Yet another hate crime...

[batgirl]

Man, 18, sought after gun, hatchet attack at gay bar
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/02/gay.shooting/index.html

NEW BEDFORD, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Police on Thursday are seeking a man in connection with a gun and hatchet attack at a gay bar in New Bedford, south of Boston. Three people were wounded in what authorities said they suspect were hate crimes.

A bartender, who asked only to be identified as Phillip, told CNN he had a bad feeling when a man entered the Puzzles Lounge after 11:30 p.m. ET Wednesday and asked if it were a gay bar.

After finishing the drink and ordering a second one, Philip said, the man moved to the back of the bar, watching a game of pool briefly before taking out a hatchet -- a small ax the size of a hammer, Phillip said. "He started swinging the hatchet on top of this customer's head," he said.

The bartender said he called 911, trying to keep the phone from view, and urged patrons out the door.

Meanwhile, the attacker struck a second patron with the hatchet, pulled out a gun and shot the first victim in the face and the second twice in the head, Phillip said. A third person also was shot in the abdomen...

Maybe if the government didn't treat gays as second class citizens we wouldn't have so many hate crimes...

[msnicolea]

OMG--how absolutely sickening. And you're right, batgirl--the anti-gay climate this administration "stokes" doesn't help.

[LyLMyssChaos]

I think that what this person did was absolutely sickening and deplorable. He obviously was mentally disturbed, but it is in no way the fault of "the current administration." I know that you do not like our President, but to try and blame him and his administration for the actions of some nutcase is in no way fair or realistic.

[msnicolea]

Hate crimes existed before President Bush and will take place long after he is gone. But it is absolutely true that the anti-gay rhetoric of this administration does nothing to prevent this type of behavior, and, in fact, may encourage people to act that way by legitimizing their bigotry. I am blaming him for the climate not for the particular crime.

[gayle]

Hate crimes existed before President Bush and will take place long after he is gone. But it is absolutely true that the anti-gay rhetoric of this administration does nothing to prevent this type of behavior, and, in fact, may encourage people to act that way by legitimizing their bigotry. I am blaming him for the climate not for the particular crime.

Dead on.

[batgirl]

Hate crimes existed before President Bush and will take place long after he is gone. But it is absolutely true that the anti-gay rhetoric of this administration does nothing to prevent this type of behavior, and, in fact, may encourage people to act that way by legitimizing their bigotry. I am blaming him for the climate not for the particular crime.

ITA. When you prevent people from being able to wed, adopt children together, not allow people who have been together for decades to decide appropriate end of life care... not to mention label them as "sinners", "immoral," that they are "going to hell"... what message is this going to send to the more, um, unstable person? That its okay to persecute them, to discriminate against them, to attack them with hatchets...?

[LyLMyssChaos]

But the thing is, it's not "Bush" that is preventing these things from happening. It's the American people, the majority of people, contrary to what some believe, simply do not want it. I mean, there was a measure up for vote in Michigan, not too long ago, that would "legalize gay marriage" and if I remember correctly it was up in like 10 other states and failed in all of them. The President isn't "creating" any kind of sentiment. If anything, he is merely reflecting what the majority of Americans want.

[chefker]

ITA. When you prevent people from being able to wed, adopt children together, not allow people who have been together for decades to decide appropriate end of life care... not to mention label them as "sinners", "immoral," that they are "going to hell"... what message is this going to send to the more, um, unstable person?

Right on. Segregation sent a similar message to unstable persons...that black citizens were somehow inferior, and those unstable individuals would resort to harassing, assaulting or even murdering people based on the color of their skin. All because these people (who were likely unstable to begin with), were intolerant, ignorant, and full of fear and hate.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

But the thing is, it's not "Bush" that is preventing these things from happening. It's the American people, the majority of people, contrary to what some believe, simply do not want it. I mean, there was a measure up for vote in Michigan, not too long ago, that would "legalize gay marriage" and if I remember correctly it was up in like 10 other states and failed in all of them. The President isn't "creating" any kind of sentiment. If anything, he is merely reflecting what the majority of Americans want.
At one point, the American people also were just fine and dandy with not allowing interracial marriage. Yes, our elected officials are responsible to their constituents. But not just to the majority over the minority. They're also responsible for supporting the rights of the individual, even when it's an unpopular stance.

[LyLMyssChaos]

At one point, the American people also were just fine and dandy with not allowing interracial marriage. Yes, our elected officials are responsible to their constituents. But not just to the majority over the minority. They're also responsible for supporting the rights of the individual, even when it's an unpopular stance.

But how far does that go? I mean, for many people, this is a moral issue. Think of it like this:
There are people who think that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable, and there are others who think it is absolutely horrific. Just as there are people who think having sex with children is perfectly acceptable and there are others who think it is absolutely horrific. So in our country, since the majority deem the practice of having sex with children horrific, our leglislation leans to that viewpoint. Just like there are people who think that having multiple spouses is pefectly acceptable, the majority thinks it is not, so our laws support the latter viewpoint. Unfortunately in our country, homosexuality is not "perfectly acceptable" by the majority, so our laws represent this. Just like there are people who feel that what that person did by attacking those people in the bar is perfectly acceptable, the majority of society does not deem it acceptable, so thankfully, they will be faced with laws that support the viewpoint that it's not acceptable. We simply cannot legislate to the minority for the most part in this country. It just isn't feasible.

[msnicolea]

As soon as you equate homosexuality with people who have sex with children, you lose what little credibility you had left. Shame on you.

Our government is supposed to PROTECT minorities, whether racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual--it doesn't say "majority rules--tough shit."

[LyLMyssChaos]

As soon as you equate homosexuality with people who have sex with children, you lose what little credibility you had left. Shame on you.

Our government is supposed to PROTECT minorities, whether racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual--it doesn't say "majority rules--tough shit."


I wasn't equating homosexuality with people who have sex with children. It was just another example of a "moral" issue that people would have differing opinions on. Did you see my other examples or are you just picking up on the one that you feel will "cancel out everything else I said?"

[amew]

We simply cannot legislate to the minority for the most part in this country.

Then how on earth did Congress pass a wealth of civil rights legislation in the 1960s, long before a majority of this country really believed in racial equality?

You might have a point if it weren't for a little thing called the 14th Amendment.

[batgirl]

At one point, the American people also were just fine and dandy with not allowing interracial marriage. Yes, our elected officials are responsible to their constituents. But not just to the majority over the minority. They're also responsible for supporting the rights of the individual, even when it's an unpopular stance.

So true. If the government is not doing anything to promote equal rights they are pretty much condoning this type of behavior.

I just don't understand how american's can so love male figure skating, home makeover shows (extreme makeover home edition for example), all these personal makeover shows (what not to wear, extreme makeover), yet be so terrible homophobic at the same time. You guys know these people are gay, right?

[LyLMyssChaos]

I just don't understand how american's can so love male figure skating, home makeover shows (extreme makeover home edition for example), all these personal makeover shows (what not to where, extreme makeover), yet be so terrible homophobic at the same time. You guys know these people are gay, right?

See? That is the misconception that so many people have. Just because someone doesn't support the homosexual lifestyle, doesn't mean that they don't like "gay people." They just think that their homosexual actions are sinful, or unnatural. A lot of people equate it to premarital sex, teen pregnancy, tatoos or piercings, it's simply tabboo to them. It is quite possible for someone to be homosexual and be polite, well-mannered and liked.

[msnicolea]

Liked--but not invited into your home with a partner, right? Forgive me, LMC--but you have absolutely no credibility when it comes to professing your "tolerance."

Tolerance does not include wanting to deny someone his civil rights.

[Txfish]

Um, LMC, are you suggesting in some way that people who have tattoos or piercings should also not be allowed to marry whom they choose, because some people think those behaviors are "taboo"? I get the point of view where you don't want homosexual lifestyles shoved in your face, but I don't think you've ever fully comprehended the idea that THEIR CHOICES ARE BEING TAKEN FROM THEM. They cannot choose to get married. They cannot benefit by law as heterosexual couples can, and that's INEQUALITY.

And this is pure hatred, and however indirectly, it is emotionally supported by our government's leadership. It's disgusting.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

There are people who think that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable, and there are others who think it is absolutely horrific. Just as there are people who think having sex with children is perfectly acceptable and there are others who think it is absolutely horrific. So in our country, since the majority deem the practice of having sex with children horrific, our leglislation leans to that viewpoint.
There is a huge difference between the two situations though that make the analogy worthless to the argument... Homosexuality involves consenting adults. It does not infringe on anyone else's rights. An adult having sex with a child is infringing on the child's rights. The child is not deemed capable of giving consent.

As far as the multiple spouses thing... That's a legal/administrative matter, IMO. The main purpose behind a civil marriage is to provide a legal framework for things like property ownership, parental responsibility, etc. And with civil marriage you're given some economic benefits (being able to claim the spouse as a dependent, no taxes when property passes to the spouse upon death, etc.). Gay marriage is solidly compatible with this set-up- recognizing gay marriage would simply provide equal benefits to gays. Multiple spouses are not compatible with the set-up, and recognition of them would provide additional benefits to those involved.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Liked--but not invited into your home with a partner, right? Forgive me, LMC--but you have absolutely no credibility when it comes to professing your "tolerance."

That's because your definition of "tolerance" is "I tolerate those that agree with me." You have not shown me one ounce of your so-called tolerance. And yes, I did say that I would ask anyone that I knew that was homosexual to leave their partner at home if they could not conduct themselves as heterosexual friends would. And my reasons for that? It's my home, and I have standards for behavior in my home. I have small children and I really don't want to explain to them why someone is behaving immorally. We don't approve of immoral behavior and don't allow it in our home, it's that simple. I don't see why it's okay for others to have standards for their home, but not for me. And FWIW, I was professing "tolerance" in any way shape or form, I was merely explaining how the American public in general can watch those shows and not have a problem with Gay cast members, hosts, etc.

