% are on the extreme homo side where they are solely that way, and maybe 50% are solely hetero on the other side. But I think a good percentage, say 10-15% each, are close enough to the middle where they could honestly go either way based on circumstances in their upbringing and based on their life experiences.

Have you ever had a family member that is gay? Did you get to see them grow up? I have a gay family member. Let me tell you, I knew from the time he was 5 that he was going to be gay. For what it's worth, him and his straight brother were raised exactly the same. It's really not a choice and I can't believe people actually think that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP. I am reading every single post and your thoughts are helpful to me. I had a feeling some people would suggest that I have gay/lesbian tendencies. Far, far from it. I am not a swinger. Neither do I fear or dislike LGBT people. I am just like most of the posters here – “normal”. There is one person I don’t care much for, that’s Rick Santorum. IMO, I think he really has major social (and political) issues. He is scary to me. But, you may recall that a few weeks ago Santorum had a back-n-forth exchange about gay marriage with a college student in NH, and I think he made some really valid points. Google it. One of his lines of questions was asking the students (and others in the audience) if they thought that people should be legally allowed to have multiple spouses. The audience’s response was a clear “no”. Well, Santorum went on from there… So, if you support gay marriage, do you also think that polygamy should be law?

Btw, the princess/princess book in the pre-school is totally crazy! That’s what I mean by “aggressive”.

I support gay marriage, and I have absolutely no problem if we decide to legalize polygamy. If consenting adults want to get married, and that marriage has no real negative effect on society, then I see no reason to ban it.

That said, I think there are real differences between gay marriage and polygamy. First of all, practically speaking, our legal system is already set up to easily accommodate gay marriage. Spousal benefits, divorce law, child support, insurance, inheritance, etc., it's all based on a two-party contract, and there's no reason why a same-sex couple should cause any hiccups to the system. A marriage of three or more would be more difficult to accommodate -- how would we divide assets? Who would get survivor benefits? But I don't think that's an insurmountable obstacle.

I also think that the nature of a relationship between two people is different than one between three or more. I think the type of intimacy and trust is probably different (again, not better or worse, but different). But that's clearly no reason to ban polygamous marriage.

I know that, historically, polygamous marriages have lead to welfare fraud, child abuse, spousal abuse, etc. But we have laws already on the books to deal with that.

So, yeah. I have no problem with polygamous marriage. But I don't see us legalizing it any time soon, simply because the demand isn't there.

Here's a question for you, OP -- if the "two princes" preschool book is "aggressive," is a book about a prince and a princess an example of the aggressive heterosexual agenda?

OP responding. Thank you for your thoughts. I say "no" to your prince/princess heterosexual question. No "agenda" is needed -- it's an established tradition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP. I am reading every single post and your thoughts are helpful to me. I had a feeling some people would suggest that I have gay/lesbian tendencies. Far, far from it. I am not a swinger. Neither do I fear or dislike LGBT people. I am just like most of the posters here – “normal”. There is one person I don’t care much for, that’s Rick Santorum. IMO, I think he really has major social (and political) issues. He is scary to me. But, you may recall that a few weeks ago Santorum had a back-n-forth exchange about gay marriage with a college student in NH, and I think he made some really valid points. Google it. One of his lines of questions was asking the students (and others in the audience) if they thought that people should be legally allowed to have multiple spouses. The audience’s response was a clear “no”. Well, Santorum went on from there… So, if you support gay marriage, do you also think that polygamy should be law?

Btw, the princess/princess book in the pre-school is totally crazy! That’s what I mean by “aggressive”.

I support gay marriage, and I have absolutely no problem if we decide to legalize polygamy. If consenting adults want to get married, and that marriage has no real negative effect on society, then I see no reason to ban it.

That said, I think there are real differences between gay marriage and polygamy. First of all, practically speaking, our legal system is already set up to easily accommodate gay marriage. Spousal benefits, divorce law, child support, insurance, inheritance, etc., it's all based on a two-party contract, and there's no reason why a same-sex couple should cause any hiccups to the system. A marriage of three or more would be more difficult to accommodate -- how would we divide assets? Who would get survivor benefits? But I don't think that's an insurmountable obstacle.

I also think that the nature of a relationship between two people is different than one between three or more. I think the type of intimacy and trust is probably different (again, not better or worse, but different). But that's clearly no reason to ban polygamous marriage.

I know that, historically, polygamous marriages have lead to welfare fraud, child abuse, spousal abuse, etc. But we have laws already on the books to deal with that.

So, yeah. I have no problem with polygamous marriage. But I don't see us legalizing it any time soon, simply because the demand isn't there.

Here's a question for you, OP -- if the "two princes" preschool book is "aggressive," is a book about a prince and a princess an example of the aggressive heterosexual agenda?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm convinced it is a choice, but that societal pressures repress many from making that choice. So while I don't really care about it, I don't think we should provide civil, protected-class, type rights on something that is basically a choice.

And by "choice", what I mean is that there is some homo-hetero spectrum. Maybe less than 1% are on the extreme homo side where they are solely that way, and maybe 50% are solely hetero on the other side. But I think a good percentage, say 10-15% each, are close enough to the middle where they could honestly go either way based on circumstances in their upbringing and based on their life experiences.

Have you ever had a family member that is gay? Did you get to see them grow up? I have a gay family member. Let me tell you, I knew from the time he was 5 that he was going to be gay. For what it's worth, him and his straight brother were raised exactly the same. It's really not a choice and I can't believe people actually think that.