Poor Henk!!!
Here is some karma to make it feel better!!! 8) ;)


"it"...? ??? ::) ;)

In a supposed democratic state such as the U.S., a homosexual is an equal citizen who has the right to lead his or her private life as he or she sees fit, and in doing so should expect fully equal treatment from all state institutions. Like it or not, marriage is not just a religious institution, it is a legal one and always has been. It's just that nowadays it's the state that makes and enforces the law - not the church. For that matter, adoption is also a legal institution (which also used to be a church matter) and a same-sex couple should be allowed to adopt children. The more it is allowed, the more normal it will become, and then kids won't have to worry about getting pounded at school for something so trivial (not to mention personal...who said a kid had to share every aspect of his home life at school? I never did). 

"it"...? ??? ::) ;)

Hahahaahah!!!! ;D

Love you man! 8)

Hahahaahah!!!! ;D

Love you man! 8)


Likewise. 8)

Would you support gay civil unions?


In a legal context, marriage and civil unions are the same thing..... no?
So then I would still have to say No.

I find it sad that some people seem to think two gay people shouldn't have a child, be it adopted, via a turkey baster or via surrogacy JUST because they are gay.

Somehow being gay makes them unable to bring up a child correctly? They are probably a damn sight better parents than a great many of the population, think the Caylee Anthony thread on the 2000 boards.................

In a legal context, marriage and civil unions are the same thing..... no?
So then I would still have to say No.




Nope, marriage is a religious institution which is why it is called marriage.  Civil Unions are non religious.  Why should a religious ceremony have more clout than a civil?  Also straight couple can have civil unions.

http://www.focusmag.gr/id/files/48269/cat%20laugh.jpg

Nope, marriage is a religious institution which is why it is called marriage.  Civil Unions are non religious.  Why should a religious ceremony have more clout than a civil?  Also straight couple can have civil unions.


In a legal context, marriage and civil unions are the same thing..... no?
So then I would still have to say No.


A marriage is not recognized unless you get a license from the state, hence it still is legalized by a government institution.  Interesting.  Also, as my post said before, marriage as a term is not necessarily religious.  I haven't found anything where it is said that marriage is a religious term exclusively.  I think civil unions and marriage are pretty much the same.

My brother and sister-in-law got MARRIED, but it was presided by a judge.  So did they get married or civil unioned?    ;D 

I saw an interesting point.  If marriage is indeed religious, then the government has no authority to ban it because of the first amendment.  So, a certain religion may not allow homosexuals to marry within their church, but they don't have the authority to stop it altogether.  Also, there seems to be two different uses of the term marriage: a religious one where marriage is a sacred union with a certain religious status, and a government one where a marriage is a legal union that comes with legal privileges and legal status.  If this is the case then a religious marriage shouldn't have legal rights granted and a civil marriage should not have any religious aspects. 

Either way, gays pay taxes, are part of the workforce, and are here legally.  Then, from a legal standpoint, they should have the opportunity to be MARRIED.

Another argument that comes up is that if we allow gay marriage, then it will open up a whole new can of worms.  We will have to allow incest marriages, marriage between an adult and child, polygamy, and being able to marry a dog, cat, truck, or other things.  I guess that could be part of another thread.   

A child can't legally make the decision to marry an adult, so why is that even an option?

I don't think I see any problem with polygamy.  In a way it is already legal.  It is shady, but nothing is really done about it.  A polygamous marriage may not be legally recognized, but yet the wife and her kids can be eligible for welfare because she is considered a single mother.  Wouldn't you rather the Dad have some responsibility rather than there be a free handout given?  Polygamy in history hasn't always been about someone just being a pervert.  Sometimes, a man would take on another wife if her husband had died and she was going through rough times.  It would help support the family.  Shouldn't be any reason that a woman can't marry more than one guy either.   

You can't marry a dog, cat, or a truck because they can't consent.  Don't really know what to say about incestuous relationships at this time. 

However, I guess that can of worms will be opened when we get there.  Gays should still be able to marry. 

If the problem is about rewriting the rules on divorce, benefits, who gets what name, and others, then that shouldn't be an obstacle that can't be worked out.  Many rules have evolved over time.  I think its just part of society growing.  Would you like to go back to more "traditional"l rules of marriage where a guy can pick a woman he wants to marry and the woman has no say in the matter?  I have heard many times that we need to go back to a more traditional form of marriage.  What part of traditional are we talking about?   

 
I find it sad that some people seem to think two gay people shouldn't have a child, be it adopted, via a turkey baster or via surrogacy JUST because they are gay.

Somehow being gay makes them unable to bring up a child correctly? They are probably a damn sight better parents than a great many of the population, think the Caylee Anthony thread on the 2000 boards.................

Yep.  :)

there are so many kids needing to be adopted. It's stupid to deny them a loving environment because the couple wishing to adopt are of the same sex.

Two misconceptions anti-gay adoption people seem to have are

1) the couple wants to convert the kid.
 
You can't make someone gay. People are born gay.  My grandmother had 6 daughters and 5 of them are straight. One of my straight aunts has 14 grandchildren and 3 of them are gay. She has several great grandchildren and a couple of them are gay.

2) gay couples adopt to have a *em* "toy"

Pedophilia and Homosexuality are NOT the same thing.

Not allowing gays to married because they can't have children is just an asinine argument. Carlos & I got married and we can't have children together. Does that make our marriage null and void?



Cat

Not allowing gays to married because they can't have children is just an asinine argument. Carlos & I got married and we can't have children together. Does that make our marriage null and void?



Cat


Good Point!

Nope, marriage is a religious institution which is why it is called marriage.  Civil Unions are non religious.  Why should a religious ceremony have more clout than a civil?  Also straight couple can have civil unions.


Actually, as defined, they are the same thing.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marriage ex.4 or
http://www.answers.com/marriage ex.1d

Civil union is just a different name to make it sound better and seperate from marriage for those parties involved IMHO.
Yet, if they want the same rights etc. then why do they need a seperate terminology? ???

Nope, marriage is a religious institution which is why it is called marriage.  Civil Unions are non religious.  Why should a religious ceremony have more clout than a civil?  Also straight couple can have civil unions.


So if someone marries someone else in a registry office rather than in church (as you can do in the UK) do you not consider them married then? 

I, (an agnostic catholic), married my husband, (a lapsed jew), in a civil ceremony.  Neither church nor temple would've married us, if we had been so inclined to go that route.  I am not less married than anyone whose marriage was blessed by that God guy (or girl).

Cat and Carlos are no less married because they haven't gone forth and procreated.

Some people think the races shouldn't mix, either.  That "ick" thing Babooshka was speaking of, remember.  Blended families are no less valid!

Whichever angle you look at it, most get married for the same reason; to share their life with someone (even if they have identical parts).  With these intentions, it's hard to see how any of the above-mentioned couplings detract from someone's definition of marriage.

I, (an agnostic catholic), married my husband, (a lapsed jew), in a civil ceremony.  Neither church nor temple would've married us, if we had been so inclined to go that route.  I am not less married than anyone whose marriage was blessed by that God guy (or girl).

Cat and Carlos are no less married because they haven't gone forth and procreated.

Some people think the races shouldn't mix, either.  That "ick" thing Babooshka was speaking of, remember.  Blended families are no less valid!

Whichever angle you look at it, most get married for the same reason; to share their life with someone (even if they have identical parts).  With these intentions, it's hard to see how any of the above-mentioned couplings detract from someone's definition of marriage.




http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/happy/applause.gif



Cat

http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/happy/applause.gif



Cat



ditto that

Actually, as defined, they are the same thing.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marriage ex.4 or
http://www.answers.com/marriage ex.1d

Civil union is just a different name to make it sound better and seperate from marriage for those parties involved IMHO.
Yet, if they want the same rights etc. then why do they need a seperate terminology? ???