[BethIrish]

There are people who think that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable, and there are others who think it is absolutely horrific. Just as there are people who think having sex with children is perfectly acceptable and there are others who think it is absolutely horrific.

I can't even believe you are putting those in the same sentence. I can't. How can you even say that? How? That statement makes me sick. Someone who sleeps with children is SICK. There is something WRONG with them. Homosexuals are NOT sick and there is nothing WRONG with them.

[msnicolea]

You're right, LMC--I have no tolerance for ignorance and bigotry and hate. You caught me!

There are PLENTY of members in this community who have different beliefs thatn I do--yet somehow, they manage to leave the hateful rhetoric out of it. There are Republican members of this community (and centrist-democrats, independents, communists, etc. . )who post thoughtful, well-researched viewpoints. You don't get confronted because you're a mormon or because you're on the Right--you get confronted because you repeatedly make comments that are inflammatory, ignorant, and often, just plain wrong. Not wrong becasue I don't like what you say--wrong because they are simply untrue.

You know what, LMC--MY beliefs don't infringe upon others' rights, THAT's the difference. I don't want to take away civil liberties--and you do. And as long as you post these kinds of offensive, ill-informed views, I will respond.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Um, LMC, are you suggesting in some way that people who have tattoos or piercings should also not be allowed to marry whom they choose, because some people think those behaviors are "taboo"? I get the point of view where you don't want homosexual lifestyles shoved in your face, but I don't think you've ever fully comprehended the idea that THEIR CHOICES ARE BEING TAKEN FROM THEM. They cannot choose to get married. They cannot benefit by law as heterosexual couples can, and that's INEQUALITY.

And this is pure hatred, and however indirectly, it is emotionally supported by our government's leadership. It's disgusting.

No, I'm not, what I was suggesting is that some people are "disgusted" by homosexual behavior, just as they are by tattoos and piercings (and before everyone gets all in an uproar, I myself have had my tongue and belly button pierced, so yes, I do understand the stigma that comes with it.) I think the thing that comes into play is your opinion on homosexuality. Is it choice or not. And until that is 100% proven, I don't think this debate will ever end.

[BethIrish]

edited because really, what is the point?

[LyLMyssChaos]

I can't even believe you are putting those in the same sentence. I can't. How can you even say that? How? That statement makes me sick. Someone who sleeps with children is SICK. There is something WRONG with them. Homosexuals are NOT sick and there is nothing WRONG with them.

That is where you and I differ. I believe that homosexuals ARE sick! And that there IS something WRONG with THEM! I believe that homosexuality is perverse and disgusting. And I don't think it's acceptable. There is honestly no way you can change my opinion on that. Sexuality was created so that we can reproduce, and it is impossible for two men or two women to reproduce, so it simply is not natural.

[LyLMyssChaos]

You know what, LMC--MY beliefs don't infringe upon others' rights, THAT's the difference. I don't want to take away civil liberties--and you do. And as long as you post these kinds of offensive, ill-informed views, I will respond.


And my beliefs don't infringe upon other's rights either. I don't see how feeling the way I do takes away anything from anyone. I can feel how I want to all day, and it doesn't take away anyone's rights.

[msnicolea]

All you childless by choice or infertile couples take note--LMC deems your marriages less valid and valuable than hers! PROCREATE OR DIE!

[gayle]

"Sexuality was created so that we can reproduce, and it is impossible for two men or two women to reproduce, so it simply is not natural."

This is far too simplistic. Sexuality is a WHOLE lot more than that, and far more complex than a simple black and white, one reason only approach.

[BethIrish]

That is where you and I differ. I believe that homosexuals ARE sick! And that there IS something WRONG with THEM! I believe that homosexuality is perverse and disgusting. And I don't think it's acceptable. There is honestly no way you can change my opinion on that. Sexuality was created so that we can reproduce, and it is impossible for two men or two women to reproduce, so it simply is not natural.


Well, then, honestly, I truly feel sorry for you and I feel sorry for your children for what you are teaching them. If you can put someone who molests children in the same category as a homosexual then you are more close minded then I can even fathom.

It's people who think like you who promote bigotry and hatred in this world. edited again to clarify - I'm not saying if you don't support gay marriage then you are contributing to this environment. I'm saying that people who equate homosexuality with pedophilia...well...you are.
eta: and that is all I will say to you on this matter. I don't think I've ever really gotten in any kind of debate with you, but in all honestly, it's not worth my time or yours to continue a discussion - or to discuss anything, really - because our world views are so fundamentally different. Normally I would say that is a good thing - we could learn from each other's views - but frankly, I don't think I want to learn anything from your POV.

[msnicolea]

And my beliefs don't infringe upon other's rights either. I don't see how feeling the way I do takes away anything from anyone. I can feel how I want to all day, and it doesn't take away anyone's rights.


Do you VOTE? Ok, then.

[LyLMyssChaos]

All you childless by choice or infertile couples take note--LMC deems your marriages less valid and valuable than hers! PROCREATE OR DIE!

Umm, I have never said that. So there ya go, putting words in my mouth. I believe that the choice to have children or not is a very personal one that is best left to the two people involved. Not everyone wants to/should be parents. And as far as infertile couples? That was incredibly wrong of you to say, but I wouldn't expect anything less from you. You try to say that you have all kinds of tolerance, but you don't.

[IrisHope]

I think all gay people should live on a separate island. They are sick sick SICK

[suzubeane]

If anyone is interested, one local outlet (http://www.turnto10.com/news/6673621/detail.html) is covering this. (New Bedford is part of our market.) Other local media seem to be using the same AP info seen elsewhere.

This is so sad on so many levels, including for the City of New Bedford, which can ill afford to be hurt, divided and in the national spotlight for a hate crime. :(

[LyLMyssChaos]

Do you VOTE? Ok, then.

So I don't have the right granted to me by the constitution to vote?? Just like every other American citizen? Just because you don't like my viewpoint, and obviously I'm not the only person who feels the way that I do, otherwise this would be a mute point. I hate to tell ya, but I am obviously NOT in the minority here. If I were, gay marriage would be an issue of the past.

[msnicolea]

Yes, LMC--you've outwitted me again! I think people should have to pass my personal litmus test before voting! Only liberal democrats get to go to the polls!

You have the right to vote--but when you vote for anti-gay candidates, for example, then you are doing something to to limit other people's rights. I'm tired of you hiding behind the "what I bleieve is what I believe--it doesn't hurt anyone else." That's simply not true.

Again--I'm not interested in taking a vote re: civl liberties--that's not how it works, or as MANY posters have tried pointing out to you, there's chance that inter-racial marriage would still be illegal and women wouldn't have the right to vote, just to name two examples.

[gayle]

LyllMyss, you know I am not going to attack you. But, you must be able to see the hole in your logic regarding the statement that "Sexuality was created so that we can reproduce, and it is impossible for two men or two women to reproduce, so it simply is not natural."

Argued to a logical point, you are inferring that only heterosexual partners, who are able to reproduce really have any business being sexual.

Can you see my point? It's SOOO much more complex than that. So regardless of what you believe, it is not a point that gives any support whatsoever to your argument. In fact, it makes your argument look completely invalid.

[laurenc]

No, I'm not, what I was suggesting is that some people are "disgusted" by homosexual behavior, just as they are by tattoos and piercings (and before everyone gets all in an uproar, I myself have had my tongue and belly button pierced, so yes, I do understand the stigma that comes with it.) I think the thing that comes into play is your opinion on homosexuality. Is it choice or not. And until that is 100% proven, I don't think this debate will ever end.

the STIGMA that comes with having your BELLY BUTTON pierced?

right, because you could get whacked with a hatchet for having a neat little bejewled hoop through your navel.

:rolleyes:

[msnicolea]

the STIGMA that comes with having your BELLY BUTTON pierced?

right, because you could get whacked with a hatchet for having a neat little bejewled hoop through your navel.

:rolleyes:


running off to cover my tatoo and take out my extra piercings. . .

[laurenc]

Sexuality was created so that we can reproduce, and it is impossible for two men or two women to reproduce, so it simply is not natural.

you know what else ain't natural?

eyeglasses. polyester. nyquil. the ipod. pleather. i could go on, but i think i've made my point.

[LyLMyssChaos]

the STIGMA that comes with having your BELLY BUTTON pierced?

right, because you could get whacked with a hatchet for having a neat little bejewled hoop through your navel.

:rolleyes:

How about people not getting jobs because of having their nose, mandible, lip or tongue pierced? Yeah, I've seen that happened. It never happened to me, but I've had people make comments to me about how they thought my tongue piercing was inappropriate and I should remove it.

[batgirl]

"Sexuality was created so that we can reproduce, and it is impossible for two men or two women to reproduce, so it simply is not natural."


This is a terribly uninformed comment. It really amazes me that people keeping spewing this crap without actually trying to find any evidence in support or to the contrary...

So for you scientifically illiterate...

Homosexuality is routinely found in animal populations throught the world. Birds, apes, lizards, dolphins, etc. It has been scientifically documented that 8% of rams have a preference for other male rams. Did you know that hypersexuality is a common occurence in dolphin populations? Both boy on boy, boy on girl, and girl on girl. What about the psuedo-penis that female hyenas have (and use!) on other female hyenas? Anyone ever been to a cow pasture? Boy, their humping anything (and anyone!) they can. Ever been humped by a female dog? I was...(my leg of course!) I guess if it would have been a male dog it would have been okay!

