I cannot understand all the fighting over gay rights

Militant gays do, that's who. They put it first, along with their gay political agenda. There are a lot of gays who keep it private - I'm not talking about them.

But or lordy - the gay flamers....they wear it like a badge of honor and they never shut up yapping and yapping about it. Their whole world revolves around it and GAY comes before all else. You know it. I know it. It's really pathetic. It's annoying, rude and oh so immature.


This guy's a real hoot, and he's a prime example. BIG MOUTH.

 

I respect your quite and effective way to present this side of the issue. Thank you.

However, that aspect has been discussed at nauseum in this forum. Procreation is NOT a requirement for marriage. And the same medical advances that have allowed many heterosexual couples who cannot have children on their own to have children anyway are open to gay couple (artificial insemination, surrogate pregnancy, adoptions, etc. ).

In addition, it is obvious that the prediction that "your descendants will be as numerous as the grain of sands on the beach" has long been realized, and that this world is not suffering from UNDER population, but rather OVER population. . . so if some couples (whether they are same sex or opposite sex couples) decide not to have children. . .it is certainly NOT a drama that will lead to the disappearance of human kind!

We must also recognize that, the "corner stone" of our society, the "traditional family" has failed . . .and is pretty much a thing of the past, and NOT because of gay marriage, but because of HETEROSEXUAL marriage that doesn't work! So many divorces, so many single parents, so many blended families that last but a few years before being "blended some more!"

No, although I respect your expressing your (or your friend's) concerns about this, I believe that if you look around you and think about it more deeply, you will realize that gay marriage has NOTHING to do with the loosening of our traditional "corner stone' of society!

You are correct, gay marriage will NOT have a significant impact on society as a whole. And many kids who are left for years in foster homes may actually find a warm, loving home with two mothers or two fathers. . .and any loving parents, especially two parents, is better than being raised even in the best foster home!

 

Everytime you try to blow something off like that it only reflects your own method of doing things. Let's talk about a real situation where a real lesbian couple who had been partners living together for many years in a loving relationship, (not that you know what that is,) Langbehn, 41, had raised three adopted teenage children with Pond, her partner of nearly 18 years. At the start of a cruise vacation to the Bahamas, Pond collapsed suddenly and unexpectedly and later died at the hospital.

The couple's story, and forced separation during Pond's dying hours, inspired Obama to pursue a change to government regulations.

"The president saw an injustice and felt very strongly about correcting this and has spoken about it often over the years," White House deputy director of public engagement Brian Bond wrote on the White House blog.


That was a real event, it was part of what spurred me and many other people to work for EQUAL rights for LGBT people who have many forms of discrimination facing them even now. You don't think that has any meaning or value because you live in a bubble, you have no friends, and you have no empathy for other people. Who needs you?

 

I've heard that argument before (perpetuation of the species) and I reject it outright. Using that logic, there would be no basis for elderly people to be allowed marriage, would there? Or heterosexual sterile couples. Or heterosexual couples who wish to not have children. The species will do just fine with or without gay marriage, don't you think? So that argument is pretty meaningless.

In fact, using your own statement, I would submit that some of the causes of the demise of the family unit is too much proliferation. Too many children to adequately care for. With the heterosexual divorce rate at 50% or greater, I believe your argument of the "tradition" of marriage is a weak one. In fact, gay marriage could well improve marriage statistics.

 

You mean. . .like the "militant Christian Right?"

Believe me. . .I feel that I am a "militant advocate for gay rights," and I am heterosexual!
But I have NEVER met anyone, gay or hetero who makes this advocacy the center of their life, or that gives up living to further the cause!

In fact, the BEST WAY to advocate for gay rights is simply to live one's life in full day light, so that people can finally realize that there is really NO DIFFERENCE between a gay couple in love and a heterosexual couple in love!

There are good and bad people in all walks of life. Some relationships will succeed and last for over half a century, others will fail after a few months or a few years. . .and that is true no matter if you look at gay or heterosexual relationships. But obviously, when a relationship is committed and recognized both by the legal system and by the community where it exists, it is a LOT easier to work on the commitment and to maintain the relationship healthy and productive.

So. . .why do you insist in refusing to give that benefit to gay couples?

 

I've known many couples who married and make sure they did not have any children
To a lot of people marriage is about spending the rest of your life with somebody you love deeply

 

I'm an xray tech and I can tell you, it's a woman on the left and a man on the right - the "heaviness" of the mandible (jaw) tells the story, as well as the relative sizes of the crania. Also they're not black because the skull thickness in blacks is more pronounced. I would know - I've been xraying people for 30 years. A Radiologist (doctor of radiology) would tell you the same thing, and so could a forensics expert - they have to be able to determine these things to help identify bodies that are decomposed to the bones. Growth plates, pelvis shape, disease processes such as arthritis - all these things help determine the ID of a body.


