Gay marriage is not a 'human right': European ruling torpedoes Coalition stance

Originally posted by WatchRider
The 'queering agenda' at least is finally put on the shelf away from the winds of influence.
This at least should put the whole thing in the closet where it belongs.
I don't like nor hate the whole gay thing.
And you can't tell me the sodomite acts they indulge in in any way normal, that's why they get the whole stigma and controversy.

If you think heterosexuals never perform sodomy, you are very naive. How come heterosexuals don't get the whole stigma and controversy?

I love it when people bash gays, and then in the same breath, say they don't hate gays. I wouldn't want to hear you talk about something you really hate!

reply to post by Decronite

You really are a total nut case thinking what you do about Homosexuals. Your opinions I find are both beyond ignorant and therefore hateful (based on your ignorance).

Think about what you are accusing this guy of, and hold onto that thought for a moment while you read:

I hope one day if you ever have children that they are gay, I pray In the name of Jesus this happens to you - and I mean it! You are a disgrace in the sight and presence of God.

Sounds kind of hateful, no? You are evoking divinity in the hopes of causing someone else duress.

Even more so, you claim to call that person a disgrace to God, yet have clearly taken Jesus' name in vain to satisfy a personal vendetta.

Being self-righteous is what leads you down a path that ends with you, and you alone. We are not intended to exist alone. That is what is known as hell.

You can't pray it away! I did that myself for years, and I was once VERY devout, and it has done untold damage to myself and my relationships. One of the men that was involved in this I have to say was (and still is) is an excellent Bible Scholar, but is now a transsexual.

The mechanics of the mind are a very interesting thing. Behavioral Cognitive Therapy has been able to induce a number of brain structure changes detectable through FMRI.

Thus, I'm not quite convinced of the whole "born this way" argument.

That said, it's not my place to determine whether or not someone should attempt to undergo therapy of any kind to alter their sexual preference/orientation/whatever.

However, I have found that many who proclaim to be homosexuals in the teen and young adult group are doing it mostly for attention. They attempt to prove to others that they are homosexuals and simply end up annoying the piss out of everyone but horny school girls too hormonally tantric to apply reason.

Thus, it is still my belief that most homosexual relationships are a disservice to both parties involved, as they could be in a much better relationship with an appropriate member of the opposite sex (that's not to say any member of the opposite sex is better than a supportive member of the same sex).

But, there again - heterosexual relationships are often undertaken on similarly flawed or destructive principles by my own measure. So it would be a considerable double-standard on my part to desire to "crack down" on homosexuality while not similarly "cracking down" on flawed relationships of any sort.

Welcome to reality...

I like to think I've a lot in common with a certain Mad March Hare.

Originally posted by moonzoo7
You can hate me for what I am because you feel personally threatened by my existence.

I'm not personally threatened by your existence. I just really wish that some of you would shut the hell up for a few minutes, so that we could focus on more important things. The war between you people and the Christians is really starting to become tedious. I'm also sick of gays having a persecution complex that rivals the one held by the Israeli government, and the amount that they want to modify the legal system as a result.

Learn to ignore them, for God's sake; or just tell them to shut up, and then go back to what you were doing. Gays are not the only people who Christians accuse of being Satanic, or claim are going to Hell. They do it to many of the rest of us as well; but because at least a few of us are emotionally stable adults, we've managed to get to the point where it doesn't upset us any more.

As far as I am concerned, a person literally can't be Christian without being mentally ill. They are sick people, and as a result, if they abuse you, their opinion should not be considered authoritative. If someone who you knew was schizophrenic started screaming at you, would you allow that to offend you?

Please grow up.

Learn to ignore them, for God's sake; or just tell them to shut up, and then go back to what you were doing. Gays are not the only people who Christians accuse of being Satanic, or claim are going to Hell.