The laws in PA recognize marriage between straight couples however will not recognize Civil Unions among straight couples.  Do tax forms state marriage?  Civil Unions or both?  You're also assuming that civil unions are a LGBT term.

So if someone marries someone else in a registry office rather than in church (as you can do in the UK) do you not consider them married then? 


Depends on who preforms the ceremony.  In PA marriages done only by clergy or a judge are recognized.

http://www.focusmag.gr/id/files/48269/cat%20laugh.jpg


What is your point exactly, if I may ask.

^ I think the kitty saw her naked...?

^ I think the kitty saw her naked...?


Kitten laugh for the sake of sanity.  *sigh*  :(

I can't stand seeing women/women and men/men 'tying the knot' - then snogging, it almost makes me want to retch
I have to admit that I find the sight makes me a bit queasy, too... but that would never make me want to stop them - what they want to get up to is their business, not mine.

I see no reason why homosexual couples shouldn't have the same rights as heterosexual ones.

In a legal context, marriage and civil unions are the same thing..... no?
So then I would still have to say No.


Case law sets a different precedent for civil unions.  To put it simply, marriage is a religious issue, but civil unions are a civil rights issue.

So basically, if you're against gay civil unions, you're fighting against equal rights for gays.

Depends on who preforms the ceremony.  In PA marriages done only by clergy or a judge are recognized.


So what would you call someone who was married by a judge?  Would you say they were married or 'in a civil union'?

So what would you call someone who was married by a judge?  Would you say they were married or 'in a civil union'?


I was married by a judge in the little bitty traffic court room in Pennsylvania, I got a marriage license (which I had to apply and pay for at the big county courthouse a few miles away), so I guess I'm married.  Hopefully anyway.  ;D

I was married by a judge in the little bitty traffic court room in Pennsylvania, I got a marriage license (which I had to apply and pay for at the big county courthouse a few miles away), so I guess I'm married.  Hopefully anyway.  ;D


nope... nope... you guys are living in sin... Fire and brimstone condemn you to damnation. burn in hell sinner BURN  ;D

nope... nope... you guys are living in sin... Fire and brimstone condemn you to damnation. burn in hell sinner BURN  ;D


probably will.  probably will.  ;D

I was married by a judge in the little bitty traffic court room in Pennsylvania, I got a marriage license (which I had to apply and pay for at the big county courthouse a few miles away), so I guess I'm married.  Hopefully anyway.  ;D


I know a couple who got married at home by the justice of the peace with their cat as the witness!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/02/catsmiley.gif

I know a couple who got married at home by the justice of the peace with their cat as the witness!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/02/catsmiley.gif


How cool would THAT be!!!!  Well...we're saving the cat as a witness experience for a SPECIAL anniversary.  ;D  Besides we didn't have a cat back then, it was sorta my "wedding present" from hubby. 

We didn't have any witnesses other then the lady that worked as stenographer or whatever. 

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff30/bookmistress4ever/tv.gif       <---Patty & Q --->   http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff30/bookmistress4ever/tv.gif    'We're having a GAY old time !'  8)    ;D (In the ORIGINAL (?) sense of the word ?    ::) 

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff30/bookmistress4ever/tv.gif       <---Patty & Q --->   http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff30/bookmistress4ever/tv.gif    'We're having a GAY old time !'  8)    ;D (In the ORIGINAL (?) sense of the word ?    ::) 


lol.... but she's my "sister"

lol.... but she's my "sister"


Yeah ? Well that's cool too. Keeping yourselves amused. Aretha reckons 'Sister's are doing it for themselves' !
Whatever THAT might entail    ...    :-X    ::)    :P    ;)

Yeah ? Well that's cool too. Keeping yourselves amused. Aretha reckons 'Sister's are doing it for themselves' !
Whatever THAT might entail    ...    :-X     ::)     :P     ;)


welcome back you goof!  ;D

welcome back you goof!  ;D


Thanks .... although .. well ... I'm back in body ... whether I'm back to my ('best/worst') ... depending on your point of view  ;) .... it may take a while, and other things to think about ... yeah, I feel a bit subdued, lately.  :-\\

By the way ... (back on topic ? ) ... I probably used to be a bit homophobic too, but meeting one way back in 74 in Chicago .... well ...  he was my co-worker in components inspection ... so ... I sort of HAD to get along with him. Turned out to be a real good guy, good friend ... I even stayed over at his place (his boyfriend was there too). Also, I'm a member of a gay club over here, although really joined cos it used to be a good little earner, trivia wise. Anyhow, ... in my experience, a lot of these gay people are just fine / amusing etc;  .... if they wanna get married ... why not ?  We're all gonna die one day .... if a harmless ceremony makes their lives complete ... what's the prob ?    8)

lol.... but she's my "sister"


Reminds me of this song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYFK1R-wUwg

Ant

Carlos & I were married by a witch in a Wiccan ceremony in a chapel on the college campus. Does that make us less married?




Cat

Carlos & I were married by a witch in a Wiccan ceremony in a chapel on the college campus. Does that make us less married?




Cat


It shouldn't if marriage is a religious term.  It shouldn't if it is recognized by the government. Oh wait, I bet they are all thinking its only legit if the marriage ceremony is presided by a Christian priest.  I forgot.   

My friend is an ordained minister.  Not sure which church she's affiliated with, but whatever.  She had a "Reverend" in front of her name, so it works for our ceremony. ;D

So we said our, "I Do's" to each other, did the Apache blessing and the Cherokee prayer, and did the exchanging of roses ceremony (our first gifts to each other as man and wife).  It was quite unique.

Carlos & I were married by a witch in a Wiccan ceremony in a chapel on the college campus. Does that make us less married?




Cat



Is that witch married to Glen Campbell .........















the Witch-ita lineman ?  ???







:P






:D

Is that witch married to Glen Campbell .........















the Witch-ita lineman ?   ???







:P






:D


;D Worst pun ever, probably. Karma +1 nevertheless. ;)

;D Worst pun ever, probably. Karma +1 nevertheless. ;)



I suspect I've done worse ?    :-\\




But thanks, Henk. .......... and right back atcha !  8)









;D

My friend is an ordained minister.  Not sure which church she's affiliated with, but whatever.  She had a "Reverend" in front of her name, so it works for our ceremony. ;D

So we said our, "I Do's" to each other, did the Apache blessing and the Cherokee prayer, and did the exchanging of roses ceremony (our first gifts to each other as man and wife).  It was quite unique.


I think clergy need to have a license to preform marriages.  Judges and JOTP can automatically do it.

I vote yes.

I never chose to like my husband.  I just liked him.  I can't imagine that it's any different if you're gay. 

Carlos & I were married by a witch in a Wiccan ceremony in a chapel on the college campus. Does that make us less married?




Cat


It depends on state law.  However I don't think the federal government looks too closely at it.  Obviously whoever preformed the ceremony was licensed to do it.  No it doesn't make you less married. However to a Conservative Christian not only might you not be married but some would say you're engaging in evil diabolical witchcraft.  You know how twisted their thinking can become.

So what would you call someone who was married by a judge?  Would you say they were married or 'in a civil union'?


In PA they are married.  The legality of a civil union is different in each state.

Carlos & I were married by a witch in a Wiccan ceremony in a chapel on the college campus. Does that make us less married?




Cat


Less married than whom?

Nicole and I were married by a reverend (I think) in the basement of a VFW post. I'm atheist and she is lapsed Presbyterian. I have the same question as you... well, not really. I've never had anyone question the validity of our marriage.

