No! God is Love!

Just a question, if they believe He does not exist, why are they making such a fuss about it. Do they think that NOTHING works better than a loving God? Next they will be boycotting sugar as not sweet. How would they know anyway taste is a function of the brain.

you think not, because you are already thinking perversely. Let turn your question around to ask you how does it benefit a child to be adopted by dope addicts, or alcoholics? If they are going to be teaching the child wrong behavior, it is a criminal act. In fact it is child abuse. Why would you want to see someone taught something that has no social good? Now if the professed homosexual, or drunk, or thief, or murderer, gives that life style up, and concentrates on the child's welfare teaching only acceptable moral principles, their is nothing wrong with it But do you risk children to be put into an environment that can imprint on their mind wrong actions as good. But tell me would you trust a known child abuser with your child? What good could come of it?

It may not interfere with my life personally, except in the degradation of society in general. Why are we so intent on ending smoking, that is destroying peoples health, and want to ignore any other detrimental behavior. Drugs, also are in the same category. Do you not think that all these behaviors are chosen by the perpetrator? They are not born that way. neither are homosexuals. They choose to be that way, and can choose not to be also,

Nothing happens without a purpose. You can not even breath without the purpose of life It is built into the human system. Even homosexuality has a purpose, selfish pleasure. There is no redeeming social value to it.

Without a purpose, there is no direction. Meaning comes in the fulfillment of purpose. If you have no reason for something, it is meaningless. It is just vanity. Vanity can kill you.

I never said that the Gays cause trouble by themselves, but they do not contribute anything either. Why do we have kids? It is because we are designed to have kids. If you do not wish kids, that is fine, but that is a choice, not a design element. You have the right to choose your lifestyle, no problem with that, but you do not have the right to force it on anyone else. Do as you wish with your life, but do not interfere with mine. DO YOU UNDERSTAND??? I am not telling you to change your own way of living, live it up as you desire, but don't force it on me. I am not telling you that you have to produce more people, just that that is the natural part of life. If you want to go deep sea diving, don't expect me to make it easier for you to do so, You are on your own.

Just because I do not want to incorporate special treatments into my life, you do not want to have me tell you what you can do or not do. to each his own, and leave ma alone.

Yes, they do contribute, but it is not any more than any other single person, but they do not contribute to the notion of a common society. Their uncommon contributions can be honored and acknowledged, but not as a part of the hetrosexual society. They should organize themselves, charter themselves as an independent society group, get legally sanctioned recognition of themselves as a coherent group, and live and work as those society members without mucking up normal society. Let's face it, it is not normal to want to go through life in that fashion. If it were the normal status, we would not have both male and female as the recognized basic family unit. Why do you believe are two sexes in the first place. Just for variety? The purpose is to procreate and increase the population. For that quest, there are special rules of behavior. agreed upon by society in general. It is not homophobia, it is just common sense. You cannot mix the two and have any fixed strength. Let the homosexuals exist as a separate community with whatever rules they want, but stay out of trying to modify and change what has been socially accepted for thousands of years. And meets the basic criteria of people multiplication.

You can join whatever society you wish, but keep them separate or they get confused and unmanageable. Is that what you want? Chaos?

The Amish, for some strange reason, make their own rules for their society. they do not try to force their beliefs on anyone else. This is as it should be. If you want to live outside of the generally accepted rules of society, you have to create your own society, and live within it. The Amish claim to be a religious order, much like the quakers. This country will honor that distinction, but the Amish must contain their behavior by themselves, As long as they stay independent of the general social order of the rest of the country, no one interferes. However, when they mingle with those outside of their organization, they must conform to those rules. they cannot claim special treatment.
Homosexuals can do the same thing if they desire, and no one will hassle or disturb them without provocation. Think separate but equal, and no one will mind, But to try to force a blend of good and bad, (inferred), is just a form of legal bullying, and should not be permitted.

what "fact" are you hanging on to that makes any of my rebuttal outside of your deluded thrust for interference in the traditional concept of marriage. Do you really believe that the homosexual life style has any value to society? If so what is it?

what "fact" are you hanging on to that makes any of my rebuttal outside of your deluded thrust for interference in the traditional concept of marriage. Do you really believe that the homosexual life style has any value to society? If so what is it?

Life without purpose has no meaning, You can not have life without purpose. You may not know the purpose, but that is just your individual ignorance. Purpose is alway the foundation of life. Just because you do not know your purpose, does not prevent your life from continuing without your cognizant involvement. All living things have a design purpose. You cannot change the design purpose, you can only interfere with it, and delay it to the point that you thwart that purpose, and it becomes meaningless. In which case it dies out and has served not any purpose.

So you consider the narrow mindedness of Gays more important than normal citizens. what so is the madness in that. Gays are a blight on society, They may be loving people, but the actions are not conducive to harmony of purpose. We want them to have a good life, but not at the expense of any other path to a good life. Gays can probably contribute to society, but only in a limited way. Why do you want to interfere with what has been working for so long without rancor for the sake of notoriety. I make no sense to distort a good and positive thing with a negative thing. Let them have the singular path separate but equal. Why would you want to interfere with a positive path of society with a negative and degrading intrusion.

You are too narrow minded to see the harm this intrusion is making on society. Marriage is a hetrosexual institution, it is not to be distorted by narrow and delusional homosexuals.

Marriage is between a man and a woman, what you want to do is distort the term marriage to fit an unnatural union. If you want the same conditions that are given to people that are supporting and increasing the population of the country, figure out how you are going to do that without reproductive possibilities. we need new citizens to increase the value and wealth of the country. Homosexuals do not add anything for the future, They are present persons only. Now new children to support our society. When childless couples die, that is the end of their contribution. Children are the necessary for society to grow, defend, and innovate.

Now having said that, you can form a loving partnership with all the present privileges that exist in a joined partnership, it just does not need to be called marriage. Why is using the term marriage so important when you do not and cannot fulfill the requirements of marriage to society?

You can have equal rights under a new term, just don't muck up the honorable term and essence of marriage if you cannot fulfill the requirements of it. Figure out a different term than marriage and campaign for the same equality of that term to the configuration, but do not imply that homosexual partnerships can fulfill the basic reason for marriage is to legitimize children, and provide a safe and acknowledged relationship for that nugget of society.

You can have all the privileges except parenthood , and any inference in that realm of marriage and the family. That is the big objection, homosexual unions can not and do not have skin in the game. They have no children that can carry on the name and the characteristics of the original parents. They want all the privileges without the problems of raising children.
It is a purely selfish pursuit, wanting the privileges of society without having to support it with the hard work of producing caring and producing new citizens.

Homosexuals want special privileges without the heart ache of producing new citizens to support the society. We need new workers, citizens, warriors, people that will work to improve society homosexual couples do not add anything for the future. It is once and done. Fine enjoy you life, but do not mess up the thrust of citizenship but wanting special privileges. If you are not going to support the influx of any new citizens to the society, you have no urge to improve it except for your own selfish contribution. This is the main problem with the definition of equal rights. Homosexuals want all the privileges, but don't want to have to contribute to the problems of improving it, by generating new citizens.

And adopting children should not be permitted, because they then get a distorted experience of true family life. Unless you experience it, you cannot teach it.

At least you and I agree on this issue. Well done.