I suppose, if it discissed the homosexuality of george bush

[Edited on 15-7-2003 by All Seeing Eye]

I believe you are uneducated about the chemistry of a gay person. Do you ever ask yourself why they are BORN that way????

You seem to think they aquired that lifestyle through being around other gay people. Well its not an influenced life style. There are people that dont want to be who they are because people like you in society "dont think its right" for them to be gay.

TAKE THE STICKS OUT OF YOUR ASSES AND LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE.

count chromosomes.

everyone has the right to be with who they choose to be with and when society sets "standards" for what "they" think is normal......it makes me frikkin sick.

there is nothing more beautiful than being in love, why mess with that?

Gays have equal rights but they don't deserve them.

I'll give Hitler props for that one man, they are annoying.
I wish the gays would just leave. It's not an alternative lifestyle, it's not a religion, hell, it's not even a cult.
What part of the Constitition protects them?

Tassadar still protesting the lil' f*ckers!

What if people like you HATE Muslims?Or Hate Blacks?Or Hate Jews?Is that your solution?Just get rid of em'all?Just have em' leave?The what? Get rid of anyone else who doens't fit your views?America is a country that celbrates diversity,yet you seem to hate that.No has answered my question, why do YOU care if a man wishes to marry another man?Why do YOUare what goes on in a gay man's house?How is this hurting you?

This has nothing to do with Political Scandalism, I'm moving it to chit chat.

I'm against gay marriage since they don't need it. They can legaly live in the same home with their lover,and don't need marriage. I don't think the dictionary needs to be re-defined for gays,thats just more political correctness taking over our lives. I think gays are immoral but I don't hate them. "Hate the sin,love the sinner". I can frankly care less what they do, long as they don't hit on me or bring me into their lives. Ii don't want to know how you have sex, I don't care just leave me and my family out of it.

Even though I do not agree with you on many political issues,you come across as someone who's very fair & means well.I don't sense the anger or hatered in your posts that I do in others.

Point I'm trying to make is same sex partners should have the same rights as married couples.If one gets sick the Hospital won't allow the other to visit,only family members.A husband or wife is considered family but a same sex partner is not(yet)A same sex partner can not get the same benefits as a married couple.

I just wish some who are against gay marriages would consider why they are above everyone else. Why same sex partners DON'T deserve the same.They are US citizens who pay taxes,fight in our military, work & contribute to society just like everyone else.To hate someone for whom they choose to engage in sex with is just wrong!How can someone hate someone for loving another?Theres so much more to people than who they have sex with.Its sad so many can't see beyond their own prejudices.

Isnt Marrage about family and having children? That kinda leaves gays out.

Is a marriage between 2 hetero couples who choose NOT to have children really a marriage then?

Uh, why do you care? If a gay couple get married, does this somehow affect you? Are you going to somehow be hurt in anyway if they marry?

Also, what if a hetro couple marry, but know they can't have kids due to one being infertile? Should they be not allowed to marry since they can't have kids?

This was discussed in religon forum. Helen kept saying gay sex a sin since no kids are being created, just for pleasure. So I asked her what will she do when she hits menopause and can no longer have kids? Will she never have sex again? No reply to that, just more pleasure a sin, so gay sex a sin.

Or other one, back to being infertile. If the guy or girl were infertile, should they never have sex since it would just be for pleasure and according to helen who says she speaks for the bible, a sin. But, why is pleasure a sin? Because it is fun and good? Can't have that. Ban games, ban fun, ban amusement parks, baseball, football, fishing, for it is fun and gives you pleasure. That doesn't make sense, but according to helen, it is a sin to have fun and feel pleasure.

Besides, if evryone was gay or a lesbian, we would get rid of the overcrowding problem. But that will never happen, so don't use it as an arguement. Use something reasonable. Heck, someplaces will be all gay if they want to have pleasure, like China. Why? All men, the girls were killed since not as valuable as men, so only men left. They have killed themselves.

But still, I want to know what is so bad about two guys or girls getting married? What, alone they are peaceful, but the second they get married they grow fangs and claws and breath acid and kill people? I don't understand that.

