Only 32.61% has a spine
- Thread starter gumbo
- Start date
Otter
Nothing to see here
vraiblonde said:
Seems to me that folks would have the same trepidation with Bob and Ray's Daycare as they would Bob and Ray's GAY Daycare. Also, being gay and being a pedophile are not the same thing. Why is it that so many people seem to think that since someone is gay, that they are out to mess with a child??
Tonio
Asperger's Poster Child
Kerad said:
Kerad, that's a cheap shot and ultimately irrelevant. I don't believe the theory that homophobes are repressing their "true desires." Many gay activists make that claim, and it seem to me like they want a moral victory over the men who murdered Matthew Shepherd. "American Beauty" peddled that theory, which I think harmed the movie's ending.
Also, simply believing that homosexuality is wrong doesn't make someone a homophobe. We're all entitled to our beliefs when it comes to homosexuality, and whether it's right or wrong is a matter of personal belief. In my view, homophobia goes much farther, involving hatred and fear of gays, or promotion of that hatred and fear in others.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Gumbo...
...you actually think being attracted to the same sex is a mental illness? That it's wrong? After all this time, all we know about gays and their lifestyles and behaviors?
How do you feel about people who like jalapeños?
There's not a thing in the world wrong with Bill and Bobs Day care if Bill and Bob are good at it. The fact that sexual orientation is, to you, a qualification for fitness to do certain jobs is at once fascinating because of the assumption that heterosexual pedophiles would therefore, in your world, be qualified because they are at least not queer and at the same time educational because you are laying out the textbook definition of bigotry; one who judges others because of their differences from you, color, habits, desires, and not the content of their character. 'Gay' does not equal 'pedophile' any more than 'straight equals pedophile' although the VAST majority of pedophiles are...straight.
You are correct that sex, whom one chooses to engage in sex with, is a choice. Are you not completely missing the rest of that equation; preference?
Are you attracted to blonds? Brunettes? Red heads? Tall? Short? Passive? Aggressive? Do you like a woman who is your supporter and help mate in all things or maybe a woman who also has personal interests and things she'd like your support for? How about boobs? You an azz man? I hope you're sitting down because characteristics are matters of degree.
Ever hear of a tom-boy? Know any women who'd rather go to the fights than to the theater? How about guys who are just damn good at picking out patterns? Guys who don't like football? Know any male experts on what wine goes with which dish? What about some guys who tend to be much more introspective than...normal? How about a guy who is sensitive to the feelings of others? Nurturing? Does that make 'em fags or merely on the way to being, as you say, 'deformities'?
Have you ever engaged in sex, with a female, that is, well different from good old missionary? Does the word 'deviant' come to mind or is all that...normal?
The majority of females first sexual experience is what most people would classify as sexual abuse. It is just about done 100% by, not with, by a heterosexual male. Quite often, over 50% of the time, it is a family member. You ask the women, Gumbo, most of them have a male, straight family member who would be the LAST person they'd leave their children with.
As far as encouraging what you've deemed to be a choice, man, if you've given this much thought, maybe you might get someone to lend a hand because you're putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5. Do you have children? I've been encouraging my kids to like what I like all their lives. Guess what? No golfers. No guitar players. Guess that makes me a retard. One of the girls does have a rather decent hatred of the Dallas Cowboys, so, is that me? I think anyone who doesn't hate the Cowboys is a 'deformity'.
If my kids are gay it's because they are, not because of what I encouraged. "Please be straight, please be straight!" I'm alot more worried about character and education and well being than sexual preference.
Amazing? Yeah, but not how you meant.
Up until the 1930's there were signs in Lincoln Nebraska; "No Catholics allowed"
Familiar with the 'Red Scare'? Folks who, in the US, land of the free home of the brave, were spied on, intimidated and often arrested because of their interest in communism. Many had done absolutely nothing to subvert or harm the US. Those who had committed crimes, the Rosenburgs for instance, paid for it. A Bill or Bob who harms children should be punished. As well as a Bill and Barb.