Ant

It shouldn't if marriage is a religious term.  It shouldn't if it is recognized by the government. Oh wait, I bet they are all thinking its only legit if the marriage ceremony is presided by a Christian priest.  I forgot.   


;D

Christian ceremony in a church, under a crucifix. Blessed by God.  Bride has to be wearing white, groom wears a look of defeat.  Keeping the tradition of domestic stability alive. :P

Is that witch married to Glen Campbell .........



the Witch-ita lineman ?   ???



:D


;D ;D ;D
One Karma to you, my good man!

It depends on state law.  However I don't think the federal government looks too closely at it.  Obviously whoever preformed the ceremony was licensed to do it.  No it doesn't make you less married. However to a Conservative Christian not only might you not be married but some would say you're engaging in evil diabolical witchcraft.  You know how twisted their thinking can become.

If you're married to a self-proclaimed Christian Conservative, one might say you are preparing a carriage for the anti-christ!
:o

;D ;D ;D
One Karma to you, my good man!





Thanks, 'Max' .... and ... likewise !    :)

In PA they are married.  The legality of a civil union is different in each state.


I'm not asking about the legal status.  I'm asking the people here who don't want civil unions for gay people how they refer to hetero friends who were not married in church.  Does it bother them that these friends choose to be legally married but not 'under the sight of God'?

I'm not asking about the legal status.  I'm asking the people here who don't want civil unions for gay people how they refer to hetero friends who were not married in church.  Does it bother them that these friends choose to be legally married but not 'under the sight of God'?


That is a very good question. 

;D

Christian ceremony in a church, under a crucifix. Blessed by God.  Bride has to be wearing white, groom wears a look of defeat.  Keeping the tradition of domestic stability alive. :P


He He. 

It shouldn't if marriage is a religious term.  It shouldn't if it is recognized by the government. Oh wait, I bet they are all thinking its only legit if the marriage ceremony is presided by a Christian priest.  I forgot.   


Did you do a hand fasting?

If you're married to a self-proclaimed Christian Conservative, one might say you are preparing a carriage for the anti-christ!
:o


I'm told the place you're most likely to find Satan is in a church.  There's an obvious line of logic here.

I'm not asking about the legal status.  I'm asking the people here who don't want civil unions for gay people how they refer to hetero friends who were not married in church.  Does it bother them that these friends choose to be legally married but not 'under the sight of God'?


One word "hetero".  Gay relationship are socially where unmarried people living together were perceived back in the 50's and 60's.  Starting to be accepted however a lot of people were still cringing.  IMO sometimes I think the religious reasoning is a crutch because people can't admit they're still jittery about the whole ideal.

Is that witch married to Glen Campbell .........















the Witch-ita lineman ? 8)???







:P






:D



That was just SOOOOOO BAD!!!!!




Cat

One word "hetero".  Gay relationship are socially where unmarried people living together were perceived back in the 50's and 60's.  Starting to be accepted however a lot of people were still cringing.  IMO sometimes I think the religious reasoning is a crutch because people can't admit they're still jittery about the whole ideal.


But would you still call them married?

But would you still call them married?


Personally, I would.  I think that a stable relationship self described as marriage is just as good as a marriage.  To put relationships in the category of married or unmarried is absurd and unfair.

I would say "Not Sure".

I could say 'No' because of my beliefs, but this is the same situation we had 100 years ago with the Mormons.

I would say "Not Sure".

I could say 'No' because of my beliefs, but this is the same situation we had 100 years ago with the Mormons.


You're going to mention the Mormon War next weren't you???  Same kind a battle happening today, only no one has resorted to guns  . . .yet.

Well hubby#1 and I were married in the Methodist church, with all the pomp snd ceremony that went a long with it. We were divorced 10 years later.
Jim {#2} and I were married by the acting magistrate in Saugerties, N.Y. ZDoes that mean we are not morally married? Who cares?  After 18 years np one else would put up with our crap!!!

http://j-walkblog.com/images/sinkingship.gif


Yes, never mind about anything else !  8)

http://j-walkblog.com/images/sinkingship.gif


Yes, never mind about anything else !  8)


So about those priorities.  We don't need no stinkin priorities.  Economy, war, who cares we have to keep dykes and fags from marrying.  ::)

Last night Palin said marriage her idea of marriage was one man, one woman.  Well, maybe she should stress that number ONE to her fellow family values, christian, republicans like McCain(2). Gingrich(3), and Rove(2).

Last night Palin said marriage her idea of marriage was one man, one woman.  Well, maybe she should stress that number ONE to her fellow family values, christian, republicans like McCain(2). Gingrich(3), and Rove(2).


;D

Last night Palin said marriage her idea of marriage was one man, one woman.  Well, maybe she should stress that number ONE to her fellow family values, christian, republicans like McCain(2). Gingrich(3), and Rove(2).


I think she meant one at a time.  Two at a time gets ya sent to a radical Mormon bunker.

I think she meant one at a time.  Two at a time gets ya sent to a radical Mormon bunker.


IknowIknow, just a bit of sarcasm.....

IknowIknow, just a bit of sarcasm.....


But it raises a good point.  Depending on perception the one man one woman can be thrown right out the window.

and....presuming those marriages took place in a church then didn't they "Promise before God" to stick together until death they did part?

Since all three men Danoota mentioned are still alive I wonder how many of the wives are still alive as well?

Hmmmm isn't divorce considered a sin too Sarah Palin? 

and....presuming those marriages took place in a church then didn't they "Promise before God" to stick together until death they did part?

Since all three men Danoota mentioned are still alive I wonder how many of the wives are still alive as well?

Hmmmm isn't divorce considered a sin too Sarah Palin? 


That's traditonal "traditional " marriage.  Dang those leftist free thinking hippie commies have to make a mockery of what we hold dear.

We look the other way when it comes to our leaders.

Yes, it is a sin.  I guess it's better than murder.

The husband wants me to go get him another beer and change the channel for him.  Gotta go.

and....presuming those marriages took place in a church then didn't they "Promise before God" to stick together until death they did part?

Since all three men Danoota mentioned are still alive I wonder how many of the wives are still alive as well?
 


All of them.  Gingrich served divorce papers to number one while she was in hospital having cancer treatments, told him he couldn't take the kids because he already had someone waiting outside, and didn't pay child support until he decided to run for office. 

All of them.  Gingrich served divorce papers to number one while she was in hospital having cancer treatments, told him he couldn't take the kids because he already had someone waiting outside, and didn't pay child support until he decided to run for office. 


So what was the deal with Gingrich during the Clinton Impeachment Hearings?  Wasn't he cheating?  Boy talking about calling the kettle black.  Great way to relieve guilt, go after someone else who's doing the same thing.

So what was the deal with Gingrich during the Clinton Impeachment Hearings?  Wasn't he cheating?  Boy talking about calling the kettle black.  Great way to relieve guilt, go after someone else who's doing the same thing.


Yes, as a matter of fact during the Clinton Impeachment hearings Newt was having an affair and preparing the papers for his second divorce.  Wife #3 was a staffer 23 years younger and this had been going on for a few years.  You can't tell me the press didn't know about it.

All of them.  Gingrich served divorce papers to number one while she was in hospital having cancer treatments, told him he couldn't take the kids because he already had someone waiting outside, and didn't pay child support until he decided to run for office. 



what a jerk!



So what was the deal with Gingrich during the Clinton Impeachment Hearings?  Wasn't he cheating?  Boy talking about calling the kettle black.  Great way to relieve guilt, go after someone else who's doing the same thing.



good point



Yes, as a matter of fact during the Clinton Impeachment hearings Newt was having an affair and preparing the papers for his second divorce.  Wife #3 was a staffer 23 years younger and this had been going on for a few years.  You can't tell me the press didn't know about it.


man you coulda been another woodward or bernstien  ;D

Yes, as a matter of fact during the Clinton Impeachment hearings Newt was having an affair and preparing the papers for his second divorce.  Wife #3 was a staffer 23 years younger and this had been going on for a few years.  You can't tell me the press didn't know about it.