I know some of you like wikipedia... so here's a link that you may believe...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals

I also have numerous pub-med links if you'd like more scientific sources.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Gayle~
I do see your point. What I should have said was that sex was created primarily for reproduction (perhaps that was a better way to put it?) and I understand that there are many(myself included) who use it to express affection and love. I still however think that the act of two women or two men being physically intimate is not something that God intended and against the laws of nature.

[msnicolea]

Apparently, appearance discrimination and not getting a job can be equated with being lynched because of your race of sexual orientation. Who knew?

[IrisHope]

OT, but do you think Hitler could have been convinced the Jews weren't that bad?

ETA I'm not comparing anyone to Hitler, but when someone who is extreme has made up their mind it's hard to convince them otherwise.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Apparently, appearance discrimination and not getting a job can be equated with being lynched because of your race of sexual orientation. Who knew?

I already said that I think what happened to those people in the bar was horrific and that I think the person who did it was a nutjob. It was completely unexusable. Regardless of how you feel about homosexual behavior, someone that is gay doesn't deserve to die or be physically harmed because of it.

[Txfish]

I think the thing that comes into play is your opinion on homosexuality. Is it choice or not. And until that is 100% proven, I don't think this debate will ever end.

Sadly, I agree, that not having an answer to this question means the debate won't end. But the way I see it, if we haven't been able to PROVE that it's purely a choice, then why should we be able to legislate against it anyway, or punish people for it?

I don't agree that your views, LMC, aren't taking anything away from someone else. I saw that happen here in Texas last November... people who share your beliefs made it LAW that homosexuals had their rights removed, or prevented, however you want to look at it. Voting does matter. Beliefs do spill over and have further effects.

As for Gayle's quote: "Sexuality was created so that we can reproduce, and it is impossible for two men or two women to reproduce, so it simply is not natural."

Hell, even the Catholic church has admitted that there are TWO purposes to sexual relations: repoduction and to enhance the spiritual marital bond. How can anyone believe, who has experienced loving sexual relations, that there is no other purpose than reproduction? I mean, I get why it took the priests so long to figure it out, but anyone else? I'm at a loss.

I'm not trying to pick on LMC here -- I hate it when a thread devolves into bashing her. I apologize if I'm being combative or rude about it.

[batgirl]

Oh, and I know some of you don't believe in evolution (which still amazes me, but this is another topic for another thread)... but here goes anyway...

Scientists hypothesize (we all know what this word means, right? Hypothesis is an "educated guess" that results after withstanding numerous scientific studies) that animal populations have increased homosexual activity when they become OVERPOPULATED. It is a built in population control mechanism. Remind me how many people are on this planet....?

[laurenc]

How about people not getting jobs because of having their nose, mandible, lip or tongue pierced? Yeah, I've seen that happened. It never happened to me, but I've had people make comments to me about how they thought my tongue piercing was inappropriate and I should remove it.

there's a difference between inappropriate and immoral. wearing tight jeans and a tube top to a funeral is inappropriate but it's not immoral.

i've heard of situations where people were denied jobs for extreme facial tattoos (think mike tyson). and for the record, i don't think that's right either.

Regardless of how you feel about homosexual behavior, someone that is gay doesn't deserve to die or be physically harmed because of it.

but it's ok for them to live in a world without civil rights? to live in a world where they are forbidden to hold hands with someone they love?

[msnicolea]

For me, although I believe 100% that it is a biological issue, I don't really care. If two consenting adults make a CHOICE to live a certain way, consentually, without anyone being hurt, who am I to judge?

[camberne]

Because I just feel the need to defend my opinion and those of many in my party affiliation...

I have several gay and bisexual friends. In my church choir we have three gay men, two who are a couple and one whose partner just isn't in the choir. All of these men have been in my home and welcome in my home. They are my friends. One of the men had a partner about 15 years ago who died. The priest at that time declared that Mark was not allowed to be buried on our church property. Maybe some people agreed with him, but I know that no one in our circle of friends did - all Republicans. Two years ago, this was rectified, Mark's remains were exhumed and he was buried on our property.

I, however, still do not support gay marriage. I can't give you a specific reason why, I just can't reconcile it with my beliefs. Just as I haven't been able to go see Brokeback Mountain yet. I have decided that I will go see it, because I hear it is very well-directed and acted. However, I still don't agree with the subject matter.

All my friends accept that I have my beliefs and opinions and don't hold it against me or like me any less because of my beliefs. They don't necessarily agree with them, but they understand why I can feel that way... and it's okay. We've discussed it openly several times.

That doesn't mean that I promote acceptance of hate crime acts. The insinuation that if you don't support gay marriage, you contribute to the type of "climate" that accepts that type of behavior is very disturbing to me... and honestly, quite insulting.

[Txfish]

Ooh, batgirl, I hadn't heard that. Interesting.

Obviously, there is direct proof refuting the "against nature" argument, as seen in this animal behavior.

[jp'swife]

That doesn't mean that I promote acceptance of hate crime acts. The insinuation that if you don't support gay marriage, you contribute to the type of "climate" that accepts that type of behavior is very disturbing to me... and honestly, quite insulting.

Thank you!

[msnicolea]

Alice,

I always respect the thoughtful way you express your views and appreciate your honesty. I do disagree, though, that there isn't a link between treating homosexuals differently by affording them a lesser status and hate crimes. It's an attitude of "these people are different than us and not as worthy of certain rights and liberties" which promotes misunderstanding, hate, and, ultimately, violence.

When people are marginalized, that is what happens.

[LyLMyssChaos]

but it's ok for them to live in a world without civil rights? to live in a world where they are forbidden to hold hands with someone they love?

Who said they can't hold hands? And as far as I know, the only thing that gay people cannot do is adopt children or get married, and there are lots of people that are prohibited from adopting children.

[IrisHope]

Isn't it sad that a thread about hate crime has turned into this? Do you think it would have gone down this road if it was about a crime against religion or race? Why is this acceptable?

[LyLMyssChaos]

That doesn't mean that I promote acceptance of hate crime acts. The insinuation that if you don't support gay marriage, you contribute to the type of "climate" that accepts that type of behavior is very disturbing to me... and honestly, quite insulting.


Thank you!! This is what I was trying to say, but perhaps by coming from you it will actually get heard.

[hockeybrat]

For me, although I believe 100% that it is a biological issue, I don't really care. If two consenting adults make a CHOICE to live a certain way, consentually, without anyone being hurt, who am I to judge?

That is the thing. It isn't some disease as some people make it out to be. You don't "catch gayness", you're born with it. How does a homosexual marriage effect a heterosexual marriage? I just don't get it. These are people who are denied their rights, discriminated and we should be OK with it because they aren't in the majority?

I am sorry but that is so wrong. My ancestors immigrated to the States from China and they had to deal with a lot of anti-Chinese sentiment in the form of Chinese Exclusion Acts. There were lots of different acts that were passed in the 19th and 20th century that denied Chinese from owning property, interracial marriages, or even coming into the United States.

I see similarities of what happened back then with what is happening now and it just makes me angry and sad. I am really happy however, that Washington State just passed an Anti-discrimination bill for homosexuals. But I have heard that there is talk this will go to voters because some conservative folks have deemed it "immoral".

[amew]

For me, although I believe 100% that it is a biological issue, I don't really care. If two consenting adults make a CHOICE to live a certain way, consentually, without anyone being hurt, who am I to judge?

ITA. I did an independent study in college reviewing the scientific literature on biological bases for homosexuality, and I do believe that it is largely biological (whether genetic, the result of the hormonal environment of the womb, etc.). But legally, I don't think it should matter either way. We grant legal protections to those who choose to be Jewish or Christian Scientist or Mormon--a class characteristic does not have to be biological in order to be covered by the Equal Protection Clause.

[msnicolea]

Plenty of gay people adopt children, all across the country.

[batgirl]

I think the thing that comes into play is your opinion on homosexuality. Is it choice or not. And until that is 100% proven, I don't think this debate will ever end.

If you need 100% proof to believe anything, how can you believe in "god" and the bible? You may answer that you believe it to be fact, but that means nothing. If you require proof, proove it to me? Thanks.

[msnicolea]

ITA. I did an independent study in college reviewing the scientific literature on biological bases for homosexuality, and I do believe that it is largely biological (whether genetic, the result of the hormonal environment of the womb, etc.). But legally, I don't think it should matter either way. We grant legal protections to those who choose to be Jewish or Christian Scientist or Mormon--a class characteristic does not have to be biological in order to be covered by the Equal Protection Clause.

Exactly right--I mean, besides our race and gender, pretty much everything else is a choice!

[msnicolea]

ITA. I did an independent study in college reviewing the scientific literature on biological bases for homosexuality, and I do believe that it is largely biological (whether genetic, the result of the hormonal environment of the womb, etc.). But legally, I don't think it should matter either way. We grant legal protections to those who choose to be Jewish or Christian Scientist or Mormon--a class characteristic does not have to be biological in order to be covered by the Equal Protection Clause.

Exactly right--I mean, besides our race and gender, pretty much everything else is a choice!

[Txfish]

That doesn't mean that I promote acceptance of hate crime acts. The insinuation that if you don't support gay marriage, you contribute to the type of "climate" that accepts that type of behavior is very disturbing to me... and honestly, quite insulting.

Alice, I don't think that the climate is influencing most people into believing this violence is okay. That would be insulting. But, I think that for the borderline personalities out there, the idea that they're supporting the government is all the justification they need to act on whatever impulse they have relating to their belief.