In my home town, Laurel, there was a sign on the side of the road, for years as I am told, up until the late 60's, on the border between Laurel and Savage that said '######, don't let the sun set on you'.
Are you shouting color is not a choice? Well, not all 'black' people are the same color, not even close. How about olive skinned folks? Hell, us honky's got's us some who is whiter than others. A matter of degree perhaps? Now look at black people and the rainbow of behavior. I'd be proud to have Colin Powell as a family member. Not so much Al Sharpton.
Would you take your children to Bill and Bob, the straight liberal Democrats day care center? NOW we're talking some fruity ideas and actions! What about Thelma and Louises Day care? Is that OK because it is women? How about Monk day care, people who just don't have sex?
Gumbo, here's the bottom line;
Two men buggering one another breaks what laws of physics and nature? Adolescent monkeys try to pop each other all the time. Most perfectly straight human males first sexual experience is at the onset of puberty and is with another adolescent male. You show me yours, I'll show you mine. I am decidedly not gay. Many women have a first sexual encounter with another girl. Pretty normal, natural, wouldn't you say? There's tremendous sexual allusion in hazing rituals on sports teams and in the military. Fags, all?
That two gay people, men or women, and what they do in the bedroom bothers you is fine. That's your business. But, they are NOT violating YOUR rights behind THEIR door. Bill and Bob might well be the best day care providers on the planet but it won't be because they are gay. Or in spite of it.
Read a book "Now it's my Turn" by Mary Cheney. It might soften your fear of homosexuals a bit. Dick Cheney also has some lessons about people in there.
gumbo said:And for those of you spineless retards that can't acknowledge to difference between Right and Wrong on the gay marriage issue, I give you this.
And the reason I give you this is because peoples natural instincts of parenthood seems to always over ride mental retarded thoughts.
So here it is......
Bill and Bob's Gay Day Care Center.........
Isn't this amazing how the natural order of things just kicked in and how your true inner feelings made whats "RIGHT" prevail?
Is there going to be a lying mental reject that says "I would take my children there"?
Is there going to be an idiot to say ..It's OK for Gays to marry but draw the line at day care centers?
Who here wants to encourage your children to be gay?
The truth is even Gay's that have children are relieved to find out their children turned out to be normal. So why does society insist on excepting and engorging abnormal sexual behavior. ..(GAY VOTES)
Sex is an action! Sex is not a race of people.
Sex is the act of reproduction and or an act of pleasure.
So why is it that a group of people with sexual dysfunctions that can only pleasure their selves with the same sex has rights, like they are an ethnic group? (GAY VOTES).
Lets all re write the laws of physics, nature and our country so a group of sexual deformities can be happy.
...you actually think being attracted to the same sex is a mental illness? That it's wrong? After all this time, all we know about gays and their lifestyles and behaviors?
How do you feel about people who like jalapeños?
There's not a thing in the world wrong with Bill and Bobs Day care if Bill and Bob are good at it. The fact that sexual orientation is, to you, a qualification for fitness to do certain jobs is at once fascinating because of the assumption that heterosexual pedophiles would therefore, in your world, be qualified because they are at least not queer and at the same time educational because you are laying out the textbook definition of bigotry; one who judges others because of their differences from you, color, habits, desires, and not the content of their character. 'Gay' does not equal 'pedophile' any more than 'straight equals pedophile' although the VAST majority of pedophiles are...straight.
You are correct that sex, whom one chooses to engage in sex with, is a choice. Are you not completely missing the rest of that equation; preference?
Are you attracted to blonds? Brunettes? Red heads? Tall? Short? Passive? Aggressive? Do you like a woman who is your supporter and help mate in all things or maybe a woman who also has personal interests and things she'd like your support for? How about boobs? You an azz man? I hope you're sitting down because characteristics are matters of degree.