Newt and his ilk don't respond to "should" and "shouldn't"; only "can" and "cannot."  It's not whether he should or should not try to nail Clinton for fooling around; it's a question of whether he still be Speaker of the House if he get's caughts doing the same thing.  The answer was: No, you can't.  "If Newt had said: "We're trying to nail Clinton 'coz we hate the sonofabitch!," he'd be President today!
:o

I think she meant one at a time.  Two at a time gets ya sent to a radical Mormon bunker.

Reminds me of a limerick:

There was a young fellow from Lyme
Who married three brides at a time
When asked "why the third?"
He replied "One's absurd,
And bigamy, sir, is a crime"

Reminds me of a limerick:

There was a young fellow from Lyme
Who married three brides at a time
When asked "why the third?"
He replied "One's absurd,
And bigamy, sir, is a crime"


http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_cheers.gif
Karma +1

Absolutely I think gay marriage should be legal. If a specific church has a problem with it, then that church doesn't have to perform the ceremony. There are plenty of others that will. Government should keep their noses out of it, other than ensuring that gay couples aren't being denied the same rights that straight couples are.

Absolutely I think gay marriage should be legal. If a specific church has a problem with it, then that church doesn't have to perform the ceremony. There are plenty of others that will. Government should keep their noses out of it, other than ensuring that gay couples aren't being denied the same rights that straight couples are.


You are confusing marriage with wedding.  The wedding ceremony is up to the religions involved and not the issue.  Marriage is the recognition of the legal rights of the 2 people involved. 

You are confusing marriage with wedding.  The wedding ceremony is up to the religions involved and not the issue.  Marriage is the recognition of the legal rights of the 2 people involved. 

People say it's a slippery slope, what about polygamy?  No, no polygamy.  One to one, that's the line.  Gays have really worked on it over the past 25 years. One disadvantage is their visibility and activism vastly overstates their numbers.  Look in any local-yokel newspaper from Bangor to La Jolla has at least three wedding announcemens every week.  They're all one man and one woman.  In most places the number of gay marriages, let along gay couples looking to have children, is statistically insignificant.  It's not a threat to anything!  Maybe they'd see three gay marriages in a whole year someplaces.  It's not a big deal.

People say it "legitimizes" and "immoral" lifestyle.  First, I don't think it's immoral, but perhaps there are imoral people in gay marriages; second, you want "immoral"?  Look in the mirror, chances are you shouldn't cast the first stone. 

Anyway,

  I wouldn't go to bed with another guy just because the East Podunk Express announced Todd & Jared were getting hitched!
:P

You are confusing marriage with wedding.  The wedding ceremony is up to the religions involved and not the issue.  Marriage is the recognition of the legal rights of the 2 people involved. 

Yes, but the primary reason that many people are against marriages is because of religious reasons. The point is that people who don't like the idea of gay marriage don't have to like it; it's their opinion, whatever the reason, and they're entitled to it. But that doesn't give them the right to deny gay people what is not denied to straight people, marriage. I simply use weddings because they are linked to marriage, as opposed to civil union ceremonies.

Yes, but the primary reason that many people are against marriages is because of religious reasons. The point is that people who don't like the idea of gay marriage don't have to like it; it's their opinion, whatever the reason, and they're entitled to it. But that doesn't give them the right to deny gay people what is not denied to straight people, marriage. I simply use weddings because they are linked to marriage, as opposed to civil union ceremonies.


If they've got a problem with gay marriage, they've got a problem with gays.  Period.  Me, I don't judge a person on it either way, it's the other person's business.  I have a gay friend whose been with the same partner for 35 years.  I don't treat them any differently than a married heterosexual couple. 

And if you don't like to think about how gays have sex, then doooooon't think about it!  My guess is a lot of guys like to think about it and it tortures them!
::)

Gay marriage should be legal everywhere.  What makes "man + man" and "woman + woman" different than "man + woman"? 

Banning gay marriage is no different than women's lib or racism.  In this world, everyone is equal and should get the same fair chances as everyone else.  Not always will that happen, but in a perfect world I guess

Connecticut has approved gay marriage. http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/multi.gif

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081010/ap_on_re_us/connecticut_same_sex_marriage

Connecticut has approved gay marriage. http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/multi.gif

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081010/ap_on_re_us/connecticut_same_sex_marriage


YAY!

Glad to hear it. I'm afraid it will be quite some time before it ever gets to Oklahoma (if ever), but it's nice to know that it's slowly making its way elsewhere in the states.

Yes, why not. It's the person and how you live your life that matters, not who you're attracted to.

First of all too, I don't believe it's a choice you can be "cured" from, either you are or aren't, but you're born with your sexuality imo.

I had girl crushes almost as far back as I can remember (whether it was girls at school, babysitters, celebrities, you name it). ;) It didn't suddenly start when I was 12 or 13 (even if it kicks more into overdrive then, lol). I'm sure gay people have felt the same way as kids. They might've not yet fully understood it, but I'm sure those feelings existed early on. In fact, I've heard them say things to that effect before, like they never "felt like one of the boys".

There seems to still be about 10% anti-homosexuality. Like most people are cool with it, and it usually won't get you socially shunned or rejected by your family (like it probably would before, say the '70s), but it still doesn't have total acceptance by "the establishment" either.

Yes, why not. It's the person and how you live your life that matters, not who you're attracted to.

First of all too, I don't believe it's a choice you can be "cured" from, either you are or aren't, but you're born with your sexuality imo.

I had girl crushes almost as far back as I can remember (whether it was girls at school, babysitters, celebrities, you name it). ;) It didn't suddenly start when I was 12 or 13 (even if it kicks more into overdrive then, lol). I'm sure gay people have felt the same way as kids. They might've not yet fully understood it, but I'm sure those feelings existed early on. In fact, I've heard them say things to that effect before, like they never "felt like one of the boys".

There seems to still be about 10% anti-homosexuality. Like most people are cool with it, and it usually won't get you socially shunned or rejected by your family (like it probably would before, say the '70s), but it still doesn't have total acceptance by "the establishment" either.


actually I think the number is higher than 10% its just those of us who aren't against homosexuality are more vocal than we were in the past so it seems like acceptance is more widel spread than actually is. (If that makes sense) Although the acceptance of homosexuality is definitely higher than it used to be.

actually I think the number is higher than 10% its just those of us who aren't against homosexuality are more vocal than we were in the past so it seems like acceptance is more widel spread than actually is. (If that makes sense) Although the acceptance of homosexuality is definitely higher than it used to be.

Yeah, I'd say the late '60s to now is sort of the middle ground, where it's generally okay to be gay in societal terms, but certain people themselves disapprove.

It seems like the resistance is just against marriage or unions, as opposed to people merely being gay. Like even if someone doesn't approve of homosexuality, they'll probably have the "Be what you are, but not around me" attitude. The "extremist" haters seems to have faded away, thank God.

I think people sometimes stereotype gays as all being the way the flamboyant ones are (actually most things are like that, the biggest 10% unfairly set the stereotypes for everyone else), which isn't true either. I'm guessing their disapproval comes from the way A FEW of them live their lives, like having casual/unprotected sex with lots of people, or just generally being wild and over the top.

Everyone is different, though. Like with me, I'm just a really feminine straight dude. ;D I've never been the "typical straight man" with most things.

Glad to hear it. I'm afraid it will be quite some time before it ever gets to Oklahoma (if ever), but it's nice to know that it's slowly making its way elsewhere in the states.


Oklahomo?