Appreciate your point but ... When was the last time a Christian wrote a petition to have you removed from your job, picketed your funeral or raised the homicide/ suicide rate of your culture/race/tennis club? Just because you don't witness discrimination doesn't mean it doesn't exist it just means you're not seeing it.

And imo Christians are only a part of it.

Originally posted by Pinke
Appreciate your point but ... When was the last time a Christian wrote a petition to have you removed from your job

Christians being able to do things like this, are one of the reasons why I've never really been a member of mainstream society at all; and that includes having employment. Part of how I deal with it is by staying away from them, but I only really need to do that for the political side of it. The psychological/verbal stuff is relatively easy at this point...although I admit that it took me a while.

Gays really need to stop thinking that they have problems that nobody else in the population does. You don't.

reply to post by Aim64C


As a young adult, attention seeking behaviour is actually quite normal, especially when going through puberty, and is not just the reserve of the Homosexual community. I had to grow up with heterosexual sex/relationships being rammed down my throat in the media as I grew up, and when I look back on that time of my life, when I came out at the age of 18, I was glad to discuss my sexuality, and YES even shock people around me with it. Why? Because when you have no role models in the media, and your sexuality is damned by the Church (of which I was a member), when you finally realise that you are actually okay, and that all your friends and family are not going to abandon you, psychologically its like releasing a catapult that has been held back for years, and so BAM! That is why homosexuals are more vocal about their sexuality whenever they come out. It is merely a consequence of religious/societal suppression, the Church and society have reaped that, out of what they have sown, and still continue to sow. I have noticed that this behaviour in this generation of homosexuals is greatly reduced here in the UK, as there is more support, and there are homosexual identities in the media that young adults, and yes even children can identify with - sexuality doesn't just suddenly develop at puberty.

As for wishing gay children on a Christian is not hateful (yes I was angry), but also a very real desire for this to happen, so that you might open your eyes and heart to the fact that most homosexuals have parents, and its sometimes difficult for all involved, and should this ever happen to you, believe me all the CBT in the world can't change sexuality - I've been there and done it - living proof, as have many others.

How many times have you prayed against homosexuals or perhaps gone to demonstrations? Isn't that hate?

In one breath you say "The mechanics of the mind are a very interesting thing. Behavioral Cognitive Therapy has been able to induce a number of brain structure changes detectable through FMRI. ", and in the next breath, "That said, it's not my place to determine whether or not someone should attempt to undergo therapy of any kind to alter their sexual preference/orientation/whatever.", that is both being a and a condescending human being and a double standard.

As for "Thus, it is still my belief that most homosexual relationships are a disservice to both parties involved, as they could be in a much better relationship with an appropriate member of the opposite sex", again is massively condescending. I can but imagine how you would feel if the opposite of that was said to you!

Finally, you actually have a reasonable argument here, and with this I can certainly agree - "But, there again - heterosexual relationships are often undertaken on similarly flawed or destructive principles by my own measure. So it would be a considerable double-standard on my part to desire to "crack down" on homosexuality while not similarly "cracking down" on flawed relationships of any sort.But, there again - heterosexual relationships are often undertaken on similarly flawed or destructive principles by my own measure."

But then of course you ruin that with, "So it would be a considerable double-standard on my part to desire to "crack down" on homosexuality while not similarly "cracking down" on flawed relationships of any sort." - which is exactly what you have done.

How can you expect to be taken seriously, when in essence you are simply being condescending in your tone, with veiled attacks, without any real factual experience? Everything I have said is true by my own experience. If you were gay, you would certainly NOT find being gay a disservice! If I said the same about heterosexual relationships, we both know what your answer would be.

reply to post by petrus4


I take it Petrus that you are not gay, therefore saying that homosexuals suffer from persecution complexes is for me and many other gay people (especially men) is very much a reality that sadly shouldn't be there. But because of the society we have grown up in, it would be a bloody miracle if it wasn't there.

Also having grown up in the Church, many Christians also suffer from a persecution complex as well.

