No, you are a bigot. What FB said is that 50 years ago, you would have been a racist, but have moved on to another form of bigotry. In that case, you should be against bigotry, having experienced it yourself. That is the feeling that homosexuals have every time they read the tripe you have been spouting in this thread. He was forceful, but accurate. You are advocating discriminating against homosexuals because you believe that they made a choice to be gay at some point in their lives. You have chosen to ignore the available evidence and have further chosen bigotry over tolerance. Jesus would be proud.
Please show me any venue that has one of these signs for homosexuals. It is a piece of paper and a tax change. Nothing more. And it is borderline reprehensible to compare gay people today to blacks in the 50's. This isn't even close to being in the same league and you and I both know it. (I've lived in Montrose 3 1/2 years and never saw any gay bashing in that entire span.) They'll get it eventually, although I'm still on the civil union side of the fence. The difference is I think the Gov't should call ALL marriages civil unions. Marriage needs to be taken out of the Government speak, period. Separation of church and State, etc.
I won't say whether the people who go and get converted to heterosexuality are just doing it out of guilt because I don't know them, but I would suspect that at least for some of them that it is about the guilt and shame being forced upon them. With that said, I do find it someone interesting that we believe we can shame gay people into being straight, but environment doesn't make people gay.
Thanks. While we are a society and a government with a certain set of collective values we are also a society that upholds individual opinions. You seem to feel that if gay marriage were recognized as on par with heterosexual marriage that would be imposing a value on you as an individual. While under the law that might be a societal standard you as an individual are still free to maintain your own personal value system and not recognize gay marriage. I raised this example earlier in the thread. For a devout Muslim or Jew they are forbidden from eating pork yet eating pork is legal in our society. You could say that our society places no value judgement on the eating of pork. That doesn't mean that for the individual Muslim or Jew that they are being forced to accept the eating of pork as a value. They are still free to not eat pork even if it is OK under the law. So yes we are a society but we are individuals and their is a difference between the two.
Just to add one more thought to my previous post. Freedom isn't about having everything go your way. For any of us as individuals there are probably tons of things we don't approve of that are accepted in our society. If we accept the idea of a free society we do have to accept that our personal values will diverge from the values of society on some level. As long as society doesn't force us to personally accept or engage in those things we are still free.
If, hypothetically speaking, homosexuality was not a choice, and gays and lesbians are just acting out who they are innately, then would it be fair to characterize your preference to withhold certain rights from them as discrimination? Would you change your opinion and not advocate against allowing them to marry (while still believing that their actions are wrong or sinful or whatever)? My impression is that you think that because they make the choice, then they can choose a different lifestyle to avoid losing the privileges that others receive, correct? And that's why it's not discrimination, right? If that's the case, then my first thought is even if it was a choice I personally wouldn't want to deny somebody else their choice simply because it makes me uncomfortable but has no other ill effects. But more importantly, the people in this thread calling you a bigot or saying that you discriminate all know that it is not a choice at all. You think it is a choice and therefore not discrimination, they know it is not a choice and so they call you on your views as advocating discrimination. I've known of people who had similar views to his. They thought homosexuality was disgusting and wrong. They were bothered by so many people trying to defend such immoral behavior. When they were called out as bigots, they were extra defensive, because they saw themselves as the moral voice standing up for what was right. But over time, somehow something started to sink in. Maybe they realized it wasn't a choice, or maybe they met a few gay people and weren't so disgusted any more. Maybe they couldn't find a good reason to continue the anger. Whatever it was, they eventually re-thought their position. They didn't become gay or anything like that (since they weren't gay in the first place). They didn't even become activists for homosexual causes. But they did realize that maybe all that mental effort spent arguing to disallow rights and privileges of others was wasted, and it really wasn't necessary. They realized that they could wish these people the best and still hold true to their own values and morals, and that doing so didn't diminish them in any way. I honestly think he could turn out like that eventually. Not today or tomorrow of course, but I do hope that his mind is open enough to at least leave room for the possibility at some point in the future.
I agree with this also. Although I will add that living in a predominantly gay condo for over three years allowed me to see all types. The overwhelming majority were great and welcoming. But there were also the seedy ones. I mean even ones the other gays didn't like, either. In particular, this one dude in his 50's that would just sit on his patio (which was communal. He basically sat outside his door) and chat and flirt with everyone. I recall when I broke my leg he helped me up and down the stairs, but he did it in a way which made me feel reaally uneasy. I think the few out there like this guy screw a lot of it up for the rest, as well.
Just like any group of people, there are great examples of humanity as well as scum of the Earth dirtbags in the homosexual community. I have had the good fortune of knowing a great many of the former, as well as the unfortunate experience of having my junk grabbed against my will by the latter. This seems to hold up to society at large. Most of the people I know are stand-up, honest folks. However, there are those guys that will circulate through a club groping women as they pass, as well as guys who give us all a bad name in many other ways. I just hope that eventually the people who are resistant to equal rights will figure out that they are acting against the ideals of our society.
Why is it a comparative deal between your marriage and theirs? If homosexual couples are able to commit to each other in a loving, marriage, why is your own marriage changed at all? Can't you just not like the idea, of the homosexuals being married, but not change your thought on your own marriage? You aren't forced to recognize their marriage as being equal to yours, unless you are somehow involved in giving out benefits, deciding adoptions or that kind of thing. Why do you even have to think about a marriage between same sex couples at all? If they are married, they are married, you don't have to recognize it as equal, or think about it one way or the other. You can go about your business, and the gay couple can go about theirs each knowing that the law isn't discriminating against either of you.
Apparently I spoke too soon. How many damn rep points do I have to spread around before I can give more to FB and finalsbound?!
Yeah, several of your posts have missed out because I haven't spread enough around. same with finalsbound, mc mark, and others.
Shucks, I wrote about Michael Jackson just hours before he went to the hospital ... May he RIP I guess I'm back in the thread discussion... Probably so. Though consider my extreme example was tolerance = gay and bi PROMOTION and ENCOURAGEMENT. The inverse bizarro standard. I think there's enough ambiguity already where bisexuality or bi-curiousity for sure would happen more in the bizarro standard. Was saying it COULD concievably happen with applied force, though I dont advocate that it SHOULD happen. I was talking more the BEHAVIORS that are of gay or straight definition. Rather than pure sexuality. Just cuz gays fake straight behavior more doesnt make them "true" straight. Straights can do gay things but it doesnt make them true gay either. Gay for Pay the greatest example. Or prison sex with Bubba. It all adds to CONFUSION we dont need