Sorry, couldn't resist.
:-\\

The most vain of fears among heterosexual males is that every gay man wants to go to bed with them.  Well, maybe if some of those gay men could walk around with wedding bands, the fellas wouldn't have to worry about getting hit on so much!
:D

Oklahomo?

Sorry, couldn't resist.
:-\\

The most vain of fears among heterosexual males is that every gay man wants to go to bed with them.  Well, maybe if some of those gay men could walk around with wedding bands, the fellas wouldn't have to worry about getting hit on so much!
:D


LOL yeah, I think some of the discrimination comes from straight guys who are overly worried about protecting their "manhood". Again, I think it fits my idea that people base ALL gays off of the extreme examples (i.e. the flayboyant ones with the distinct voice), even if it's only a small percentage. And having said that, there's nothing wrong with being overly flamboyant - it might be a little obnoxious, but as long as they're not breaking the law, why should it be any of our business what they do?

Connecticut has approved gay marriage. http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/multi.gif

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081010/ap_on_re_us/connecticut_same_sex_marriage


I heard that on the news yesterday and I was like yes... finally. Of course here in Fla it is on the ballot in Nov. Or something to do with same sex civil unions, I can't remember just now. Do I support it? Of course!!! Will it pass?? In Fla????  8-P      I don't really think so, this state is very backward in a lot of respects, also very racist. I have been working the phones for Obama and have never encountered such blatant racism in my life.

I'm sorry to anyone who lives in Fla, if I offend, but man o man. I guess I'm kinda spoiled from living up North where people are not so narrow minded about such issues as race and sexual orientation.

Another big myth is Orlando, a lot of people  hear Orlando and conjure up these images of Mickey and funparks. But let me tell you Orange County is very violent. The tourists never see that part of the city. Almost every morning on the news there is a shooting or robbery.

I heard that on the news yesterday and I was like yes... finally. Of course here in Fla it is on the ballot in Nov. Or something to do with same sex civil unions, I can't remember just now. Do I support it? Of course!!! Will it pass?? In Fla????  8-P      I don't really think so, this state is very backward in a lot of respects, also very racist. I have been working the phones for Obama and have never encountered such blatant racism in my life.

I'm sorry to anyone who lives in Fla, if I offend, but man o man. I guess I'm kinda spoiled from living up North where people are not so narrow minded about such issues as race and sexual orientation.

Another big myth is Orlando, a lot of people  hear Orlando and conjure up these images of Mickey and funparks. But let me tell you Orange County is very violent. The tourists never see that part of the city. Almost every morning on the news there is a shooting or robbery.

I remember riding on some godawful back roads in rural Florida, I think it was just north of the Everglades, don't quite remember I was only 12, but I remember thinking we could be in Haiti or something.  Sure wasn't like what the other kids brought back from their vacations down in F-L-A! 

Anyway...that's gone off topic.

I remember riding on some godawful back roads in rural Florida, I think it was just north of the Everglades, don't quite remember I was only 12, but I remember thinking we could be in Haiti or something.  Sure wasn't like what the other kids brought back from their vacations down in F-L-A! 

Anyway...that's gone off topic.


Yeah sorry, I kinda went off on a rant.

Yeah sorry, I kinda went off on a rant.

Oh, I was referring to myself...I had something to say about Florida, but not gay marriage!

Oklahomo?

I can feel a "People will say we're in love" parody coming on.. or possibly even an "Oklahoma" one :)

LOL yeah, I think some of the discrimination comes from straight guys who are overly worried about protecting their "manhood".


Quite possibly, although Sally Kern certainly isn't helping things.

We have already heard the arguments from both the Right and the Left ad nauseam.

Nevertheless, the second half of the following interview might offer some food for thought, which will most probably disgust Conservatives and Liberals alike:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6285932897071996798

By the way, my position: Marriage, no. Civil unions, yes.

Quite possibly, although Sally Kern certainly isn't helping things.


Oh yeah, THAT bitch.  Is it true that one of her sons is gay?  I heard about it a couple of months ago, but never heard if they confirmed he was.

Oh yeah, THAT bitch.  Is it true that one of her sons is gay?  I heard about it a couple of months ago, but never heard if they confirmed he was.


Truthfully, I don't know, but if he were I imagine he'd probably keep it under wraps given who his mom is. He denies it, although he admits that he's celibate.

I can feel a "People will say we're in love" parody coming on.. or possibly even an "Oklahoma" one :)

You mean Rodgers & Hammerstein?  I think it kinda is already!
:P

Just to get another discussion rolling - I'm curious, for those that are opposed to gay marriage, why? BTW I'm not being smarta*s or anything.

Is it a fear that if being gay is totally mainstreamized by legalizing marriage, that it'll endanger the "typical family". Like two guys or girls raising a kid being on the same level as a man and a woman is still kinda feared by the establishment, maybe because they see it as homosexuality being forced on us. I don't think it'll be much different 'cause there's been nontraditional familes since the '70s (when the divorce rate started getting high), or just check out Full House. ;) My other guess would be that people associate gays with being promiscuous, flamboyant or total hornballs (hey, alot of sttraight guys are bad or worse that way too, lol...so it depends on the person) and they think it's a bad influence on little kids or safe Middle America. Maybe they think gay couples won't be as responsible with raising kids?

Having said all that, I DO think it's important for kids to have a good adult role model of both genders in their life (if it's a gay couple, maybe one of their sisters). And since kids can be mean, they'll probably be in for a tough ride in school, so it's really important to be sensitive about it and explain the situation to them (the best they can reasonably understand it).

Interesting article

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_10697788

Oh yeah, THAT bitch. 

You're already half way there!
:-X

We have already heard the arguments from both the Right and the Left ad nauseam.

Nevertheless, the second half of the following interview might offer some food for thought, which will most probably disgust Conservatives and Liberals alike:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6285932897071996798

By the way, my position: Marriage, no. Civil unions, yes.


Always appreciate a bit of CanCon. Very interesting.

Just to get another discussion rolling - I'm curious, for those that are opposed to gay marriage, why? BTW I'm not being smarta*s or anything.

Is it a fear that if being gay is totally mainstreamized by legalizing marriage, that it'll endanger the "typical family". Like two guys or girls raising a kid being on the same level as a man and a woman is still kinda feared by the establishment, maybe because they see it as homosexuality being forced on us. I don't think it'll be much different 'cause there's been nontraditional familes since the '70s (when the divorce rate started getting high), or just check out Full House. ;) My other guess would be that people associate gays with being promiscuous, flamboyant or total hornballs (hey, alot of sttraight guys are bad or worse that way too, lol...so it depends on the person) and they think it's a bad influence on little kids or safe Middle America. Maybe they think gay couples won't be as responsible with raising kids?

Having said all that, I DO think it's important for kids to have a good adult role model of both genders in their life (if it's a gay couple, maybe one of their sisters). And since kids can be mean, they'll probably be in for a tough ride in school, so it's really important to be sensitive about it and explain the situation to them (the best they can reasonably understand it).

Me and the missus are against it because marriage has been between one man and one woman since the beginning of time, even when it was between one slimy primordial green thing and one primordial green thing.  If we start letting a few of these here gays get married, before you know it, the mice will chase the cats, the cats will chase, the dogs, the dogs will fly the spaceships and a big rent will open in the space time continuum. 
D'ya understand now?
:D

Me and the missus are against it because marriage has been between one man and one woman since the beginning of time, even when it was between one slimy primordial green thing and one primordial green thing.  If we start letting a few of these here gays get married, before you know it, the mice will chase the cats, the cats will chase, the dogs, the dogs will fly the spaceships and a big rent will open in the space time continuum. 
D'ya understand now?
:D


"The space time continuum, whoa Doc, this is heavy!" ;D

Seriously though, I get what you're saying and you've probably got a point. DO you think it's cool for them to live together or have a civil union, but just not to be married in the traditional sense? I guess one reason I'm in favor of it is because it feels almost like people are inferiorized because of their sexual/romantic preference (which I believe you're born with and can't help).