Just be glad you don't have one to contend with, you know, like being burned at the stake, and then people trivialising that.

I really do like the fact that you say that gay people should just get on with it in terms of having their own civil ceremonies - I mean whats to stop us? Plus we don't get screwed in court when it all goes wrong.

It just really infuriates me (and anyone else on any website) when people discuss topics that don't affect them in any way, or have no experience of and therefore speak out of ignorance, with a couldn't care less attitude.

Isn't this what this website is about??? Addressing ignorance? People discussing real experience, or theories in context?

I also have to say that relating Christians or homosexuals to Schizophrenics? (well yes I can somewhat see your sarcastic humour there) but really shows how much you care or know of any of these three sections of society.

For example, in England there was a time a while back that the public was insisting that all schizophrenics should be slammed up, because they believed that schizophrenics are all axe wielding maniacs! Schizophrenics really don't care much about what the public thinks, because people generally ignore them, and that more often that not suits them fine. But as soon as they are singled out as axe wielding maniacs, its personal.

This is why Gays and Christians are so at odds, because both strongly feel and know how they feel towards each other. When people see such things from being outside of the equation, its easy to come out with easy lame assumptions.

Sexuality is very much at the core of who we all are as homosexuals, it shouldn't be, but the only reason it is, is because society has suppressed it, so that when homosexual people come to terms with it, it is the biggest, unexplored territory that must be explored, and even then is somewhat often damaged through years of neglect.

Imagine living in a house all your life, and there was one room that was always locked, and then one day, you finally get access to that room, and it happens to be a bedroom. You had spent all your life sleeping on the sofa, not knowing any different, apart from the fact that other people all your life talk about having a bedroom, it sounds like a most wonderful place, especially as there is this weird social code that you are not supposed to talk about what you do in it, but you have never been there or ever seen anyone else's, but they are allowed to see each others bedrooms.

Which part of your house would you talk about the most?

How terrifying would it be to find out that what you do in the bedroom is not really what most other people talk about what they do in the bedroom? And you have long suspected there are others like you that are not really allowed to talk about what they do in their bedroom, and were always hushed in your company, and you realise that you are one of THEM.

I hope this illustrates to some extent what a gay persons dilemma is in society.

Its real, and still happens today. How would you feel if society blanked you, fired you and ridiculed you, all because you're bedroom door was jammed for years after everybody else has been going in and out of there's for years before you ever did, and then tell you to shut up about your damn bedroom, you really wouldn't like it. Believe me, it would hurt like hell.

reply to post by Q:1984A:1776

Marriage is not a human right. The pursuit of happiness certainly is.

Hmmmm.

So if two people were gay and they wanted to get married but they weren't allowed to this would cause them to be unhappy and thus deny them the right to pursue happiness.

If they are consenting adults please explain exactly where the problem is?

Some people's defenitions of 'rights' are quite alarming.

The state and the church etc should have no right whatsoever to interfere in people's private lives as long as they aren't harming anyone else etc.

There's enough hurt and pain in the world without getting wound up over something as harmless as this.

Too many intefering, sanctimonious busy bodies who want to impose their morals and beliefs on everyone else in this world for my liking.

reply to post by kaylaluv


You are misunderstanding me. I did not make my post to claim some sort of sanctimonious superiority as you seem to think. I created it to illustrate the point that the majority of gay marriage advocates simply refuse to compromise on the term marriage.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Some other goals for marriage have been: for political gain, monetary gain, and property gain. And those were all heterosexual marriages. Something to be proud of, no?

There are many marriages that do not create families. Do you want to ban all marriages, including heterosexual ones, that do not involve procreation? Can you not have harmony and cooperation between families and communities with gay marriages as well?

The point that I was trying to make is that a "traditional" marriage has been between man and woman for thousands of years. I don't see the point you are trying to make. I also never said anything about wanting to ban marriages, at all. I honestly think you are putting words into my mouth so you can create an argument.