Ever hear of a tom-boy? Know any women who'd rather go to the fights than to the theater? How about guys who are just damn good at picking out patterns? Guys who don't like football? Know any male experts on what wine goes with which dish? What about some guys who tend to be much more introspective than...normal? How about a guy who is sensitive to the feelings of others? Nurturing? Does that make 'em fags or merely on the way to being, as you say, 'deformities'?
Have you ever engaged in sex, with a female, that is, well different from good old missionary? Does the word 'deviant' come to mind or is all that...normal?
The majority of females first sexual experience is what most people would classify as sexual abuse. It is just about done 100% by, not with, by a heterosexual male. Quite often, over 50% of the time, it is a family member. You ask the women, Gumbo, most of them have a male, straight family member who would be the LAST person they'd leave their children with.
As far as encouraging what you've deemed to be a choice, man, if you've given this much thought, maybe you might get someone to lend a hand because you're putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5. Do you have children? I've been encouraging my kids to like what I like all their lives. Guess what? No golfers. No guitar players. Guess that makes me a retard. One of the girls does have a rather decent hatred of the Dallas Cowboys, so, is that me? I think anyone who doesn't hate the Cowboys is a 'deformity'.
If my kids are gay it's because they are, not because of what I encouraged. "Please be straight, please be straight!" I'm alot more worried about character and education and well being than sexual preference.
Amazing? Yeah, but not how you meant.
Up until the 1930's there were signs in Lincoln Nebraska; "No Catholics allowed"
Familiar with the 'Red Scare'? Folks who, in the US, land of the free home of the brave, were spied on, intimidated and often arrested because of their interest in communism. Many had done absolutely nothing to subvert or harm the US. Those who had committed crimes, the Rosenburgs for instance, paid for it. A Bill or Bob who harms children should be punished. As well as a Bill and Barb.
In my home town, Laurel, there was a sign on the side of the road, for years as I am told, up until the late 60's, on the border between Laurel and Savage that said '######, don't let the sun set on you'.
Are you shouting color is not a choice? Well, not all 'black' people are the same color, not even close. How about olive skinned folks? Hell, us honky's got's us some who is whiter than others. A matter of degree perhaps? Now look at black people and the rainbow of behavior. I'd be proud to have Colin Powell as a family member. Not so much Al Sharpton.
Would you take your children to Bill and Bob, the straight liberal Democrats day care center? NOW we're talking some fruity ideas and actions! What about Thelma and Louises Day care? Is that OK because it is women? How about Monk day care, people who just don't have sex?
Gumbo, here's the bottom line;
Two men buggering one another breaks what laws of physics and nature? Adolescent monkeys try to pop each other all the time. Most perfectly straight human males first sexual experience is at the onset of puberty and is with another adolescent male. You show me yours, I'll show you mine. I am decidedly not gay. Many women have a first sexual encounter with another girl. Pretty normal, natural, wouldn't you say? There's tremendous sexual allusion in hazing rituals on sports teams and in the military. Fags, all?
That two gay people, men or women, and what they do in the bedroom bothers you is fine. That's your business. But, they are NOT violating YOUR rights behind THEIR door. Bill and Bob might well be the best day care providers on the planet but it won't be because they are gay. Or in spite of it.
Read a book "Now it's my Turn" by Mary Cheney. It might soften your fear of homosexuals a bit. Dick Cheney also has some lessons about people in there.
What's interesting is that these pedophile accusations are typically directed at gay guys - lesbians don't seem to get slapped with that. Notice Gumbo didn't say "Jane and Lisa's Lesbo Daycare"?otter said:
And while we're on the subject, straight men will rent porn that includes two females having sex with each other, but there's no way in hell they'd rent a movie with two guys getting it on. AND men also tend to be significantly more homophobic than women - it's rare to see a woman getting all uptight about gays in her midst.
Even homophobic Gumbo - I'll bet you $10 that he's gotten all excited about female-on-female action. That's the first thing most guys say when confronted with a pair of lesbians - "Can I watch?" It's so common it's cliche.
Just an interesting observation.
Hessian
Well-Known Member
Larry...