See the above example: the male pelvis is more verticle, whereas the female is wider - for child bearing.

But whatever. It was a "nice" thought - just not realistic; like liberal fantasy often isn't.

 

Can I ask you something about the footer you use? "Civil debate is expected. Fair warning: trolling/insulting me will get you nowhere, and I will report you."

Is that some kind of threat? I ask, because in just the couple of posts you've made, it seems you are making every attempt to engage in uncivil debate. Or at least start some. So what's the point ?

 

I don't make threats. I've been a member of this forum a long time and I do my best to post within the rules.
I also try to stay on topic; your question to me would have been more appropriate in PM.

 

wow. just wow.
I think they'd like nothing more than to go about their business while strait folks ignored them. But that doesn't happen, yet.

 

has failed? no. is being destroyed? definitely! the major players in this destruction are the hedonistic entitlement mentality that sees sacrifice, an important factor in the continuation of "the family", as less a virtue than an unnecessary hindrance and the usurpation of parental roles by the state. when we eschew personal responsibility we also abandon the responsibilities that are an integral part of family life. when "the family" finally fails, so does our species as we know it. when we are unable to put aside our own whims for the sake of family, an extension of our very selves, we are also unable to exhibit the necessary charitable urges that allow us to share this earth with one another. when we reach that point, only force can keep us from tearing ourselves apart and that spells the end of our evolution as an intelligent species.

 

How can there be an honest dialogue when your information is all wrong and you don't want honest answers?
You are even afraid to talk to one who is gay. Pretty damn hard to be honest.

 

didn't i just go over that or are you folks merely prattling to hear yourselves bleat?

 

I'm not sure what your being a radiologist has to do with gay rights. . .but the "heaviness of the mandible" depends on the type of the person. . .some women have thicker jaws, and some men have more slight, small bone features. So, although "in general" you could see that, at everything being equal, men are expected to have stronger jaws, and women thinner, more slender features. . .that is OBVIOUSLY not always the case. . .which makes the picture posted really meaningful.

And.. .although, once again, one can expect a woman to have a broader pelvis than a man, it is CERTAINLY NOT a rule without exceptions! It all depends on the morphology of the person. .some women have broad shoulder and narrow hips . .some men have narrow shoulder and "a big butt."

The fact is that love is not and SHOULDN'T BE determined by sexual appendices or "bone structures!"
Love is NOT limited to sexual intercourse, but to deep seated emotions that are NOT perceptible on ANY Xray machine. . .even for an expert!

 

But adulterers do it daily also. In much much larger numbers. So adultery is a greater sin in our world. According to religious folks.

 

I'm new to this place. But your posts, with that somewhat inflammatory and unnecessary photo, seems to wish to invite uncivil dialog. With your every post, you include that footer. Is that not part of your dialog and a message you wish to convey every time? And the mere statement "I will report you" in bold, italics and color seems to be just that.

 

NOPE. . .. you went over what your "friend" said to you, and concluded by saying you were not convinced.

And.. .correct me if I am wrong (English is not my first language), but isn't "bleating" reserved for sheep?

Where did your civility go so quickly?

 

there is no degree of sin in gods eyes

 

Then it should be a non issue for you. Just out of common decency. If you don't like gay sex, don't do it and don't promote it.

 

you are quite correct, bleating is the only sound that mindless followers are capable of making as they endlessly parrot their party line. my civility disappears the moment the herd mentality enters the room.

 

Good to know the magical sky man is also an unreasonable bastard.

 

Why do I have the feeling that "the ice has melted" and what's "under" is emerging?

And why do I have the feeling that. . . that "friend" might have been hidden under the "ice" all along?

Whatever you think and believe about the "destruction" of the family unit, the blame obviously doesn't lie with gay couples!
So. . .maybe this discussion about the destruction of the family unit and the consequences we can expect (as well as those we have already experienced) could be moved to a new thread that would focus on that issue?

I would certainly read it with interest and probably participate if you choose to start such a thread.

 

then out of common decency don't be flaunting your gayness around me or my children

 

I meant, our society has much more adultery going on. And I hear nothing from religious folks about all those divorcees remarrying.
I bet some of those against gay folks are, gasp, divorced and remarried. Maybe living with someone without being married.

But it's nice to see someone religious know that gays are no more sinful than you are.

 

For some reason, you have attributed my comment to Domer. . .

Since you choose to use belittling, I think it is only fair that I stand up and take your new found nastiness for myself.

Are you aware yet, as a new member, that insulting other members is not allowed in this forum?