Are you refuting the points that I made about the goals of marriage? Certainly, there are people that marry for ulterior motives. That doesn't make the goals I listed about traditional marriages untrue.

Well, how sanctimonious of you. If a church is willing to marry two gays in a ceremony and pronounce them married in the eyes of God (and there ARE churches who are happy to do this), who are you to tell them they can't call it a marriage?

Why aren't the religious right up in arms about atheists (or pagans or wiccans or satanists) being able to get a marriage license and call their union a marriage, as they have been able to do since marriage licenses have been around? These guys are about as anti-sacred as you can get, right? But I hear no uproar about this.

I never said that I would deny people anything. As I said earlier, my post is about gay marriage advocates lack of compromise. Why do you evade my points with hypothetical situations?

I can tell you why no one is up in arms about atheists, pagans, wiccans or satanists. Traditional marriage goes back thousands of years, a tradition that is observed in nearly all cultures. No one faction owns the traditional marriage. You seem to have the belief that modern day factions control marriage. They don't. Any couple of a man and woman can get married anywhere and under any circumstance. The modern day rituals of celebrations is merely a cultural offshoot of the situation(marriage) that varies by culture. Also the legal aspects of modern marriage are tools for governments. While the majority of people follow them they are not necessary at all for a man and woman to be married in the traditional sense.

Why are you so fanatical about having their union be called something else? How does it affect you or your marriage in any way? How does it hurt you? Is your marriage not strong enough to handle gays calling their union a marriage? Why should gays call their union something other than marriage, when there are churches who will pronounce them married in the eyes of God?

It doesn't affect me. Again you have missed my point. This isn't about me. The point that I am making is that gay couples could get a great majority of what they seek. Apparently a lot of people feel strongly about preserving what most people think a traditional marriage should be. So, by giving an inch they could gain a mile and yet, they refuse to do so because of whatever reason. It is also mildly amusing that so many gay people complain that they are not treated fairly in the marriage debate. Yet, they seem to have no consideration for the convictions of others. Cute double standard.

Originally posted by My_Reality
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

You are misunderstanding me. I did not make my post to claim some sort of sanctimonious superiority as you seem to think. I created it to illustrate the point that the majority of gay marriage advocates simply refuse to compromise on the term marriage.

Why should they?

Separate But Equal - - is NOT Equal.

I find it very sanctimonious that any one thinks - - - Separate But Equal is Equal.

Originally posted by petrus4
Gays really need to stop thinking that they have problems that nobody else in the population does. You don't.

edit on 22-3-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)

It's just my opinion, but I think that's a gross and unfounded generalisation.

People like that exist in all demographics, and just because people are say racist against one group doesn't mean that another group needs to be quiet about it. If something is wrong, it's wrong. That's all.

I don't think disconnecting yourself from society is the answer to that. Anyway, we're probably straying off the main topic.

reply to post by Annee


Why should they? They could then get the majority of what they seek by compromising.

I can reverse the question as well. Why should we change the way marriage has been defined for thousands of years? You see it as an equality issue whereas I see it as a definition issue. By definition, two gay people could not get married due to the fact that both people are of the same sex...and marriage is between a man and a woman.

That is why I stress compromise. Both sides could make small sacrifices in their demands for the greater good.

It could also be argued that gay marriage advocates are being sanctimonious as well. Instead of leaving well enough alone, discord is created through their efforts to completely redefine what marriage is.

If any two different people are equal, just because they are different, does not make them unequal. A lesbian couple, and a male couple are different, but they not still equal?

I have come to the conclusion that at the end of the day if us gays want to get married, get a civil partnership, it has all the licentious trimmings of marriage, and publicly say that you are husband/wife of each other, even get your names changed if you want to.

Gay men and women in the UK have been calling each other husband/husbear and wife/wifey for years. You don't need recognition from the government, with all its whore of babylon licentious vices that go with it. We really are better off without it.