That was a very long response...and I think this could be hashed out better in conversation at Applebee's rather than huge copy-paste-counter...posting.
However...in response to a well reasoned post...I will counter with a few thoughts:
**Through the 1970's...it was considered a mental illness. (but you knew that). As we become more "enlightened" and PC...doesn't that seem odd?
We cheer our tolerance while accepting a far more risky (health-wise) behavior.
*Does Aids mutate? Yes?
*Have we found a cure for it? No.
*Who is the overwelming spreader? Gays.
*Are gays likely to carry a higher ratio of communicable and dangerous diseases? Yes.
*Are Gays far more likely to have multiple partners and thus spread diseases faster? Yes.
*Do preventative measures (ie safe sex) have a 100% rating? No.
Do Gays target youth with "awareness programs" to encourage young prospects to be proud of their decision? Yes-it is in California state curriculum.
*Can you guarrantee that once Gays establish their protection and rights in law...that this is not the first step to further "enlightened" legislation? No.
*Do Gays push their civil rights legislation as furthering the Black civil rights movement? Of course despite loud denunciations from ML King's daughter and others.
I will say it: The movement, the "enlightenment", the tolerance....is full of deception, outright lies, and is certainly not "GAY" in the original meaning of the word. (yet another misnomer that they appropriated)
The US government is WRONG not to publish stats and condemn homosexual behavior because it is a threat to public health and a burdening cost to our medical community. Treatment of other infectious diseases has been forced to take a back seat due to the demands of the Gay lobby. That is vicious self promotion.
It is evil....and I will never back down in the face of its threat.
That was a very long response...and I think this could be hashed out better in conversation at Applebee's rather than huge copy-paste-counter...posting.
However...in response to a well reasoned post...I will counter with a few thoughts:
**Through the 1970's...it was considered a mental illness. (but you knew that). As we become more "enlightened" and PC...doesn't that seem odd?
We cheer our tolerance while accepting a far more risky (health-wise) behavior.
*Does Aids mutate? Yes?
*Have we found a cure for it? No.
*Who is the overwelming spreader? Gays.
*Are gays likely to carry a higher ratio of communicable and dangerous diseases? Yes.
*Are Gays far more likely to have multiple partners and thus spread diseases faster? Yes.
*Do preventative measures (ie safe sex) have a 100% rating? No.
Do Gays target youth with "awareness programs" to encourage young prospects to be proud of their decision? Yes-it is in California state curriculum.
*Can you guarrantee that once Gays establish their protection and rights in law...that this is not the first step to further "enlightened" legislation? No.
*Do Gays push their civil rights legislation as furthering the Black civil rights movement? Of course despite loud denunciations from ML King's daughter and others.
I will say it: The movement, the "enlightenment", the tolerance....is full of deception, outright lies, and is certainly not "GAY" in the original meaning of the word. (yet another misnomer that they appropriated)
The US government is WRONG not to publish stats and condemn homosexual behavior because it is a threat to public health and a burdening cost to our medical community. Treatment of other infectious diseases has been forced to take a back seat due to the demands of the Gay lobby. That is vicious self promotion.
It is evil....and I will never back down in the face of its threat.
Tonio
Asperger's Poster Child
vraiblonde said:
Why do you suppose that is? Remember when Terrell Owens accused Jeff Garcia of being in the closet? You don't hear, say, Mia Hamm doing the same thing to Brandi Chastain. That's very common among men, not just pro athletes.
vraiblonde said:
I think it's obvious - they just want to see the action without some guy's hairy azz hogging the camera. They probably feel the same way about action where a woman is alone stirring the soup. I've never seen any hardcore videos.
Hessian
Well-Known Member
Interesting question...BL
One would assume that marriage would thus cut partners and improve the health of the "couple."
However... if partners were used to multiple encounters before and want to "settle down"...they bring their host of pathogens with them. And the conditioning to seek new adventures will be very hard to beat.
