So the preference and attraction is fine and normal as long as you don't act on it and try to have a fulfilling life? Is it better to just ignore those feelings, push them way down deep inside, yeah, that's it...deeper, oh yeah...wait, what? Oh yeah, feelings. Ignore your natural and normal preferences and attractions, make some poor woman miserable by marrying her even though you're not attracted to her in the least, never fulfill her needs or wants or desires, maybe have a kid, just to see if that helps you drive those natural, normal feelings way down deep inside, so very deep inside, until one day you snap and pull an American Beauty style Colonel Frank Fitts style murder? Hey, whatever works for you, I guess.
I love when Clutchfans try to solve age old dilemmas through internet debates in a slightly unrelated thread. That's what the D&D is built on.
I think, with all this hard work, one of these days we'll actually solve an age old dilemma. 2021, The Nobel Peace Prize goes to the Debate and Discussion section of the Clutchfans bbs.
I only made the point that being a homosexual was a choice, I didn't say how to deal with your perverted sexual passions, no need to get your rainbow edible undies in a knot. SMH.:grin:
It's just an interesting position. Does that mean you'd be ok with two homosexuals getting married as long as they never consummated the marriage?
Guys just aren't my thing, never really had to deal with what you've gone through. I like women so much, I married one. (zips up flame suit) I don't believe that Gays should get married either. Gay marriage is so Gay. btw ...Joel Osteen preaches out of the Summit. I like the summit.
Without the 'sex' there is no homosexual, just guys who find other guys attractive. If the marriage isn't consummated, is it truly a marriage? In most Western traditions & laws, a marriage is not considered a binding contract until and unless it has been consummated. But same sex couples shouldn't be allowed to marry in MY opinion.
Can you provide me with a US law that says a marriage isn't legal if not consummated? I know the Brits have a law that says a marriage is voidable if one party is unable (or unwilling) to consummate, but it doesn't speak to a situation where neither party wishes to. Thanks!
And this was a choice, and not simply a realization that you liked girls? There is a difference, you know.
I used to work in nightclubs frequented by gays, I chose to stick with girls and not with guys. I know the difference, do you?
I'm not convinced you do. You didn't answer my question about your "choice" in kindergarten/first grade. Was it a realization or a choice at that point?
IzakDavid13 you are a moron. Being gay isnt a choice, I bet you can walk down the street and pick out a gay man before he ever opens his mouth and it ISNT because he is dressed in a pink tutu. Gay is a genetic thing, hence the whole idea of a "gaydar" minus the **** inside the guys mouth as a give away...read this published journal article (If you even can read...up for debate as Ignorance is normally a sign of low education) http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0036671 And why shouldnt gays be married IN THE STATE? I mean, what does it matter to you? I am a Catholic and am against MARRIAGE IN CHURCH but I am all for two men or two women to reap the benefits of a civil union of the state. Anyone who argues against State Marriage is someone who has their head so deep up their pupit-for-profit preacher ass that flowers smell like ****.
I think you're either missing his point or you know that the position you've staked out for yourself is morally and intellectually indefensible without resorting to some vague Bronze Age superstition (which itself as a moral compass or explanation for the natural world drifts over time). All you're left with is you think its icky. Oh boo hoo. You lose and your ideas are bad.