When it comes down to it, I think both gays and christians should let things lie. Also Christians should divorce themselves from the state as a moral duty to their faith and stop riding the beast they so love to ride.

Marriage is indeed the right of everyone, and not the right of government or anyone else to interfere with it.

reply to post by Decronite

As a young adult, attention seeking behaviour is actually quite normal, especially when going through puberty, and is not just the reserve of the Homosexual community.

You misunderstand the intent of my statement. Homosexuality, particularly in teenagers and young adults, is more of a display than it is an actual developed sense of self.

That is why homosexuals are more vocal about their sexuality whenever they come out.

It's also how people justify binge drinking after their 21st birthday. "I've been pent-up!"

sexuality doesn't just suddenly develop at puberty.

On that, we agree to an extent. Would you support the assertion that my appreciation for the female body has come about from my experiences? That my attraction to a woman's hips ("bell-curve") stems from my own background as a child as well as my experiences (limited as they may be) with women?

Why, then, should it be so controversial to assume the posture that one's appreciation for members of the same sex is derived in a similar manner?

My 'tastes' changed as I got older. Breast size got filed under hip/waist ratio, all of which is dependent upon a general intelligence and integrity check (integrity is above intelligence - but I don't need someone telling me how smart I am all the time; I need someone who has confidence in her own mental faculties). All of which comes from friends I became attracted to or unhealthy obsessions with anime.

As for wishing gay children on a Christian is not hateful (yes I was angry), but also a very real desire for this to happen, so that you might open your eyes and heart to the fact that most homosexuals have parents, and its sometimes difficult for all involved, and should this ever happen to you, believe me all the CBT in the world can't change sexuality - I've been there and done it - living proof, as have many others.

Except it is exactly what develops it in the first place. Stop trying to ignore the causes behind the development of your own self.

Honestly, had you been left to your own devices, you more than likely would have moved on to preferring heterosexual relationships. Therapies to change "who you are" implants the idea that you are or aren't something. Further, for individuals still attempting to find their own identity, it is nearly impossible for them to develop or change that identity into something.

How many times have you prayed against homosexuals or perhaps gone to demonstrations? Isn't that hate?

I tend to speak to God in a very casual manner. I don't ever really stop 'praying' - simply turn to a force I know is always there and address it like I would any other individual.

However, I do beseech God to help people find who they are and to find what is the best existence available to them.

It's a difficult stance to maintain - and it has only been recently affirmed and solidified following a very bad collapse of a relationship. On one hand is my desire to see someone I care about (but was hurt by in the extremes) happy. On the other hand is my desire to be the one making her happy (exclusively - a possessive instinct if there ever was one). And on yet another hand is my desire for her to know exactly how much the entire episode hurt me.

I found myself, at times, cycling through irrational cycles of thought and desire. I didn't want to see her happy or fulfilled in life unless it was with me. Anything else equated her to a harlot. This is largely due to my inability to process events like most other people seem to (although I think they just tend to go with the "whore" adjective and leave that as a permanent judgment - something I can't possibly do).

Years later, I have finally rendered the solution to the problem. She is and always will be someone I care about deeply, and irrationally. However, I decide who I am. I decide what another means to me. I am not a victim of events but a dynamic part of them. It is up to me to define my character.

I may have my beliefs about how a person should or should not be; but that does not mean I judge their being. All I have to analyze is their behavior - decidedly inadequate in an attempt to judge the soul.

that is both being a and a condescending human being and a double standard.

Again, you don't really get what I'm saying.

Whether or not your neural structure is a problem, or not, can really only be decided by you. I cannot - barring socially unacceptable tendencies such as theft, murder, etc (at which point - individuals who do not see this as a problem need to be removed from said society, that cannot function with such behavior being common).

That, at no point in time, means that you are helpless in your situation, or at the mercy of "how you were born."

reply to post by deepankarm


Well of course marriage isn't a human right, that goes for any kind of marriage. It's a civil union, a binding together of two people as a sort of official government-recognized, couple.