Add to that the many gays enjoy a higher income (according to recent stats)...that causes divorce lawyers to snicker as they contemplate the thousands of ugly divorces that will now involve their talents.
If Heterosexual marriages are facing over 50% divorce...care to speculate what the homosexual rate will be?...
....interesting.
One would assume that marriage would thus cut partners and improve the health of the "couple."
However... if partners were used to multiple encounters before and want to "settle down"...they bring their host of pathogens with them. And the conditioning to seek new adventures will be very hard to beat.
Add to that the many gays enjoy a higher income (according to recent stats)...that causes divorce lawyers to snicker as they contemplate the thousands of ugly divorces that will now involve their talents.
If Heterosexual marriages are facing over 50% divorce...care to speculate what the homosexual rate will be?...
....interesting.
Hessian, I know more hetero couples who seek sex outside the marriage than gays who step out on their partner. So the same (your statement quoted above) can be said of male/female couples as well.Hessian said:
Hessian
Well-Known Member
Vrai....and BL...
Vrai:...
Is it possible that you know 4 gay couples and 40 heterocouples and thus your "sampling" may be skewed?...just wondering.
BL: I have not looked for any studies & stats on singles and "encounters."
Naturally Hollywood is screwed up so I would never look to their relationships as being normative.
However If you were to dig a little, you would find that the majority of homosexuals have typically dozens of sexual encounters with dozens of partners and this is the conditioning I was referencing.
That behavior can be found in the hetero community but only among a small precentage. They set up their "permanent" union for failure because of a reputation of swinging.
Vrai:...
Is it possible that you know 4 gay couples and 40 heterocouples and thus your "sampling" may be skewed?...just wondering.
BL: I have not looked for any studies & stats on singles and "encounters."
Naturally Hollywood is screwed up so I would never look to their relationships as being normative.
However If you were to dig a little, you would find that the majority of homosexuals have typically dozens of sexual encounters with dozens of partners and this is the conditioning I was referencing.
That behavior can be found in the hetero community but only among a small precentage. They set up their "permanent" union for failure because of a reputation of swinging.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I agree...
...and I look forward to the day plus I got the first round!
In the mean time, homosexuality served no purpose for society in a day and time when survival was the main goal and having more kids to facilitate this was the main goal.
We can call homosexuality a mental illness all we want but, in and of itself for two consenting adults, it should be, in my opinion, a private matter. Homosexuality is nothing new under the sun. It is, in the broader context, odd, queer, unusual. That doesn't make it an illness. I know too many people who are just fine that I could no more call mentally ill than I could myself. Save the jokes out there. The Mary Cheney book is a fabulous tale of father and daughter on the political trail. She ain't mentally ill.
Modern western society does not hold as dear as maybe we could or even should the old ways which served us, frankly, so well in order to survive and prosper. That said, being gay is not new and is not an illness. It's a sexual preference and if my heart specialist or Arabic translator or CPA is as queer as it gets AND is an expert in their field, don't we have room for that in our world? No one is forced to use their services.
AID's is clearly a public health issue and I think the way it has been handled is horrible. It has NOT been treated like a public health issue. It has been treated like a political issue and I think it has done nothing but hurt us all in the long run. It must be treated for what it is; a health issue and I agree, in the first world it is very much a gay issue. Globally, it ain't even close; it is an heterosexual issue. Our cases are a drop in a horrible bucket compared to Africa. They are killing themselves, wholesale, with mindsets based on stubborness and illogic.
"Straight' venereal, sexually transmitted disease ain't much of a picnic either. At least they are treated for what they are; public health issues. This is VERY much a failing on the part of the gay community.
I agree for gays to couch their arguments in the vernacular of black civil right or even female struggles is a stretch. There is little legitimate similarity. However, that does not invalidate concerns, just reduce the intensity and position on the totem pole of public issue importance.
What else are gays after, do you fear, once achieving a protected right to public sanctioned marriage? Job preference? Tax breaks for gays? An extra chicken in the pot? Free lube?