Obviously, this situation was horrible and completely wrong. But I don't think we can deny that there is a political message out there that is allowing people to feel at ease about thinking in their heads, "Well they had it coming".

[LyLMyssChaos]

If you need 100% proof to believe anything, how can you believe in "god" and the bible? You may answer that you believe it to be fact, but that means nothing. If you require proof, proove it to me? Thanks.

I don't need 100% proof for everything, but I think the homosexuality arguement won't end until we have it as close to 100% proven one way or the other because there is continously studies that come out to combat whatever the previous study said.

[camberne]

It's an attitude of "these people are different than us and not as worthy of certain rights and liberties" which promotes misunderstanding, hate, and, ultimately, violence.

When people are marginalized, that is what happens.Actually, it's not entire that...it's the teaching that it's okay to hate and act hateful towards people who are different than you. A young person who is not taught that it's okay to hate people different than them is not going to hate. Prejudice is not a genetic behavior, but a learned behavior.

How 'bout a few lines from South Pacific:

You've got to be taught
To hate and fear
You've got to be taught
From year to Year
It's got to be drummed
in your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught

You've got to be taught
To be Afraid
Of people whose eyes
are oddly made
And people whose skin
Is a different shade
You've got to be carefully taught

You've got to be taught
Before it's too late
Before you are 6 or 7 or 8
To hate all the people
your relatives hate
You've got to be carefully taught

[Txfish]

Prejudice is not a genetic behavior, but a learned behavior.


Right. And a lot of people will learn it from those in power.

[batgirl]

I am sorry but that is so wrong. My ancestors immigrated to the States from China and they had to deal with a lot of anti-Chinese sentiment in the form of Chinese Exclusion Acts. There were lots of different acts that were passed in the 19th and 20th century that denied Chinese from owning property, interracial marriages, or even coming into the United States.


Boy, I had forgotten about this. Americans love to discriminate, but ultimately they come around. I honestly believe that gay rights will be incorporated into our culture, certainly not with Bush in office, and maybe not in the next 10 years (god, I hope so...) but it will come. Then we will say, wow, what ignorant, intolerant people we were back then...

And as for Washington state. Wow, I loved living there. It offered equal rights to gays and women (emergency contraception is available over the counter there...) they are waaay more prgressive that the idiots here in Michigan. Thank god I'll be moving soon...

[amew]

That doesn't mean that I promote acceptance of hate crime acts. The insinuation that if you don't support gay marriage, you contribute to the type of "climate" that accepts that type of behavior is very disturbing to me... and honestly, quite insulting.

Would you defend those who opposed interracial marriage in the last century on similar grounds?

[hockeybrat]

Boy, I had forgotten about this. Americans love to discriminate, but ultimately they come around. I honestly believe that gay rights will be incorporated into our culture, certainly not with Bush in office, and maybe not in the next 10 years (god, I hope so...) but it will come. Then we will say, wow, what ignorant, intolerant people we were back then...

And as for Washington state. Wow, I loved living there. It offered equal rights to gays and women (emergency contraception is available over the counter there...) they are waaay more prgressive that the idiots here in Michigan. Thank god I'll be moving soon...


I think so too, at least I hope but I just don't think it is coming fast enough.

Definitely way more progressive than MI (from what I hear).

[LyLMyssChaos]

For those of you who keep referring to the 14th Amendment, can you show me where in the following words it says anything about guaranteed opportunity to marry?

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

It says that they cannot abridge priveleges without due process of law, and I think that holding a public vote on whether or not make gay marriage legal is due process of law. The public has spoken. If you want to be married, move to a state where the people have approved it.

[amew]

For those of you who keep referring to the 14th Amendment, can you show me where in the following words it says anything about guaranteed opportunity to marry?


LMC, the US Supreme Court has interpreted the 14th Amendment as including a right to marry on multiple occassions, including the case of Loving v. Virginia, in which the Court struck down the State of Virginia's ban on interracial marriage.

[Emilie]

LMC - honestly wondering this - how does a gay couple being allowed to marry affect you? Why do you care so much?

[batgirl]

Actually, it's not entire that...it's the teaching that it's okay to hate and act hateful towards people who are different than you. A young person who is not taught that it's okay to hate people different than them is not going to hate. Prejudice is not a genetic behavior, but a learned behavior.


Well said. ITA. It is very sad that many children will be learning this prejudice from their parents.

Quick question. Do you believe your, um, discomfort? of gays was learned from someone? I ask this sincerely (since I think you were very respectful in your post), I'm just wondering how you came to the conclusion that gays shouldn't marry, and that you are uncomfortable watching films such as "Brokeback mtn".

[Txfish]

LMC, I'm not a legal scholar but I see two places there where that type of vote should be unconstitutional: (1)"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States", and (2)"nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".

The "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law", to my knowledge, has never been directed at an entire group, but instead individuals who are in violation of existing laws.

Just my take; hopefully someone with more knowledge & understanding of the law can clarify.

[IrisHope]

Hate in the name of god. gotta love it.

[amew]

It says that they cannot abridge priveleges without due process of law, and I think that holding a public vote on whether or not make gay marriage legal is due process of law.

That simply isn't what due process of law means. The majority can't simply vote to deprive minority groups of their fundamental rights. That just isn't how the 14th Amendment works.

[camberne]

Would you defend those who opposed interracial marriage in the last century on similar grounds?Race doesn't enter into it at any point for me. It's a gender thing. And, I'm not sure what that has to do with anything anyway. A hate crime is a hate crime - whether it's against gay people, interratial couples, Black people, White people, Jewish people, etc. It's wrong any way you cut it.

[prudies]

Just my take; hopefully someone with more knowledge & understanding of the law can clarify.

Let's not and say we did. Please?

[Txfish]

Prudies, LOL Sorry!

[LyLMyssChaos]

LMC - honestly wondering this - how does a gay couple being allowed to marry affect you? Why do you care so much?

Because by allowing them to marry it will perpetuate the immoral behavior to acceptable and normal, neither of which I believe to be true. It doesn't directly affect me, but does affect the world I live in. The more accepting our society becomes of things that are immoral and sinful, the more sinful and immoral our society becomes. Just as it used to be very much taboo to have premarital sex, it is now fairly common, and a lot of people don't think twice about it. It also used to be very wrong in our society for women to be immodest and now people get all upset because a girl gets kicked off of a cheerleading squad for working at a "restaurant"(and I use the term extremely loosely) because they REQUIRE her for a uniform to wear very short shorts and an extremely tight tank top. Or look at movies. What would have been rated R 10 years ago, is now PG-13. I believe that the standards of society are ever so quietly being eroded, so that things that should not be acceptable are becoming more and more so.

[prudies]

Txfish - I'm just being a brat, but I hate when we start talking con law on message boards!

[prudies]

LMC Just as it used to be very much taboo to have premarital sex, it is now fairly common, and a lot of people don't think twice about it.

Not exactly. In the history of the world, we've had some periods of time that were more puritanical and others where people had a different view of sexual morality. Also, perception isn't always morality. We have this Leave it to Beaver image of the 1950s, but the truth is there was plenty of premarital sex going on.

[camberne]

Quick question. Do you believe your, um, discomfort? of gays was learned from someone? I ask this sincerely (since I think you were very respectful in your post), I'm just wondering how you came to the conclusion that gays shouldn't marry, and that you are uncomfortable watching films such as "Brokeback mtn".Good question! Honestly, I imagine that part of it would have to do with what I was taught. I was taught - by family, church, peer group - that marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman. It's what I believe.

As far as Brokeback Mountain goes... Oddly enough, I don't get uncomfortable watching two women be intimate as I do watching two men be intimate. Heck, truth be told, I've been sexually intimate with other women. Many women at the college I went to (now a university) were openly gay. But, seeing two men intimately kissing or having sexual relations just makes me cringe. I think it may have to do with my sexual image of men... and I'm NOT going to elaborate on that. I think it would be a little bit TMI. ;)

Now, I will concede that life circumstances certainly come around and can influence our beliefs. I have a 13 year old son. If he were to come to me sometime in the future and say that he was gay and was in love with another man, what would I do and feel? I don't know. I want my son to be as happy as I am.

However, here and now... today... this is how I feel.

edited to add: FWIW, I do believe that in another 20 years or so, the gay marriage issue will be resolved in favour of the marriage. I might not agree with it, but I certainly wouldn't attack anyone over it!!

[Emilie]

Because by allowing them to marry it will perpetuate the immoral behavior to acceptable and normal, neither of which I believe to be true. It doesn't directly affect me, but does affect the world I live in. The more accepting our society becomes of things that are immoral and sinful, the more sinful and immoral our society becomes. Just as it used to be very much taboo to have premarital sex, it is now fairly common, and a lot of people don't think twice about it. It also used to be very wrong in our society for women to be immodest and now people get all upset because a girl gets kicked off of a cheerleading squad for working at a "restaurant"(and I use the term extremely loosely) because they REQUIRE her for a uniform to wear very short shorts and an extremely tight tank top. Or look at movies. What would have been rated R 10 years ago, is now PG-13. I believe that the standards of society are ever so quietly being eroded, so that things that should not be acceptable are becoming more and more so.

By the same account, then should women not be allowed to vote? Should there be lunch counters, drinking fountains and bus seats for whites and others for blacks? Should interracial couples not be allowed to marry as well? Should divorce be outlawed as well?

Because at one time all those examples were once considered immoral and sinful too.

[wine_o_girlie]

Who said they can't hold hands? And as far as I know, the only thing that gay people cannot do is adopt children or get married, and there are lots of people that are prohibited from adopting children.