"The space time continuum, whoa Doc, this is heavy!" ;D

Seriously though, I get what you're saying and you've probably got a point. DO you think it's cool for them to live together or have a civil union, but just not to be married in the traditional sense? I guess one reason I'm in favor of it is because it feels almost like people are inferiorized because of their sexual/romantic preference (which I believe you're born with and can't help).

I dunno.  Me and Ssssteeee-ven are going to see Rent at the end of the universe!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/laughing9.gif

^ ;D

The LOL sites always have something to suit the occasion:

http://roflrazzi.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/ellen-degeneres-portia-derossi-our-mere-existance.jpg?w=400&h=600

Yes, I'm in favour of same-sex marriage. It's about tolerance and equal rights. If straight people have the right to get married, then gay people should, too.

Connecticut has approved gay marriage. http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/multi.gif

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081010/ap_on_re_us/connecticut_same_sex_marriage



I heard that the people who lost that suit are now going to try to make a Constitution amendment so they can have that ruling overturned.  ::)  I don't get why people will go out of their way to prevent two people from getting married. Who does it hurt for two men or two women to get hitched? I just don't get it.



Cat



Cat

I heard that the people who lost that suit are now going to try to make a Constitution amendment so they can have that ruling overturned.  ::)  I don't get why people will go out of their way to prevent two people from getting married. Who does it hurt for two men or two women to get hitched? I just don't get it.



Cat



Not quite.  They are trying to get a YES vote to there being a constitutional convention to rewrite the constitution.  A long drawn-out process by all accounts.

http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-connecticut-gay-marriage,0,4681068.story

People should be able to basically do what they want, as long as it doesn't infringe on others' rights.

People should be able to basically do what they want, as long as it doesn't infringe on others' rights.


Well said.

Ant

People should be able to basically do what they want, as long as it doesn't infringe on others' rights.


What about my kid's rights not to be intraduced to Mr. and Mr. Honeybuns, his kindergarten teachers.  You liberals ever though about OUR rights, huh?
:D

I'm for it. Gay people should have the right to be as miserable as the straight and married.  ;D

Ant


Well put.

I voted NO.

I could say why but if there's one thing I've learned, it's that unless I toe the liberal line here, it's best just to keep my mouth shut.

I voted NO.

I could say why but if there's one thing I've learned, it's that unless I toe the liberal line here, it's best just to keep my mouth shut.


You can say why - it's just that some others might then get very very angry!  ;)

I don't get why people will go out of their way to prevent two people from getting married. Who does it hurt for two men or two women to get hitched? I just don't get it.

Me neither... though I'm currently reading Sam Harris' "End of Faith", and he does point out the faith-based logic that if you believe a) that God cares about whether people sin, and b) that homosexuality is a sin then the corollary is that it is up to you to do something about it.

I do wish these people would get some sense of perspective, though.  However much you may dislike the thought of homosexuality, there are far worse sins to get ones knickers in a twist about.



I voted NO.

I could say why but if there's one thing I've learned, it's that unless I toe the liberal line here, it's best just to keep my mouth shut.

So instead you're not going to say why?  True, on this topic especially it seems, there is a liberal (with a small "l") consensus - that is, it's not any of our business to stop two men or two women marrying if they so desire.. but I would love to hear some kind of argument put forward as to why you think this is wrong.

...
Actually i've always heard that the most ferocious homophobes are usually closet gays. Maybe you should adjust your gaydar towards you ;)

Everyone is free to express their opinion and that's what this thread was suppose to be about,who's for and against gay marriage and the reasons why. What happened is that none of those who oppose it came up with more than prejudice against gays. Cause let's face it...those who say no to gay marriage are basically saying homosexuality is wrong and should be kept in the closet. See we love the gay shows on TV and might even have gay friends but they can ever be seen as equal or given the same opportunities or rights.

I'm not sure what people are afraid of... is this new family concept worse than the past ones? Are gay couples less capable of raising a child? Of loving and caring? To me it's obvious the answer is no and until someone comes up with a strong valid argument that will make me think differently i won't be happy until laws are changed and everyone will be free to live and love as they please.

I'm going with no because people have the right.  It may be a sin and God does care, but he also gives us a choice to follow Him or not.  Children in the future?  maybe they'll still be able to decide for themselves what they want to do when they grow up.     

I'm going with no because people have the right.  It may be a sin and God does care, but he also gives us a choice to follow Him or not.  Children in the future?  maybe they'll still be able to decide for themselves what they want to do when they grow up.     


I understand your position if you're religious and your religion says homosexuality is wrong then you are against gay marriage. Fortunetly in some countries religious beliefs do not make state laws. In your Church those rules may apply outside in the real world they don't. In the eyes of the law we are all the same and that is what gay couples want,to be treated the same.

Actually i've always heard that the most ferocious homophobes are usually closet gays. Maybe you should adjust your gaydar towards you ;)

Everyone is free to express their opinion and that's what this thread was suppose to be about,who's for and against gay marriage and the reasons why. What happened is that none of those who oppose it came up with more than prejudice against gays. Cause let's face it...those who say no to gay marriage are basically saying homosexuality is wrong and should be kept in the closet. See we love the gay shows on TV and might even have gay friends but they can ever be seen as equal or given the same opportunities or rights.

I'm not sure what people are afraid of... is this new family concept worse than the past ones? Are gay couples less capable of raising a child? Of loving and caring? To me it's obvious the answer is no and until someone comes up with a strong valid argument that will make me think differently i won't be happy until laws are changed and everyone will be free to live and love as they please.



Are you suggesting what I think you're suggesting??? ;D  I'm not going to say another word.

You don't have a proper gaydar. ::)


I don't know if most people do. :D

I understand your position if you're religious and your religion says homosexuality is wrong then you are against gay marriage. Fortunetly in some countries religious beliefs do not make state laws. In your Church those rules may apply outside in the real world they don't. In the eyes of the law we are all the same and that is what gay couples want,to be treated the same.


I don't think it's wrong to want to stop what one believes is wrong.  For myself it just seems that when I do try to correct someone or something God has His way of giving me a spanking.  He's telling me He will do the judging and I need to mind my own business. 

What about my kid's rights not to be intraduced to Mr. and Mr. Honeybuns, his kindergarten teachers.  You liberals ever though about OUR rights, huh?
:D


geeze they're not recruting  :)

^ Speaking of that - did you notice that when it comes to stuff like PDA's, gays seem to get criticized for it alot harder than straight people do (even if both do it lol). Like I was saying in my other posts, I guess it's still remnants of old stereotypes some people have, or the extreme ones making it look like they're all the same way.

^ Speaking of that - did you notice that when it comes to stuff like PDA's, gays seem to get criticized for it alot harder than straight people do (even if both do it lol). Like I was saying in my other posts, I guess it's still remnants of old stereotypes some people have, or the extreme ones making it look like they're all the same way.


This is my opinion only, but I don't like PDA at all, whether gay or straight.  The phrase, 'get a room' comes to mind.

This is my opinion only, but I don't like PDA at all, whether gay or straight.  The phrase, 'get a room' comes to mind.


True ;D Especially when they're all over each other.

I guess it's just that people almost expect/stereotype gays for being outwardly sexual more than straight people, when everyone does it. Heck some straight people are probably worse, LMAO.

Yes, though I'm not sure if marriage should be a legal status at all. It's a religious thing.

I don't think it's wrong to want to stop what one believes is wrong. 
Personally, I think it's wrong to go telling people not to do things that hurt nobody.

Yes, though I'm not sure if marriage should be a legal status at all. It's a religious thing.


No, weddings are the religious observance of a legal marriage.  Marriage is the recognition by the government of two people in a legally binding relationship, religion doesn't have enter into a marriage.

geeze they're not recruting  :)


That's not what G. Gordon Liddy says!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/08/rudolf.gif

That's not what G. Gordon Liddy says!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/08/rudolf.gif


Who gives a flying Rats ass what he says???? ;D ;D ;D

Who gives a flying Rats ass what he says???? ;D ;D ;D


I used to tune into his radio program.  It was a scream! Listeners would call in and ask him for advice and counsel like he was Dr. Phil! 

"Hello, Mr. Liddy, my kid's getting bullied in school, what should he do?"
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/05/greenchainsaw.gif
"Gee, thanks, G!"

But that station went all-sports a few years ago so I don't get to hear Gordon no more!
:\'(

Actually i've always heard that the most ferocious homophobes are usually closet gays. Maybe you should adjust your gaydar towards you ;)


Just what I was thinking............the whole methinks she doeth protest too much.  ;D

Is that all you're concerned with is gay men?  Here I thought you'd be a bit more inclusive.


Don't try 'n' tell me gay men didn't help Kate Bush's career neither!
::)

Anyone who is against gay marriage is really just a bigot, sorry. It's like advocating slavery.

^ Speaking of that - did you notice that when it comes to stuff like PDA's, gays seem to get criticized for it alot harder than straight people do (even if both do it lol). Like I was saying in my other posts, I guess it's still remnants of old stereotypes some people have, or the extreme ones making it look like they're all the same way.



And I say it again...gay or straight if you have to wipe you mouth or wash something after your PDA it is TDM (Too Damn Much)

Don't try 'n' tell me gay men didn't help Kate Bush's career neither!
::)


Of course not everyone knows they did.  Still trying to figure out k.d. Lang though. :-\\

I voted NO.

I could say why but if there's one thing I've learned, it's that unless I toe the liberal line here, it's best just to keep my mouth shut.
it's because al used the anti-gay-marriage thing as an excuse to turn me down.  :\'(

Of course not everyone knows they did.  Still trying to figure out k.d. Lang though. :-\\


K.D. Lang is pretty cool, actually.  Remember "Phranc" who toured with The Smiths?
???

K.D. Lang is pretty cool, actually.  Remember "Phranc" who toured with The Smiths?
???


Yes, I remember.  I've gotta admit though some gender bending is really cool.

You just don't like her haircut. :(

Saaaay, Babs, what's your hangup?
???

That's a hell of a mullet.

it's because al used the anti-gay-marriage thing as an excuse to turn me down.  :\'(


Any man should be proud to have you as a husband.  I would be. http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa87/kattofix/smilies/flirt2.gif

it's because al used the anti-gay-marriage thing as an excuse to turn me down.  :\'(

Oh you little bitch!  You stay away from Al, he's mine.  I'll eat your heart out, honey!  Do you catch my drift?
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/ymca.gif

Oh you little bitch!  You stay away from Al, he's mine.  I'll eat your heart out, honey!  Do you catch my drift?
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/ymca.gif


I don't mean to pick on you Max, you know I'm like your biggest fan and everything. However, I want to use this post of yours to sort of shift the debate a little bit.

I wonder if many people realise how little the type of behaviour you are imitating resonates in the lives of most of the world's same-sex attracted individuals. What you've described is a specific, Occidental homosexual sub-culture (the dominant one). But we can't expect every same-sex attracted person to slap on a rainbow flag and start listening to Madonna. Unfortunately, many feel an enormous pressure to do just that. Men especially think that being attracted to other men automatically strips them of their masculinity, and that is the message that both the mainstream society and the dominant homosexual subculture (the Gay movement) sends them.

Few and far between are the role models who say to young people attracted to the same sex 'look, you're just like everyone else - no need to separate yourselves.'

I don't mean to pick on you Max, you know I'm like your biggest fan and everything. However, I want to use this post of yours to sort of shift the debate a little bit.

I wonder if many people realise how little the type of behaviour you are imitating resonates in the lives of most of the world's same-sex attracted individuals. What you've described is a specific, Occidental homosexual sub-culture (the dominant one). But we can't expect every same-sex attracted person to slap on a rainbow flag and start listening to Madonna. Unfortunately, many feel an enormous pressure to do just that. Men especially think that being attracted to other men automatically strips them of their masculinity, and that is the message that both the mainstream society and the dominant homosexual subculture (the Gay movement) sends them.

Few and far between are the role models who say to young people attracted to the same sex 'look, you're just like everyone else - no need to separate yourselves.'


I agree. :)

People don't fit into stereotypes (that's a pet peeve of mine, whenever someone tries to pigeonhole or say a certain person "should" act or feel a certain way). Hey I'm a straight, girl-loving guy and I'm not "typically manly". ;D People probably could mistake ME as being gay if they didn't know, LMAO - so it just depends on the individual.

I agree. :)

People don't fit into stereotypes (that's a pet peeve of mine, whenever someone tries to pigeonhole or say a certain person "should" act or feel a certain way). Hey I'm a straight, girl-loving guy and I'm not "typically manly". ;D People probably could mistake ME as being gay if they didn't know, LMAO - so it just depends on the individual.
Yes it's a bit like people who panic when they find out someone is gay because that means of course they will automatically make a pass at them because they are the same sex! The fact that they probably don't even fancy them doesn't even enter their head.  ;D

so what's there to figure out then?

she's a gay singer who looks a bit like Elvis and has a lovely voice


And she has a GREAT road crew. We did her show the other week and whilst the show itself was dull as anything I've seen for a while her crew is great. In and out so fast, really well organized. Good folks.

I don't mean to pick on you Max, you know I'm like your biggest fan and everything. However, I want to use this post of yours to sort of shift the debate a little bit.

I wonder if many people realise how little the type of behaviour you are imitating resonates in the lives of most of the world's same-sex attracted individuals. What you've described is a specific, Occidental homosexual sub-culture (the dominant one). But we can't expect every same-sex attracted person to slap on a rainbow flag and start listening to Madonna. Unfortunately, many feel an enormous pressure to do just that. Men especially think that being attracted to other men automatically strips them of their masculinity, and that is the message that both the mainstream society and the dominant homosexual subculture (the Gay movement) sends them.

Few and far between are the role models who say to young people attracted to the same sex 'look, you're just like everyone else - no need to separate yourselves.'


I agree.

Most I've met didn't act like the typical gay stereotype.

OKay enough I say break out the wesson oil, and huge rubber sheet everyone get naked and we will see what happens.. have to be at last 400 or 500 people... Party hearty oh of both sexes. ya know like studio 54 in the 70s' ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

OKay enough I say break out the wesson oil, and huge rubber sheet everyone get naked and we will see what happens.. have to be at last 400 or 500 people... Party hearty oh of both sexes. ya know like studio 54 in the 70s' ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Typical hippie.  Can't handle tension.  Besides what you're suggesting gets really really messy.  Now we have to decide between tension and messy. ::)

I don't mean to pick on you Max, you know I'm like your biggest fan and everything. However, I want to use this post of yours to sort of shift the debate a little bit.

I wonder if many people realise how little the type of behaviour you are imitating resonates in the lives of most of the world's same-sex attracted individuals. What you've described is a specific, Occidental homosexual sub-culture (the dominant one). But we can't expect every same-sex attracted person to slap on a rainbow flag and start listening to Madonna. Unfortunately, many feel an enormous pressure to do just that. Men especially think that being attracted to other men automatically strips them of their masculinity, and that is the message that both the mainstream society and the dominant homosexual subculture (the Gay movement) sends them.

Few and far between are the role models who say to young people attracted to the same sex 'look, you're just like everyone else - no need to separate yourselves.'


I suppose it won't help to say at this point some of my best friends are gay...

In other words, I meant only to poke fun at homophobes and the homophobes' stereotypes of gays.  However, your point is indeed well taken.  Karma +1 to you.

OKay enough I say break out the wesson oil, and huge rubber sheet everyone get naked and we will see what happens.. have to be at last 400 or 500 people... Party hearty oh of both sexes. ya know like studio 54 in the 70s' ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

If you bring the nose candy, I'll bring the 'Ludes, and may the ghosts of Andy Warhol and Truma Capote smile upon us!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/evil6.gif

If you bring the nose candy, I'll bring the 'Ludes, and may the ghosts of Andy Warhol and Truma Capote smile upon us!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/evil6.gif
As Boy George amongst others has said, I'd rather have a cup of tea.  ;D

As Boy George amongst others has said, I'd rather have a cup of tea.  ;D


...A cup of Jon Moss tea!
:P

...A cup of Jon Moss tea!
:P
Nah just a cup of your proper rosie lee. He said tea was better than sex.

I don't mean to pick on you Max, you know I'm like your biggest fan and everything. However, I want to use this post of yours to sort of shift the debate a little bit.

I wonder if many people realise how little the type of behaviour you are imitating resonates in the lives of most of the world's same-sex attracted individuals. What you've described is a specific, Occidental homosexual sub-culture (the dominant one). But we can't expect every same-sex attracted person to slap on a rainbow flag and start listening to Madonna. Unfortunately, many feel an enormous pressure to do just that. Men especially think that being attracted to other men automatically strips them of their masculinity, and that is the message that both the mainstream society and the dominant homosexual subculture (the Gay movement) sends them.

Few and far between are the role models who say to young people attracted to the same sex 'look, you're just like everyone else - no need to separate yourselves.'


You're right but isn't that true to every group? If you're a lesbian you must be butch, if you're a republican you must have a gun, if you're french you must be arrogant, if you're skinny you starve yourself, and so on.
We interact with all kinds of people and we have learned that stereotypes don't mean a thing, still here we are still doing it all the time and all of us are victims of it too. I don't believe that will ever change.

I think I have been misundestood. I am not railing against stereotypes, and I know that none of you are homophobes, least of all Maxwell.

What I meant was that people should stop and really think about sexual identities and political movements and how a lot of it is nothing but machination.

I've known tons of guys who declare themselves gay, and who one of the various stereotypes exactly. From your macho-men to your good old-fashioned fruitcakes, they all exist in droves (that's why they are stereotypes in the first place).

What I wanted to say is that the people who claim leadership in the 'gay community' are basically frauds and have made a career out of being queer. The only good example they set for young people is that of sexual openness. But all their other balony (the rainbows, the parades, the so-called 'gay culture', the materialism, the narcissism etc...) freaks out the mainstream youth, thereby forcing those youth who might be same-sex attracted to be ostracised and to instead adopt this vapid culture I have described. It also forces those who might otherwise test their sexual preferences in good faith, to 'play it safe' and just stick with the majority for fear of being labelled 'one of those people'. 

Instead of encouraging people to safely explore their sexuality and to be open and acknowledge other people's right to do the same, they sell them a pre-packaged sexual identity, part and parcel, complete with how they should dress, the political views they should have, the sexual practices they should engage in etc... Gay Inc. is huge, and it is even marketable. Ever read a gay magazine like the Advocate? You will see ads just for gays, the way you would see them in Spanish for Hispanics, or the way Church's Chicken markets to blacks. It's appalling.    

Worst of all is that this idea of a Gay Mafia, while it was meant to be a joke, is basically real. How else do you call a small, but vocal group of people who make it their sole mission in life to destroy anyone who dare question them? If a self-identified 'straight' public figure said what I have said here, the gay pressure-groups (an extension of the false leadership, the career queers) would stop at nothing to destroy his career. If a self-identified homosexual public figure said it, they would ruthlessly lampoon him or her as being a self-loather, a gay Uncle Tom etc...

So basically, this so-called 'leadership' is a mini-tyranny. It has an agenda. It shouldn't be representing the whole of same-sex attracted people, but sadly it does.

Everything in society must be questioned, especially those ideas we take for granted. 

I think I have been misundestood. I am not railing against stereotypes, and I know that none of you are homophobes, least of all Maxwell.

What I meant was that people should stop and really think about sexual identities and political movements and how a lot of it is nothing but machination.

I've known tons of guys who declare themselves gay, and who one of the various stereotypes exactly. From your macho-men to your good old-fashioned fruitcakes, they all exist in droves (that's why they are stereotypes in the first place).

What I wanted to say is that the people who claim leadership in the 'gay community' are basically frauds and have made a career out of being queer. The only good example they set for young people is that of sexual openness. But all their other balony (the rainbows, the parades, the so-called 'gay culture', the materialism, the narcissism etc...) freaks out the mainstream youth, thereby forcing those youth who might be same-sex attracted to be ostracised and to instead adopt this vapid culture I have described. It also forces those who might otherwise test their sexual preferences in good faith, to 'play it safe' and just stick with the majority for fear of being labelled 'one of those people'. 

Instead of encouraging people to safely explore their sexuality and to be open and acknowledge other people's right to do the same, they sell them a pre-packaged sexual identity, part and parcel, complete with how they should dress, the political views they should have, the sexual practices they should engage in etc... Gay Inc. is huge, and it is even marketable. Ever read a gay magazine like the Advocate? You will see ads just for gays, the way you would see them in Spanish for Hispanics, or the way Church's Chicken markets to blacks. It's appalling.   

Worst of all is that this idea of a Gay Mafia, while it was meant to be a joke, is basically real. How else do you call a small, but vocal group of people who make it their sole mission in life to destroy anyone who dare question them? If a self-identified 'straight' public figure said what I have said here, the gay pressure-groups (an extension of the false leadership, the career queers) would stop at nothing to destroy his career. If a self-identified homosexual public figure said it, they would ruthlessly lampoon him or her as being a self-loather, a gay Uncle Tom etc...

So basically, this so-called 'leadership' is a mini-tyranny. It has an agenda. It shouldn't be representing the whole of same-sex attracted people, but sadly it does.

Everything in society must be questioned, especially those ideas we take for granted. 


You forgot to mention the discrimination within the actual LGBTQ community.  I've heard stories of outright hatred of lesbians toward transsexuals of both MTF and FTM.  You're also looked down upon if you're bi curious.  They want individualism and pride yet they can't handle what they "stand for".

Nah just a cup of your proper rosie lee. He said tea was better than sex.

Yes, I remember that well...
:)


You forgot to mention the discrimination within the actual LGBTQ community.  I've heard stories of outright hatred of lesbians toward transsexuals of both MTF and FTM.  You're also looked down upon if you're bi curious.  They want individualism and pride yet they can't handle what they "stand for".

This reflects the insecurity and self-esteem issues that, unfortunately, still pervades "LGBTQ community."  A lot of the activist-types have fragile egoes.
::)

You forgot to mention the discrimination within the actual LGBTQ community.  I've heard stories of outright hatred of lesbians toward transsexuals of both MTF and FTM.  You're also looked down upon if you're bi curious.  They want individualism and pride yet they can't handle what they "stand for".


Totally on the ball.

In California, there is a proposition to ban gay marriage. Right now I am pretty neutral on the issue, but I have been reading some strong arguments against this proposition, as well as the names of those who oppose the proposition. So I can't make up my mind one way or the other yet. :-\\


Edit: I'm leaning towards a yes vote. If gay people want to marry, that's perfectly fine with me