An equal right to marriage is, to me, one of equality, not advantage such as affirmative action and it's remedial impulses.
I agree with this wholeheartedly EXCEPT I do not and will not view the fight for the right to public sanctioned union as vicious or evil.
Hessian said:
...and I look forward to the day plus I got the first round!
In the mean time, homosexuality served no purpose for society in a day and time when survival was the main goal and having more kids to facilitate this was the main goal.
We can call homosexuality a mental illness all we want but, in and of itself for two consenting adults, it should be, in my opinion, a private matter. Homosexuality is nothing new under the sun. It is, in the broader context, odd, queer, unusual. That doesn't make it an illness. I know too many people who are just fine that I could no more call mentally ill than I could myself. Save the jokes out there. The Mary Cheney book is a fabulous tale of father and daughter on the political trail. She ain't mentally ill.
Modern western society does not hold as dear as maybe we could or even should the old ways which served us, frankly, so well in order to survive and prosper. That said, being gay is not new and is not an illness. It's a sexual preference and if my heart specialist or Arabic translator or CPA is as queer as it gets AND is an expert in their field, don't we have room for that in our world? No one is forced to use their services.
AID's is clearly a public health issue and I think the way it has been handled is horrible. It has NOT been treated like a public health issue. It has been treated like a political issue and I think it has done nothing but hurt us all in the long run. It must be treated for what it is; a health issue and I agree, in the first world it is very much a gay issue. Globally, it ain't even close; it is an heterosexual issue. Our cases are a drop in a horrible bucket compared to Africa. They are killing themselves, wholesale, with mindsets based on stubborness and illogic.
"Straight' venereal, sexually transmitted disease ain't much of a picnic either. At least they are treated for what they are; public health issues. This is VERY much a failing on the part of the gay community.
I agree for gays to couch their arguments in the vernacular of black civil right or even female struggles is a stretch. There is little legitimate similarity. However, that does not invalidate concerns, just reduce the intensity and position on the totem pole of public issue importance.
What else are gays after, do you fear, once achieving a protected right to public sanctioned marriage? Job preference? Tax breaks for gays? An extra chicken in the pot? Free lube?
An equal right to marriage is, to me, one of equality, not advantage such as affirmative action and it's remedial impulses.
I agree with this wholeheartedly EXCEPT I do not and will not view the fight for the right to public sanctioned union as vicious or evil.
BuddyLee
Football addict
Of course we don't really know for sure...yet.Hessian said:
However, what if that's the problem. If you cannot marry, have multiple benefits, and so on doesn't the relationship go down another level? Sure the feelings may be there but it's assuredly tougher on the relationship causing more stress on that relationship. I don't think anyone can say for sure but I don't think marriage would create more swinging. If anything, it might help and quite possibly in the long run stop some of the spreading of various diseases.
Tonio
Asperger's Poster Child
Larry Gude said:
Larry, not only did I agree with your post, I got a Beavis-and-Butthead-guilty-pleasure chuckle out of your double entendres.
On a serious note, some time ago I read Randy Shilts' "And the Band Played On" and I was saddened and outraged by the self-serving actions of almost everyone involved. Not just the gay activists who treated AIDS as a political issue, as you rightly pointed out. There were also people like Patient Zero, who would have otherwise been a sad, pitiful case of nihilism and fatalism. There was Dr. Gallo, who cared only about making headlines for himself. There were the public officials who faced pressure from both the gay activists and the religious activists, and didn't have the stones to stand up to both sides and give AIDS the proper treatment as a public health issue.
Hessian
Well-Known Member
Next time I'm on the 70 in Frederick....
I'll take you up on the offer as long as I buy the appetizer.
You know....it truly appears that
a) going to a more conservative lifestyle in this country is: impossible
b) adapting to new a moral standard is fraught with ugly outcomes.
c) the struggle to determine the course will be in the hands of those with the most $$, most press coverage, and most PC.
(Larry, please avoid the use of the adj. "Fabulous"...it has been co-opted by the gay community
)
Regarding that global consequences...you are 100% on.