If you think this is the case then you are sadly mistaken. Think tax benefits, inheritances, healthcare benefits, heath-care decision making ability, etc., etc., etc. and that doesn't even begin to cover it. :mad: You do know that same-sex domestic partners were denied 9/11 survivior benefits whereas opposite-sex domestic partners were granted these benefits, right? Of course you probably don't because then you wouldn't have made your ill-informed statement that I quoted above.

[SingleWhiteFemale]

I, however, still do not support gay marriage. I can't give you a specific reason why, I just can't reconcile it with my beliefs. There is a way to reconcile this with your beliefs.

Church and state need to be separate. Gay marriage should be legal. However, no church should be forced to perform such unions. If a religion is against gay marriage, they more than have the right to say they won't marry a gay couple or recognize such a union. I hear all the time of churches saying they won't marry non-members, or people of other faiths, or unions they don't feel are right/won't survive. Perfectly fine--the state cannot force a church to perform such a union. Yet any male and female can get married in the eyes of the law. They can go to city hall, and get a marriage license, get married by a judge or whomever is allowed to perform a binding marriage in the eyes of the law. Take religion out of the equation. Quite frankly, many places in Europe you have to have a civil ceremony to have the marriage be legally binding--you must go to a church afterwards if you want the marriage to be recognized/blessed by the church!

[amew]

Not exactly. In the history of the world, we've had some periods of time that were more puritanical and others where people had a different view of sexual morality. Also, perception isn't always morality. We have this Leave it to Beaver image of the 1950s, but the truth is there was plenty of premarital sex going on.

Exactly. And to the extent that permarital sex was less common in the past, I suspect it has more to do with the fact that the average at of first marriage is now 26 or 27 (as opposed to 19 or 20) than it does with moral decline.

[msnicolea]

Yeah, if I had tied the know at age 13, I would have been a virgin, too!

[SingleWhiteFemale]

We have this Leave it to Beaver image of the 1950s, but the truth is there was plenty of premarital sex going on. In terms of the 1950s, it was a really really odd decade that doesn't fall into suit with the rest of history ;)

As to premarital sex, here's Kinsey's results from 1948 and 1953. Quite common, at the time really taboo, yet it happened all the time. Even though people were getting married very young!Premarital Sex

Occurs in:
Males:
67-98%, depending on socioeconomic level.
68% by age 18 had experienced premarital coitus, (p. 549-52, and Table 136, p. 550, Male).
Females:
about 50%, (p. 286, and Table 75, p. 333 and Table 79, p. 337, Female). And more recent information from another well respected, though more recent study/gathering of stats:Age at First Intercourse

* By their late teenage years, at least 3/4 of all men and women have had intercourse, and more than 2/3 of all sexually experienced teens have had 2 or more partners (AGI, 2002).

Males Females

25% by age 15 26% by age 15
37% by age 16 40% by age 16
46% by age 17 49% by age 17
62% by age 18 70% by age 18
69% by age 19 77% by age 19
85% by age 20-21 81% by age 20-21
89% by age 22-24 92% by age 22-24

[hockeybrat]

If you think this is the case then you are sadly mistaken. Think tax benefits, inheritances, healthcare benefits, heath-care decision making ability, etc., etc., etc. and that doesn't even begin to cover it. :mad: You do know that same-sex domestic partners were denied 9/11 survivior benefits whereas opposite-sex domestic partners were granted these benefits, right? Of course you probably don't because then you wouldn't have made your ill-informed statement that I quoted above.

Exactly. There is more to marriage than being able to adopt children.

[LyLMyssChaos]

I wasn't only speaking of the 50's, but as our society has moved on in general. And I agree, there have been some changes, for the better. I think women should vote, that we should not be segregated by race, and thank goodness that they got rid of the law in 70's that said it was perfectly legal to kill a Mormon ;) , but that doesn't mean that ALL changes that have been made are for the better, at least IMO.

ETA: And those statistics that you posted SWF, are something that I'm refrencing. I think that is absolutely terrible! 1/4 of all teenagers have had sex by the time they are 15????? That is absolute insanity IMO!! I want to work to change statistics like that.

[camberne]

There is a way to reconcile this with your beliefs. <snip>Not to make light at all of your post because it was well thought out and written, but do you think that people haven't said that before... it's just a matter of separation of church and state? No, not really, for me it's not. My beliefs are not based entirely on religious teachings, but social as well. And, like it or not, that's what I believe. I'm a couple weeks shy of 36 years old and not unintelligent... I didn't just pull this out of the air.

I was going to post this earlier, but I refrained... but this gives me the perfect segway. It has always amazed me on the boards that people think that if they just explain their rationalization of their beliefs, then those of us who believe something different will magically change the way we think and feel. We can certainly appreciate your (general "your") point of view, but your view is not going to make mine disappear, and it doesn't mean that I'm wrong and you're right or vice-versa... it means we are different.

[prudies]

LMCAnd those statistics that you posted SWF, are something that I'm refrencing. I think that is absolutely terrible! 1/4 of all teenagers have had sex by the time they are 15????? That is absolute insanity IMO!! I want to work to change statistics like that.

Look at the stats again - the first group is from the 1950s! Premarital sex was frowned upon and yet...it happened all the time!

[prudies]

And also, I know you weren't just talking about the 1950s, but the point is that that the whole line about things being better way back when is JUST NOT TRUE.

[SingleWhiteFemale]

camberne, geez, it was just one way to be able to have the 2 fit. Nothing more, nothing less. I didn't say you were unintelligent or pulled it out randomly. Legitimate thought I have too, that I dind't say "hell you're so damn wrong that it can't work--because here's how!" It was something to think about, not "you must believe this because I say it works!"

[laurenc]

this thread moves too fast for me to keep up!

Who said they can't hold hands? And as far as I know, the only thing that gay people cannot do is adopt children or get married, and there are lots of people that are prohibited from adopting children.

oh, sure, they can hold hands. but can they do it without fearing that someone will harrass them or physically assault them? no. but you can most certainly walk down the street flashing your belly buttion and tongue piercings for all to see, but you would hardly have to worry about getting more than a double-take. you equated the stigma of being gay to the stigma of having a piercing, and i'm saying you're comparing apples and oranges.

wine_o_girlie, msnicolea and others have already addressed your second point.


ETA: And those statistics that you posted SWF, are something that I'm refrencing. I think that is absolutely terrible! 1/4 of all teenagers have had sex by the time they are 15????? That is absolute insanity IMO!! I want to work to change statistics like that.

i agree, when i have a daughter i would hope that she's not having sex at age 14. however, the ways in which you and i would work to change those statistics likely differ. but that's a whole 'nother thread.

[camberne]

singlewhitefemale - I know what you were saying and in the way you meant it... I was just clarifying that this is how things tend to get so out of control on these boards and your post gave me prime opportunity to make that point. You said "This is how you can clarify it with your beliefs..." in the vein that you came to those conclusions and here's the way for me to do it. I'm pointing out that YOU may clarify it with YOUR beliefs that way, but I don't.

That why I tried to make that disclaimer in the beginning... apparently, not well enough. Edited to say: re-reading my post, it does sound a bit testy... sorry about that!! It really wasn't my intention!

[Txfish]

Alice, I'm in agreement about what you said re: assuming anyone can change people's viewpoints. But, I think we're all getting our information out there, and sometimes I think people's minds DO changes based on a new perspective or new information. So it's worthwhile to explain it, as long as everyone on *both* sides is willing to listen objectively and think it through. I think that in some cases, while not "magically", it does help or lead someone to a new way of thinking on a topic.

People can be influenced, and on something as important as equal rights I'm willing to try.

[SingleWhiteFemale]

camberne, no problem :) You may have been a bit testy, I may have been a bit bitchy in return... Sorry. No worries :)

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Originally Posted by camberne
That doesn't mean that I promote acceptance of hate crime acts. The insinuation that if you don't support gay marriage, you contribute to the type of "climate" that accepts that type of behavior is very disturbing to me... and honestly, quite insulting.
Thank you!! This is what I was trying to say, but perhaps by coming from you it will actually get heard.
It's not because of who's saying it, it's the whole context of what's being said. There's a big difference between what camberne expressed, and what you did:
I, however, still do not support gay marriage. I can't give you a specific reason why, I just can't reconcile it with my beliefs. Just as I haven't been able to go see Brokeback Mountain yet. I have decided that I will go see it, because I hear it is very well-directed and acted. However, I still don't agree with the subject matter.
That is where you and I differ. I believe that homosexuals ARE sick! And that there IS something WRONG with THEM! I believe that homosexuality is perverse and disgusting.

[LyLMyssChaos]

That last comment did not come out until FAR into the conversation. Initially all I said was that it was absolutely horrible what that person did and that I don't feel it is in any way the government's fault what happened.

[BethIrish]

Exactly what littefred said. If you don't support gay marriage because you believe it goes against your morals, okay. But the idea that homosexuality is even on the same page as a pedophile - that is sick. I think it's perverse and disgusting that someone could hold that belief.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

That last comment did not come out until FAR into the conversation. Initially all I said was that it was absolutely horrible what that person did and that I don't feel it is in any way the government's fault what happened.
And nobody "jumped on you" for saying that. They disagreed but the thread didn't take a turn until you compared gays with pedophiles.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Exactly what littefred said. If you don't support gay marriage because you believe it goes against your morals, okay. But the idea that homosexuality is even on the same page as a pedophile - that is sick.