I'm going to agree here with everything James has just said, seeing as he beat me to it

Has it gone back to the point that marriage is only for christian heterosexuals who will have children? Leaving the rest of us (including myself - a no christian straight female who doesn't particularly want children) unable to marry?

There are marriage services for the non religious - those of us who really don't care if our union is condoned by God, but who just wish to form a public, legally protecting and long lasting bond with the person we love. So some of those people happen to be gay - big deal - thats their business behind closed bedroom doors, just like the rest of us with our sexual preferences. Whatever next - no marriage for sado masiochists, dominatrixes and straight men who enjoy sodomising their wives?! Those practices aren't to everyone's tastes either but do we ban people who do it from getting married?

I think if two people care enough for each other, intend to spend the rest of their lives together and can make each other happy in this screwed up world, then good luck to them

Either that or we remove all differences (legal protection, hereditary rights etc )between married people and co-habitants

I second that! Totally agree!!!

1) The question isn't if Gay people should be Gay.

I'm not saying deny them rights, deny them freedom of expression or (politically and religious is how this applies in the constitution), nor freedom to own property.

I'm saying they do not have the freedom to marry, that is a communal decision and should the community not grant them that "priviledge" than the Supreme Court shall not force it.

I'm sorry Romantico but you have a lot to learn about Nevada if you think that.

So in conclusion there's no point arguing about "it's in the genes" which it isn't for many gays, just many others.

This is about 2 main things, definition of "Marriage" which is man and woman, and about popular decision being upheld.

The few liberals who are stalwartly for "gay marriages" always seem to be the ones to make it a "They can't change who they are" issue.

That's not the issue.

Again I'll say, based on the definition of Marriage alone, you can not have "Gay" marriages.

Finally, if a community does not want gays to marry they should not have to put up with it.

when the grays stop messing with our DNA, at night, there wont be anymore gays, and we wont have to worry about the entire subject.............

FM, you are using the definition of marrige? HAHAHA!!!!

Hello! Wake up people, punk means gay prostitute, yet you say someone is a punk nowadays for listening to punk rock. Why? Usage changes the meaning.

Death use to mean no coming back, yet today you can be dead for a long time and get shocked back to life by doctors.

Gay use to mean happy, but due to usage, now means same sex relationship.

Sorry, but definitions change.

Also FM, why shouldn't gays be allowed to marry? Or better one, why should hetero's be allowed to marry when over 50% end up in divorce? How many gay/lesbian divorces do you hear of? None. Yet more than half the straight marriges have ended in divorce. I find that freaking funny!

Originally posted by romantico

1) Gays can adopt.

2) Is a marriage between 2 hetero couples who choose NOT to have children really a marriage then?

1)

2) Yes, because at least, they can still change their minds.

You can thumbs down it all you want! I see you have no answer for why heteo couples who choose NOT to have kids who are still married! Thank God the world is more tolerant of gays than some of these hatemongers!

Romantico, I didn't write that I was hating them. I just wrote that I was against the idea that gay can adopt kids.

And for the point 2, I gave you an answer I think.

It's alright UP, they just think that "Tollerance" means tollerate every peice of crap that comes their way.

A pathetic existance really...

Why shouldn't Gays marry? It's not cultural nor natural.

Culturally Marriage is a "sacred bond" between man and woman, it should not be so easily broken as Democrats and Liberals have made it today.

(In 1860 you could count the number of Divorces in the world on your fingers)

Naturally, homosexuals can not breed, thus are not meant to HAVE families, because we as Humans are meant to raise a family of our own, not to take another family.

This also fits in with culture where we are not a "Baby-sitting culture" we are a "family unit culture".

Since Gays can neither have kids, nor provide kids with both a Mother and Father, they shall not marry.

Well, do kids of divorced marriges have mommy and daddy? Most don't, just mommy.

Also, you never answered my qquestion, just went around it. Why should hetero couples marry? More than half break up, yet never heard of a divorced gay or lesbian.

Also, cultural? What cultur? Northern? Western? Eastern? Southern? Midwest culture or Detroit culture? Bible belt(south) culture? Or advanced culture? Rich folk(New England) culture or middle wage culture? Who's culture are you basing this on? Christian? Well, then don't eat meat, don't have fun, don't think, be a sheep, now!!!!