That being said that doesn't excuse those trying to restrict gay marriage. Equality is equality and there is no rational basis on which to deny homosexual couples the right to marry.

This discussion has to be one of the most aggravating of all the politically faux conflicts. It is totally born of ignorance and it is shocking how little people know about the topic's core word - marriage.

Marriage is NOT a right, it is a legally binding contract between two BUSINESSES that is created by the State, and once created it is wholly owned by the State. Marriage is governed by the STATE because the STATE created the contract and to get married you need the STATE'S permission, and to get divorced you need the STATE'S permission - which can be denied at the whim of the state's representative. Think about that for a moment, the State, via a judge or other one does not know, can prevent one from divorcing an abuser, the state representative can make a failed marriage - failed business venture, stay together till death parts them!

A marriage license is PERMISSION to use the system of marriage, as there is a copyright holder - the state, which licenses the right to use the term and the contract stipulations. Nowhere does it say anything about love or commitment or anything about emotional states etc. The permission slip is a corporate document that gives the state the right to RULE over the actions of those who signed the legally binding corporate document and it gives the state control over every single action taken by the new corporation known as 'the marriage." AND gives the state the right to all that said corporation/business produces. "Produce" can mean money, property AND CHILDREN!!!!!!

The state wants children, "gay marriage" does not PRODUCE children and since the state owns the license to the system of corporate merger via marriage, the state can dictate the terms. The state wants children - slaves, and, as such, has decided not to grant the use of IT'S license to folks who will not produce slaves! Marriage isn't about LOVE, where does it say LOVE in the contract, it isn't about HUMAN RIGHTS, where does it say that? Marriage is about PROPERTY and who controls it - period!!!!!!

You can "wed" anyone and anything you want, but not with the license owned by the state known as marriage. You can "merge" your two companies in another form which, btw, does NOT require the state's permission to quit the corporation.

Why on earth do people CLAMMER, FIGHT, and SCREAM to have the right to demand the state rule over their lives! Why would you want the state to decide the entire financial, child, property worlds of your relationship at all? This is so repulsive to me, yet people demand this enslavement for some inexplicable reason. Where did they get the idea that State recognition = reinforcement of love. Worse yet, where did they get the idea that State recognition = VALIDATION! I can't ever remember the state giving me any sense of satisfaction over anything at all, yet folks actually believe that gay marriage will satisfy them?

Ask yourself that question: Why do I NEED the STATE to VALIDATE me?

Marriage is NOT a validation of a relationship, if it were it would be permanent. Marriage, control of a relationship by the state, is NOT a human right, it is NOT a step out of the dark ages but a coffin fully buried in the dark ages! What people should be demanding is the State get out of the relationship business altogether, not get deeper into it.

Originally posted by My_Reality
reply to post by Annee

 

Why should they? They could then get the majority of what they seek by compromising.

Compromise is F'n Bull Pucky.

Why the hell should they compromise. That is insane.

And it is NOT Equality.

reply to post by Decronite

As for "Thus, it is still my belief that most homosexual relationships are a disservice to both parties involved, as they could be in a much better relationship with an appropriate member of the opposite sex", again is massively condescending. I can but imagine how you would feel if the opposite of that was said to you!

I'll presume you just did. It's more fun that way.

My room mates and I are all males. We take care of the same living spaces and chip in on many of the same bills. We look out for each other and are there for each other during difficult times (and during fun times). There is a bond between us that is akin to a brotherhood.

The argument can well be made that the bond has been more beneficial to me than any relationship I've had with a female.

One of my room mates has even considered adopting a child from one of his relatives who is experiencing some ... issues. In talking it over - we'd raise that kid much in a similar way to how a family would (albeit not the type of family I came from - where we all ate at the same table for dinner and had to eat our vegetables: my room mates can't really wrap their heads around that one).