But see? That's where you are wrong. I have said time and time again that I don't support gay marriage because it goes against my morals and I was told that I was a bigoted homophobe and how wrong I was. I do not think that homosexuality and pedophiles are the same thing. They are both sicknesses, but of varying degrees. I kind of look at it like post-partum depression and schizophrenia. Both of those things are mental illnesses, but that is where the similarties end IMO. Just like I think that homosexuality and pedophelia are both immoral sexual disfunctions, but that is where the two similarties end. Nobody ever wants to listen to me try to explain it though. The tendency is to assume that I think homosexuals are child molesters or something, which isn't true.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

But see? That's where you are wrong. I have said time and time again that I don't support gay marriage because it goes against my morals and I was told that I was a bigoted homophobe and how wrong I was. I do not think that homosexuality and pedophiles are the same thing. They are both sicknesses, but of varying degrees. I kind of look at it like post-partum depression and schizophrenia. Both of those things are mental illnesses, but that is where the similarties end IMO. Just like I think that homosexuality and pedophelia are both immoral sexual disfunctions, but that is where the two similarties end. Nobody ever wants to listen to me try to explain it though. The tendency is to assume that I think homosexuals are child molesters or something, which isn't true.
No, the tendency is to assume that you think gays are "sick! And that there IS something WRONG with THEM!" and that you "believe that homosexuality is perverse and disgusting." I understand that those are your beliefs. And you're entitled to your beliefs. But I find those beliefs disturbing.

[wine_o_girlie]

I do not think that homosexuality and pedophiles are the same thing. They are both sicknesses, but of varying degrees.

HOMOSEXUALS ARE NOT SICK, NOR DO THEY HAVE A "SICKNESS". Yes, I realize caps means I am yelling and yes, if you were in front of me right now I would yell at you. I am so angry right that there are people who spew this hatred and have the ability to reproduce, thus continuing the spread of hatred and bigotry. The world is absolutely not a fair place.

[gayle]

Just so ya know, schizophrenia is inherited. In other words, people are born with it. This falls right n line with how I personally veiw being gay. It's not a choice, it's a genetic code.

Oh and before anyone jumps me, ya'll know I don't believe that being gay is a mental illness, whereas schizophrenia clearly is (and something I know a bit about as it runs in my family.) The only similarity between them is that a person that is born with either, has absolutely zero control on the genetic makeup that creates either one.

[BethIrish]

Gayle The difference is - mental illness you can cause harm to yourself or others. Homosexuality - well, how can loving and caring for another person be wrong? How can that be an illness?

eta: just so you know, I agree with you....just taking your thought one step further.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Just so ya know, schizophrenia is inherited. In other words, people are born with it. This falls right n line with how I personally veiw being gay. It's not a choice, it's a genetic code.

Oh and before anyone jumps me, ya'll know I don't believe that being gay is a mental illness, whereas schizophrenia clearly is (and something I know a bit about as it runs in my family.) The only similarity between them is that a person that is born with either, has absolutely zero control on the genetic makeup that creates either one.

Gayle~

I understand what you are saying, but you can you at least see the analogy that I was attempting to make on how I view homosexuality as as a "disorder?" I don't expect you to agree with me, but do you at least understand what I'm trying to say?

[gayle]

Gayle The difference is - mental illness you can cause harm to yourself or others. Homosexuality - well, how can loving and caring for another person be wrong? How can that be an illness?

eta: just so you know, I agree with you....just taking your thought one step further.


ITA!

[gayle]

Gayle~

I understand what you are saying, but you can you at least see the analogy that I was attempting to make on how I view homosexuality as as a "disorder?" I don't expect you to agree with me, but do you at least understand what I'm trying to say?


Yes, I do see what you were trying to say. I don't agree, but I do see the point you were trying to make.

However, you were coming at it from a perspective that both are "illnesses". implying that people have a choice to "get well". And in either case, schizophrenic or homosexual, that is simply false information.

[LyLMyssChaos]

HOMOSEXUALS ARE NOT SICK, NOR DO THEY HAVE A "SICKNESS". Yes, I realize caps means I am yelling and yes, if you were in front of me right now I would yell at you. I am so angry right that there are people who spew this hatred and have the ability to reproduce, thus continuing the spread of hatred and bigotry. The world is absolutely not a fair place.

Screaming at me will do no good, and question my right to reproduce really is inappropriate. And I believe the world is a totally fair place. You have the right to your opinion and I have a right to mine.

[gayle]

LyllMyss, your current avatar just totally carcked me up.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Yes, I do see what you were trying to say. I don't agree, but I do see the point you were trying to make.

However, you were coming at it from a perspective that both are "illnesses". implying that people have a choice to "get well". And in either case, schizophrenic or homosexual, that is simply false information.

Thank you, and I respect your opinion. It is true, schizophrenia cannot be cured, but it can in most cases me improved with medication. I however view homosexuality as a sexual disfunction, so I believe it is something that someone can "get well" from.

[hockeybrat]

Gayle The difference is - mental illness you can cause harm to yourself or others. Homosexuality - well, how can loving and caring for another person be wrong? How can that be an illness?

eta: just so you know, I agree with you....just taking your thought one step further.


Maybe people think you can catch gayness as though it were a disease or gay people will have sex right in front of you. :eek:

(I don't understand why people choose to be so ignorant this)

[LyLMyssChaos]

LyllMyss, your current avatar just totally carcked me up.

I found it quite fitting. LOL I find that most of the time, we all find ourselves hitting our heads on a brick wall at some point or another! ;) :p

[BethIrish]

Maybe people think you can catch gayness as though it were a disease or gay people will have sex right in front of you. :eek:

(I don't understand why people choose to be so ignorant this)

Yup, God forbid you see two people in a loving, caring relationship who just happen to be of the same sex! :eek: The horror of it all!!!!!!

[wine_o_girlie]

and question my right to reproduce really is inappropriate.

Calling homosexuals "sick" is inappropriate. Many, many, many of us have loved ones who are homosexual and have been harmed in one way or another by people who spew hate like you do. You might not have a hammer or a knife or a gun in your hand but you are harming homosexuals and the people who love them.

[southerner]

Thank you, and I respect your opinion. It is true, schizophrenia cannot be cured, but it can in most cases me improved with medication. I however view homosexuality as a sexual disfunction, so I believe it is something that someone can "get well" from.

joining in late, but how do propose people "get well" from "sexual disfunction"?

FWIW, schizophrenic symptoms/behaviors can be improved with medication, not the schizophrenia itself.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Calling homosexuals "sick" is inappropriate. Many, many, many of us have loved ones who are homosexual and have been harmed in one way or another by people who spew hate like you do. You might not have a hammer or a knife or a gun in your hand but you are harming homosexuals and the people who love them.

Ya know what's ironic? I don't walk around talking about how "sick" homosexuals are. I don't even mention it until I get pushed to a point in a discussion where someone simply will not accept that I don't approve of homosexual behavior. They keep digging and want to know why I feel the way I do, so eventually it comes out. I would never go up to someone who was gay and tell them they were sick or anything even close to that.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

joining in late, but how do propose people "get well" from "sexual disfunction?

FWIW, schizophrenic symptoms/behaviors can be improved with medication, not the schizophrenia itself.
My guess... People who object to homosexuality because of their religion often believe that the "cure" is to not act on the sexual impulses. So, something that curbed any sexual feeling could, I imagine, be considered a cure.

[gayle]

southerner said
"FWIW, schizophrenic symptoms/behaviors can be improved with medication, not the schizophrenia itself."

Exactly.

[LyLMyssChaos]

joining in late, but how do propose people "get well" from "sexual disfunction"?

FWIW, schizophrenic symptoms/behaviors can be improved with medication, not the schizophrenia itself.

I am aware of that. As far as how to treat sexual disfunction, I would suggest meeting with a counselor/therapist/psychologist and I guess things would go from there. I really don't know how it would be treated, but I do know of people that have said they were gay, then somehow just changed their mind seemingly overnight and were "straight again." That is why I really have my doubts on the idea that is something someone is born with.

[southerner]

My guess... People who object to homosexuality because of their religion often believe that the "cure" is to not act on the sexual impulses. So, something that curbed any sexual feeling could, I imagine, be considered a cure.

if this is correct, then what should they do with those impulses?

[laura]

But how far does that go? I mean, for many people, this is a moral issue. Think of it like this:
There are people who think that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable, and there are others who think it is absolutely horrific. Just as there are people who think having sex with children is perfectly acceptable and there are others who think it is absolutely horrific. So in our country, since the majority deem the practice of having sex with children horrific, our leglislation leans to that viewpoint. Just like there are people who think that having multiple spouses is pefectly acceptable, the majority thinks it is not, so our laws support the latter viewpoint. Unfortunately in our country, homosexuality is not "perfectly acceptable" by the majority, so our laws represent this. Just like there are people who feel that what that person did by attacking those people in the bar is perfectly acceptable, the majority of society does not deem it acceptable, so thankfully, they will be faced with laws that support the viewpoint that it's not acceptable. We simply cannot legislate to the minority for the most part in this country. It just isn't feasible.

[snip]

But see? That's where you are wrong. I have said time and time again that I don't support gay marriage because it goes against my morals and I was told that I was a bigoted homophobe and how wrong I was. I do not think that homosexuality and pedophiles are the same thing. They are both sicknesses, but of varying degrees. I kind of look at it like post-partum depression and schizophrenia. Both of those things are mental illnesses, but that is where the similarties end IMO. Just like I think that homosexuality and pedophelia are both immoral sexual disfunctions, but that is where the two similarties end. Nobody ever wants to listen to me try to explain it though. The tendency is to assume that I think homosexuals are child molesters or something, which isn't true.