"Our cases are a drop in a horrible bucket compared to Africa. They are killing themselves, wholesale, with mindsets based on stubborness and illogic. "
I recall your wife scathingly attacking the Bush adm. for its billions of $$ headed there...with doubtful affects.
So...what would you say is the reason why we seem to have a "lid" on it here? Education? Safe sex materials? Clinics? Billions spent on medicine? ...or a general awareness of the ugly outcome of HIV?
You ask what do I see as the outcome of their push for recognition & rights. It will build a foundation to attack Boy scouts...Churches, Private schools...the military...and school curriculum.
Do you like the way Jesse Jackson uses his "rainbow" as a club to beat up corporations and get generous donations and concessions? Gays have already been taking notes and started to apply heavy pressure on businesses in the same way---that is just part of the outcome.
Museum & monument on the Mall to the great Civil rights campaign for gay rights???? I wouldn't put it past them. Memorial for the heroes of the Haight -Asbury Riots in the 70's? hmmm?
BL...your chicken-egg argument IS worth considering....
IF marriage were allowed....would that naturally reduce spreading of pathogens and improve health.....
I'll give you bonus points on that view,...interesting.
I'll take you up on the offer as long as I buy the appetizer.
You know....it truly appears that
a) going to a more conservative lifestyle in this country is: impossible
b) adapting to new a moral standard is fraught with ugly outcomes.
c) the struggle to determine the course will be in the hands of those with the most $$, most press coverage, and most PC.
(Larry, please avoid the use of the adj. "Fabulous"...it has been co-opted by the gay community
)Regarding that global consequences...you are 100% on.
"Our cases are a drop in a horrible bucket compared to Africa. They are killing themselves, wholesale, with mindsets based on stubborness and illogic. "
I recall your wife scathingly attacking the Bush adm. for its billions of $$ headed there...with doubtful affects.
So...what would you say is the reason why we seem to have a "lid" on it here? Education? Safe sex materials? Clinics? Billions spent on medicine? ...or a general awareness of the ugly outcome of HIV?
You ask what do I see as the outcome of their push for recognition & rights. It will build a foundation to attack Boy scouts...Churches, Private schools...the military...and school curriculum.
Do you like the way Jesse Jackson uses his "rainbow" as a club to beat up corporations and get generous donations and concessions? Gays have already been taking notes and started to apply heavy pressure on businesses in the same way---that is just part of the outcome.
Museum & monument on the Mall to the great Civil rights campaign for gay rights???? I wouldn't put it past them. Memorial for the heroes of the Haight -Asbury Riots in the 70's? hmmm?
BL...your chicken-egg argument IS worth considering....
IF marriage were allowed....would that naturally reduce spreading of pathogens and improve health.....
I'll give you bonus points on that view,...interesting.
gumbo
FIGHT CLUB !
If your exposed to something wrong long enough, your sense's become numb to what its right.
The prostitute feels something is wrong when she first starts committing the acts of prostitution, soon after, she starts justifying her action to herself and others.
If incest is common enough practice in an area. The people who live there will turn a blind eye to that too.
The fact that you don't see anything wrong with Homos getting married because of your over exposer to it doesn't make it right.
My opinion psychological damage has occurred when ever someone quits being able to distinguish the difference between right and wrong.
It's only natural for Beerwenchs subconscious to link male homosexuality to being a pedophile. A sexual dysfunction is a sexual dysfunction.
The prostitute feels something is wrong when she first starts committing the acts of prostitution, soon after, she starts justifying her action to herself and others.
If incest is common enough practice in an area. The people who live there will turn a blind eye to that too.
The fact that you don't see anything wrong with Homos getting married because of your over exposer to it doesn't make it right.
My opinion psychological damage has occurred when ever someone quits being able to distinguish the difference between right and wrong.
It's only natural for Beerwenchs subconscious to link male homosexuality to being a pedophile. A sexual dysfunction is a sexual dysfunction.
Last edited: