Why Sally Ride waited until her death to tell the world she was gay

Unless something goes completely haywire in my life...like Elin Nordegren... yes. I have a will, and "everything" will go to my son...to wit, he'll be quite disappointed lol

(My "6 million" and "daughter" were hypotheticals to make a point )

 

Amazing. I just read through this entire thread, and the level of stupidity is simply astounding.

On the one side we have a bunch of moralists who claim authority from a 2000-year-old book, and who won't be happy until they can strip homosexuals of their civil rights. In my vocabulary, who you choose or not choose to shack up with is a natural right, and the phenomenon of "natural rights" occurs at the individual level, and it is our government's job to protect these rights, not to interfere with them or "permit" them to some and deny them to others. Frankly, it's none of the government's business whom I do or don't sleep with, and it's none of the church's business either. The government only gets involved to the extent that states have to recognize each others' marriages, and since marriage occurs at the state level is seems logical and reasonable that there should be a federal umbrella governing what's recordable and what's not (like, for instance, the issue of blood tests versus miscegenation). The moralists in this equation cite the "tradition" of church marriages, but that is a false argument, because there is no such tradition. Marriages began as business transactions ("I'll give you two cows and a chicken for your daughter"), and there is a long and varied historical record of homosexual unions being performed all through the middle ages and renaissance, even by officials of the church.

There is one and only one reason why opponents of gay marriage would strip American citizens of their civil rights, and that's because "the Bible says it's not normal". So on the other side of this debate, we have people who don't believe that. And in spite of overwhelming scientific evidence that homosexuality is ubiquitous in nature (the incidence being "around 10%" in hundreds upon hundreds of species), there are people who choose not to believe that either. Well, I have a question for the religious folks: either God is everything or He is nothing. Which is it? If He is everything, then surely He created homosexuals too, and if there is a 10% incidence in all of nature then that means gays are part and parcel of God's design. God's plan is the gay man standing in front of you. You're looking right at God's will and you're trying to deny it. Why is that? Because of a few misunderstood and mistranslated words written thousands of years ago? By the same people who said pigs are "evil" because they cause disease?

 

There is no genetic reason that mixed races should not marry.

Blacks and whites are proven to be able to have children together which is not the case with homosexuals.

 

I will be honest, I am NOT going to read 1400 rights to marriage. I may have a sad life this week and be spending to much time on a political forum but even I haven't gotten that bad yet.

I did glance at it though and it said something along the line of 400 state rights and 1000 federal rights. That is simply unjustifiable. There is no reason why states can't simply adopt however many of the 1000 federal rights they want and incorporate them into their statutes. The vast majority of them are probably innocuous ones like joint adoption and child custody rules etc. The Feds have no business in the personal lives of of its citizens.

 

Procreation has nothing to do with marriage. If this were the case, then any women who has gone through menopause could not marry, and woman who is infertile could not marry and any man who is 'shooting blanks' could not marry.

 

Procreation defines the traditional relationship between men and women.

Marriage is a family institution and that is the reason marriage is and always has been between a man and a woman only.

If homosexuals want to shack up they can make contracts with each other to dispose of property or powers of attorney.

 

Speaking of marriage I found this on yahoo questions......

"I heard on the tv show "according to jim" that marriage was invented by cavewoman b/c she couldnt start a fire by rubbing sticks together so she needed to marry a caveman. Then the caveman invented the wheel to get away from here. Is this fact? It seems so right."

 

Sally Rides obituary just says "she is survived by Tam O'Shaughnessy, her partner of 27 years; her mother, Joyce; her sister, Bear, a niece and a nephew". Seems all of this is due to Sally Ride's sister, Rev. Bear Ride. Seems the Rev Bear Ride is gay and a big advocate for the gay lifestyle, and could barely wait for Sally to kick the bucket so she could out her sister. Sally was a class act. Bear is a dirt bag.

 

The sister should change her name from Ride to Rug then we can really appreciate her for the clown she appears to be.

 

Do you have an handbook you get these answers from? They have been debunked long ago

 

By "debunked" you mean that liberals do not agree.

But that is true of the entire homosexual agenda that conservatives could say is debunked since they do not agree with it either.

 

If homosexual couples were allowed to adopt, they would then be fulfilling the required "benefit to society" by raising a kid and forming a family. Procreation doesn't necessarily need to be involved.

 

Once again, this is false. A gay man can donate his sperm and any woman can be injected with his sperm. No relationship needed.

Any lesbian can get a man sperm and be impregnated. No relationship needed.

A gay man can eve donate his sperm to a lesbian. No relationship needed.

Debunked again.

If marriage is a family institution, then why does christians have the highest divorce rate?

Debunked again.

Nope, a contract will not stop the feds from imposing inheritance tax: http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...ks-supreme-court-review-gay-marriage-ban.html

Debunked again.

Hardly "not agreeing"

 

It's like they decided to (*)(*)(*)(*) on her grave.

 

I don't think so.

Heather having two mommies is just as confusing to the natural order as two lesbians being man and wife or whatever they choose to call it.

 

Except research shows otherwise:

Kids of lesbians have fewer behavioral problems, study suggests

Debunked again.

 

No one I know who has two mommies is confused at all. Very lovely and intelligent people in fact. This "natural order" stuff is only a construct of your mind. Homosexual couples have proven to "work" as parents just as well as heterosexual couples.

 

None of that requires a marriage license from the state.

One woman in the news recently had 15 children and no husband - or wife.

But that is an unhealthy situation for the children as is the confusion of an unnatural marriage between two gays.

 

YOu admit your own argument fails then. Got it.

 

I think there is a lot of dysfunction in our society and I don't want to add to it by allowing gay marriage.

 

The only thing you are right on, is the dysfunction that heterosexuals have given to marriage.

 

It shouldn't matter, really. Many str8 couples can't procreate. But I certainly favor adoption for those that can't have children. I would expect conservatives who claim to value life so bad specially in the case of unborn's right to live, would also support gay marriage and adoption. So many babies are born and have no kind of family or home. Absent from this scenario is the conservative moral voice

 

I can do a study of how stupid leftist posters. Does that prove you are stupid? No, It proves that any study can be biased. You haven't shown any debunking of anything.