I'm actually sorry I clicked on this thread, but I can't not respond - though I was momentarily speechless throughout parts of this thread. I am mad, annoyed, disgusted, irritated, all of those things by reading opinions like this, but mostly I'm just sad. I'm sad that lots of people share this opinion (unfortunately), and that these opinions influence others to act in the way the person who inspired this thread did. It's so very sad. :(

But I also have a question: LMC, you keep saying this is a "moral" issue, but what makes your morals more important than, say, mine? I think it's immoral to attempt to murder someone just b/c they happen to share a different sexual preference than you do. I think it's immoral to compare homosexuality and pedophilia in any way. I think it's immoral to judge consenting adults based on their choice of sexual partners. To me the bible isn't real, so it's extremely hard for me to understand that argument basis. But for argument's sake: if the bible says sex is only used for procreation so homosexuality is immoral b/c there is no chance for procreation, then are you saying you never have sex except when you are attempting to get pregnant? Is it then immoral for someone with infertility to have sex w/ their spouse? Where do you draw the line?

[I guess I should just summarize by saying ITA w/ littlefred and msnicolea.]

[allyray231]

I do not think that homosexuality and pedophiles are the same thing. They are both sicknesses, but of varying degrees. I kind of look at it like post-partum depression and schizophrenia. Both of those things are mental illnesses, but that is where the similarties end IMO. Just like I think that homosexuality and pedophelia are both immoral sexual disfunctions, but that is where the two similarties end
I think I am going to throw up now. I can't even believe this

[EJH]

Funny, I don't feel "sick" LMC. My partner and I have a wonderful, loving, caring relationship and are now parents to a fantastically brilliant child. We are lucky to live in a state where (most) of the time we feel safe, and EQUAL. It saddens me that parents are still teaching their children to hate. "This is wrong because I say it is" -- you constantly perpetuate hate. What a sad, sad thing to teach your children.

Over the holidays we were visiting my parents in Nevada. Our baby girl was sick, and we took her to an urgent care. The doctor had an issue with her having two moms, made some horrible comments to us and told us she had an allergy (funny, what allergy is it that comes with a fever and projectile vomiting?). Then he turned and walked out. He chose to be cruel and spiteful, and ignore the health of a child, because of his own damn issues with her mothers. I will never forget that feeling of hurt (and rage). Never were we happier to come back to Massachusetts where we know if something is wrong, we will get fair treatment. Where when my partner was in the hospital for major surgery, no one questioned my sitting beside her, day and night for a whole week. I am so sad for the people who live in other states and are never treated equally, never treated human.

LMC, I'm curious what if, in 10 or 15 years, one of your children were to tell you they were gay? What would you do?

[lawyergirl25]

I don't walk around talking about how "sick" interracial couples are. I don't even mention it until I get pushed to a point in the discussion where someone simply will not accept that I don't approve of interracial marriage. They keep digging and want to know why I feel the way I do, so eventually it comes out. I would never go up to someone who was in an interracial marriage and tell them they were sick or anything even close to that.

See? I'm a good person.

/sarcasm

[southerner]

but I do know of people that have said they were gay, then somehow just changed their mind seemingly overnight and were "straight again."
I'm not trying to be a smartass here, but do you think they "changed their mind overnight" just to you? All the gay people I know don't have that switch :confused:

[laura]

I am aware of that. As far as how to treat sexual disfunction, I would suggest meeting with a counselor/therapist/psychologist and I guess things would go from there. I really don't know how it would be treated, but I do know of people that have said they were gay, then somehow just changed their mind seemingly overnight and were "straight again." That is why I really have my doubts on the idea that is something someone is born with.

Comparing all homosexuals to people who are either bisexual or 'experimenting' is like saying the man who committed this heinous crime is white, so all white straight men must be gay bashers - it is a gross generalization with no basis in fact.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Ya know what's ironic? I don't walk around talking about how "sick" homosexuals are. I don't even mention it until I get pushed to a point in a discussion where someone simply will not accept that I don't approve of homosexual behavior. They keep digging and want to know why I feel the way I do, so eventually it comes out. I would never go up to someone who was gay and tell them they were sick or anything even close to that.
Yes, but... you support government measures to keep them from having equal rights. It's like a guy saying, hey, I'm okay because I don't call women bimbos, while he's paying his female employees less because they're females.

[LyLMyssChaos]

*reference my avatar* Why oh why are people getting stuck on that one sentence in that post?????? Did everyone just ignore the rest of the examples. I used pedophelia as another moral issue! Just like polygamy and all the other examples I mentioned.
And I also think it's immoral to attempt to murder someone for their sexual preferences!!! I have never disagreed with that!!! I think what that person did is a perfect example of why we have the death penalty, but that is a topic for another thread. And I have already cleared up what I meant about sexuality being for procreation, so I'm not going to do it again. I feel like people just want me to keep repeating things hoping to trip me up.

[laura]

And you WOULD tell a gay person not to bring his/her partner into your home - what kind of message do you think that sends?!

[BethIrish]

Funny, I don't feel "sick" LMC. My partner and I have a wonderful, loving, caring relationship and are now parents to a fantastically brilliant child.

Erin, you forgot "utterly adorable" in there, as well ;)

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

*reference my avatar* Why oh why are people getting stuck on that one sentence in that post?????? Did everyone just ignore the rest of the examples. I used pedophelia as another moral issue! Just like polygamy and all the other examples I mentioned.
And I also think it's immoral to attempt to murder someone for their sexual preferences!!! I have never disagreed with that!!! I think what that person did is a perfect example of why we have the death penalty, but that is a topic for another thread. And I have already cleared up what I meant about sexuality being for procreation, so I'm not going to do it again. I feel like people just want me to keep repeating things hoping to trip me up.
I responded to your polygamy example.

[LyLMyssChaos]

I'm not trying to be a smartass here, but do you think they "changed their mind overnight" just to you? All the gay people I know don't have that switch :confused:


Actually? At the time I was completely open and accepting of homosexuality, had no issue with it really. In fact, at the time, my date for the senior prom was a gay friend. I even had a rainbow garter because we did the garter dance and I wanted him to have something memorable. At that point in my life, I hung out with a very large group of very openly gay people. So it wasn't "just me" that they changed their minds with. They were dating people in the group and broke up with them and started dating girls and things. So people who think they know me so well, really don't know me at all.

[EJH]

[QUOTE=LyLMyssChaos]And yes, I did say that I would ask anyone that I knew that was homosexual to leave their partner at home if they could not conduct themselves as heterosexual friends would. And my reasons for that? It's my home, and I have standards for behavior in my home. I have small children and I really don't want to explain to them why someone is behaving immorally. We don't approve of immoral behavior and don't allow it in our home, it's that simple.QUOTE]

I wanted to ask what this means? What exactly is it that homosexual people do when visiting people's homes that heteros don't?

[wine_o_girlie]

Ya know what's ironic? I don't walk around talking about how "sick" homosexuals are. I don't even mention it until I get pushed to a point in a discussion where someone simply will not accept that I don't approve of homosexual behavior. They keep digging and want to know why I feel the way I do, so eventually it comes out. I would never go up to someone who was gay and tell them they were sick or anything even close to that.

So what? The fact that you don't scream it from the rooftops doesn't mean a damn thing. The fact that you believe that homosexuals are "sick" is what is at issue. I see nothing "ironic" about that. I stand by my point, believing that homosexuality is "sick" means that you are harming homosexuals and the people that love them.

[EJH]

Erin, you forgot "utterly adorable" in there, as well ;)

Thanks Beth, we think she's pretty adorable! :D


Erin

[laura]

I wanted to ask what this means? What exactly is it that homosexual people do when visiting people's homes that heteros don't?

Obviously they can't help but have sex right on the dining room table. I mean they are GAY! They must be heathens!!

(hopefully my sarcasm is evident)

[LyLMyssChaos]

EJH~~
I really am sorry that you were treated that way. That doctor had no right to treat you the way that he did, and your daughter should have received the best treatment available regardless of your sexual orientation.

As far as if one of my children were to tell me they were gay, I have answered this time and time again, and my answer hasn't changed. I would still love them as much as I ever have, but that doesn't mean that I would approve of how they live their life. Will I be accepting of their partner? I would have to reevaluate things at that point in my life and see how I feel. It is very likely that yes, because I am a mother and I love my children, I would have no choice to accept them. But that doesn't mean that I have to approve of them.

[allyray231]

used pedophelia as another moral issue

Ummm pedophelia is WAY more then a moral issue--it would like me comparing say the Holocaust to the death penalty.

[villanelle75]

I think the reason that people might be mostly reacting to one sentence of yours is because it's a horrific sentence and you seem to stand by it.

It woudl be like someone saying somethign else disgusting, like say, "we hsoudl lynch all the non-white people," and then wondering why everyone was focusing on that sentence when there was plenty of other content in the post.

[LyLMyssChaos]

[QUOTE=LyLMyssChaos]And yes, I did say that I would ask anyone that I knew that was homosexual to leave their partner at home if they could not conduct themselves as heterosexual friends would. And my reasons for that? It's my home, and I have standards for behavior in my home. I have small children and I really don't want to explain to them why someone is behaving immorally. We don't approve of immoral behavior and don't allow it in our home, it's that simple.QUOTE]

I wanted to ask what this means? What exactly is it that homosexual people do when visiting people's homes that heteros don't?

I wouldn't want them to express affection toward their partner in my home. I don't feel that my 2 1/2 year old and 9 month old are ready to be told about something that I consider to be sinful behavior.

[laura]

*reference my avatar* Why oh why are people getting stuck on that one sentence in that post?????? Did everyone just ignore the rest of the examples. I used pedophelia as another moral issue! Just like polygamy and all the other examples I mentioned.
And I also think it's immoral to attempt to murder someone for their sexual preferences!!! I have never disagreed with that!!! I think what that person did is a perfect example of why we have the death penalty, but that is a topic for another thread. And I have already cleared up what I meant about sexuality being for procreation, so I'm not going to do it again. I feel like people just want me to keep repeating things hoping to trip me up.