That said - the relationships are not at all sexual. However, I can certainly see where one could make the argument that such relationships are preferential to long-term commitments to the opposite sex (at least some brief sexual contact would be necessary to reproduce... ruling out medical/technological crutches). And it may work in some cases.

However, I want a family of my own DNA; a partner selected for both her maternal potential (including genetics) as well as her character and integrity. I will never be fulfilled in a homosexual relationship; regardless of how close a friendship is.

Further - there are many instinctual differences between men and women (that are fairly common across the spectrum) that lead to a more natural blending of intimacy and function as a partnership.

which is exactly what you have done.

You're putting words in my mouth by attempting to label me.

If I wanted others to speak for me, I would simply star posts or cast votes. No need to waste time and effort if I'm simply one of the herd.

How can you expect to be taken seriously, when in essence you are simply being condescending in your tone, with veiled attacks, without any real factual experience?

When did I attack you?

I certainly stated that I disagree, and clarified my standpoint by asserting that there is, more than likely, a person of the opposite sex out there who you would be quite fulfilled with.

The only way that could be perceived as an attack upon you is if you are not as secure in your beliefs as you would like to be. Or you are not really paying much attention to what I'm saying, and simply slapping a label on me and trying to make it fit.

You may find me condescending. It's to be expected. I am, after all, here to challenge everything you believe to know and hold true.

If you were gay, you would certainly NOT find being gay a disservice!

I find a number of my heterosexual tendencies to be a disservice. I'm a sexist, to a degree. I've difficulty saying "no" to a female - to disappoint her in some way, shape, or form. I also find it difficult to be discerning - I can have very strong feelings for several females and have no clue how to 'rank' them in a preferential manner. Even if I could say I had slightly stronger feelings for one - my resolve to not harm another would pose an obstacle.

It is that: "Find the angel in every girl" mentality that makes it difficult to provide adequate support to any one of those girls (certainly if I were to lose my marbles and attempt a polygamous relationship). Being indecisive and overly dedicated to supporting a woman leads to a worn out person with little to offer anyone.

True - that can be said about any set of relationships; but you have to be able to analyze what you can and cannot offer to people under various circumstances.

If I said the same about heterosexual relationships, we both know what your answer would be.

Why beat around the bush? Come right out and say it while supporting it.

The problem isn't what you can or can't say. You can say a hell of a lot of things. The issue is whether or not you can back them up with any kind of logic or reason behind it... and still take yourself seriously.

Just another fine example of conservatives claiming that government should have no legislative role in people's private lives...until they disagree with it.

reply to post by Aim64C


I definitely know my identity, I just wish you would stop insinuating that I don't. I figured that all out - eventually - when I was 25 with a lot of interference.

I have to say your american grammar (I guess) is very difficult to read properly.

Binge drinking for the first time, and coming to terms with being gay is hardly the same, the desire to have sex, and the desire to drink are two totally different things, unless of course you are an alcoholic, and from what I have seen lets face it alcohol would probably out-do sex if that were the case.

Sexuality whether gay or straight runs its course, and usually does not change, although I have heard of one case in my local gay community. But by the same token, it happens with heterosexuals as well. Practically all people I knew that have come out have usually always known they were gay or bisexual, and when children are involved, it creates massive problems.

Thankfully in England it is taught in schools that sexuality is not just a male/female thing, and that the new generation of gay, bisexual and transgender people get the help and support they need from an earlier age, which stops a lot of them killing themselves, and developing a more happy and healthier lifestyle as a result.

You say, "I tend to speak to God in a very casual manner. I don't ever really stop 'praying' - simply turn to a force I know is always there and address it like I would any other individual." - thats exactly my way of thinking!

Also thank you for sharing your own personal relationship issues that you had (and still have in your own way). I respect your openess on that immensely. We all have those issues to deal with.

I'm certainly not at the mercy of the way I was born, I am simply saying that I am at the mercy of those that can and do affect my life on the basis of my sexuality.