I agree with littlefred's take on polygomy, which is why I didn't reference it specifically again. I feel it's more of an administrative/financial issue than a moral issue. If people didn't benefit financially from having more than one spouse, then what do I care if they do (providing they are of legal age, which tends to be problematic in polygomist communities I've read about).

I went back and skimmed through the thread again and I didn't see anywhere you addressed the answers to my questions. Would you mind pointing me in the right direction? I am not trying to "trip you up".

[laura]

[QUOTE=EJH]

I wouldn't want them to express affection toward their partner in my home. I don't feel that my 2 1/2 year old and 9 month old are ready to be told about something that I consider to be sinful behavior.

But then you actually don't mean "conduct themselves as your hetero friends would" since I would imagine if a hetero couple was, say, holding hands in your home you wouldn't object? You essentially mean they need to pretend like they are just hetero sexual friends/roommates, or they aren't welcome in your home - correct?

[southerner]

Actually? At the time I was completely open and accepting of homosexuality, had no issue with it really.
Such extremely different feelings now. Where/why the drastic change?

EJH, I commend you for wanting to be part of this discussion.

[villanelle75]

As far as if one of my children were to tell me they were gay, I have answered this time and time again, and my answer hasn't changed. I would still love them as much as I ever have, but that doesn't mean that I would approve of how they live their life. Will I be accepting of their partner? I would have to reevaluate things at that point in my life and see how I feel. It is very likely that yes, because I am a mother and I love my children, I would have no choice to accept them. But that doesn't mean that I have to approve of them.

Really? I'm surprised you wouldn't just kill their partner, since according to your views they would be contributing to the moral downfall of you child and you've been very clear that you would willingly and without hesitation kill anyone who hurt you child.

[Nigellas]

...Definitely way more progressive than MI (from what I hear).

Oie. Please, please, PLEASE do not take LMC’s views as common for Michigan. I've lived here all my life and never met someone as bigoted as her. It's a personal thing- Not a state-wide thing.

[LyLMyssChaos]

[QUOTE=LyLMyssChaos]

But then you actually don't mean "conduct themselves as your hetero friends would" since I would imagine if a hetero couple was, say, holding hands in your home you wouldn't object? You essentially mean they need to pretend like they are just hetero sexual friends/roommates, or they aren't welcome in your home - correct?

This will probably get me attacked more, but what the hey, yes that is exactly what I meant.

[southerner]

If I were one of LMC's children and I was gay, I don't know I'd ever want to admit that to her :(

[LyLMyssChaos]

Such extremely different feelings now. Where/why the drastic change?


To be honest, I really don't know. I just know that I was much younger then, and I believed very differently about A LOT of things then. It's kind of funny to think about, then I was very much Pro-Choice, Pro-Human Rights, Anti-Death Penalty, well, to put it bluntly, the exact opposite of what I am now on most issues.

[LyLMyssChaos]

Really? I'm surprised you wouldn't just kill their partner, since according to your views they would be contributing to the moral downfall of you child and you've been very clear that you would willingly and without hesitation kill anyone who hurt you child.

My child will be old enough at that point to make their own decisions. And if they choose to be homosexual (I'm not going to debate whether it's nature or choice) then they have to live with the consequences.

[wine_o_girlie]

To be honest, I really don't know. I just know that I was much younger then, and I believed very differently about A LOT of things then. It's kind of funny to think about, then I was very much Pro-Choice, Pro-Human Rights, Anti-Death Penalty, well, to put it bluntly, the exact opposite of what I am now on most issues.

Damn, too bad you found "religion".

[Evie]

LMC - are homosexuals disgusting to you because they have anal sex?

Because I heard that anal sex is rampant among Mormons before they get married because they can still call themselves "virgins." ;)

[LyLMyssChaos]

Damn, too bad you found "religion".

It has nothing to do with religion. I was religious before that point as well. I think that I just started to have different priorities and some of the experiences that I had shaped shaped my opinions, that's all.

[EJH]

EJH, I commend you for wanting to be part of this discussion.

Thanks southerner. I usually try to stay out of this stuff but really, I'm just so sick of being compared to a pedophile and the comments about this being a sickness etc....had to just...come out, if you will ;) .

LMC --

I sure hope those heteros don't show affection in your house either, my my.

I hope, for the sake of your children, that you would love them and ACCEPT THEM unconditionally. Accept whomever ever they are, entirely. The greatest words my father ever said to me "I'm happy because you are happy." End of story. Nope, not their 'vision' for their only child. But they love and accept me entirely, they love and accept my partner and they are absolutely head over heels in love with their granddaughter. Had they chosen to not accept me they would have lost me, because I can't change who I am.

Sorry, didn't mean to make this all about me, but I just think I have an interesting take on all of this...

[EJH]

If I were one of LMC's children and I was gay, I don't know I'd ever want to admit that to her :(

And isn't that so sad? The number of kids that are too afraid to come out, that end up so depressed and well, I don't need to go into it. I would imagine the loss of your child would far outweigh the need to not accept them because they love someone of the same gender.

[gayle]

To be honest, I really don't know. I just know that I was much younger then, and I believed very differently about A LOT of things then. It's kind of funny to think about, then I was very much Pro-Choice, Pro-Human Rights, Anti-Death Penalty, well, to put it bluntly, the exact opposite of what I am now on most issues.


LyllMyss, is the striking change of heart due to your becoming Mormon? Is it really just that simple?

For me, my views politically have been formed over years and years of examining issues, and examining how and where they resonate in my own heart. I dn't think anything could happen in my life that would seemingly overnight, place my views at the diametric opposite of what I have come to over many years of examination.

Not attacking you, just trying to "get" how views can shift so dramatically from one viewpoint, to the exact opposite.

[laura]

And isn't that so sad? The number of kids that are too afraid to come out, that end up so depressed and well, I don't need to go into it. I would imagine the loss of your child would far outweigh the need to not accept them because they love someone of the same gender.

ITA w/ this.

[pocket]

[QUOTE]What exactly is it that homosexual people do when visiting people's homes that heteros don't?

i think it's the breathing in and out and in and out that is the most offensive.

[amew]

It's kind of funny to think about, then I was very much Pro-Choice, Pro-Human Rights, Anti-Death Penalty, well, to put it bluntly, the exact opposite of what I am now on most issues.

Meaning you're now Anti-Human Rights?

[laura]

Meaning you're now Anti-Human Rights?

I think that about covers it.

[LyLMyssChaos]

LyllMyss, is the striking change of heart due to your becoming Mormon? Is it really just that simple?

For me, my views politically have been formed over years and years of examining issues, and examining how and where they resonate in my own heart. I dn't think anything could happen in my life that would seemingly overnight, place my views at the diametric opposite of what I have come to over many years of examination.

Not attacking you, just trying to "get" how views can shift so dramatically from one viewpoint, to the exact opposite.

Actually no, I became Mormon because I had finally found a church that matched my views, if that makes sense. I have said this before and I don't know if it does any good to say it again, but the group of people that I was speaking of really were lacking in the morals department. We were young (most of us were between 17-19, I think there were a couple of us that were in our 20's) and so for the most part they spent their time getting drunk, and just sitting around being bums. They went to the club a lot and lived very indescriminate lives. I enjoyed hanging out with them because despite the fact that I didn't share any of their interests, they let me hang out with them, and accepted me. Perhaps the reason I have such a strong view now is because of what I witnessed with this particular group of people. It's not an excuse, but have you ever had such an intense experience that it just sticks with you and forever sort of "clouds" your view of things from then on? Well, I really think that is what happened with me. I decided that although that behavior was fine for them, it just wasn't something for me. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that all gay people live their lives like that, but that is the image I sort of have burned in my mind. I don't know if this is making any sense. But that group was very wild and looking back on it now, I see how obnoxious they really were.

[msnicolea]

LMC - are homosexuals disgusting to you because they have anal sex?

Because I heard that anal sex is rampant among Mormons before they get married because they can still call themselves "virgins." ;)

Oh no you DIDN'T!

I had a mormon roommate in college who was very sexually active without actually having vaginal intercourse--but I don't presume that this extends to all members of her faith.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

LMC - are homosexuals disgusting to you because they have anal sex?

Because I heard that anal sex is rampant among Mormons before they get married because they can still call themselves "virgins." ;)
Really? Is that something you actually heard or are you just taking a dig at Mormons? If it's the former, it's the first I've heard of such a thing. If it's the latter, is that really necessary?

[LyLMyssChaos]

Meaning you're now Anti-Human Rights?

No, but I'm not one of the "help the people in Tibet" types, does that make sense?? Uggghh...this is coming out bad. Before I was all about protesting Coke or Nike because of poor labor practices, now, I just say "it's their business, if I like their product, I buy it."

[gayle]

Thank you LF, that needed to be said!

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Before I was all about protesting Coke or Nike because of poor labor practices, now, I just say "it's their business, if I like their product, I buy it."
I don't understand why you wouldn't take that same view of homosexuality. If you don't want to be involved in a gay marriage, then don't marry a gay person.

[gayle]

So LyllMyss, you came to yur views by your own life experiences, and when you encountered the Mormon church, it aligned with those views in a way that made you comfortable.

So it was the egg before the chicken, LOL, or backwards from what I thought.

[laura]

My questions are two-fold:

#1 - So you support unfair labor practices?

#2 - If you are all minding your own business about companies exploiting their workers, why can't you just mind your own business about same sex partners? I would imagine the direct impact on your life is about equal, KWIM?