PoliticalOrphan

Reading pro-gay posts here makes me want to state my own views on the subject; I am perfectly willing to accept equal (not special) rights for gays in the job market. They should have equal opportunity for employment, pay, promotion, etc. I do not accept the idea that gay "marriage" is equivalent to straight marriage. To my thinking, the concept of marriage carries with it the assumption that it may (or may not) result in procreation, which is absolutely essential to the continuance of human kind. This is not possible in gay marriage, aside from adoption, which, again, requires normal sexual reproduction. So do not demand that we straight people acknowledge your lifestyle as "normal". It is not. Just admit that "gay" relationships are outside the realm of what most consider normal, or conventional, if you prefer. And, in fact, are a mental or social aberration, and we will get along much better with each other.

Terbreugghen

Lots of things are "outside normal" and we protect them as freedom. On the other hand, I agree with you that marriage is a specific term that does not apply to same sex intimacy. Those who favor treating same sex intimacy as identical to heterosexual intimacy are asking to suspend physics, biology, and t***h. But all that said, what is really at issue is not the freedom for individuals who practice homosexual intimacy to do so. The practice is widespread and no longer viewed as criminal. Americans are free to engage in it if they wish. What is really at issue is social approval of those relationships and entitlement benefits enforced by government edict, and often in direct contradiction to the right of religious conscience. I know there is specific wording about the freedom of religious conscience in the Constitution. I have yet to find the part about governemtn benefits and entitlements for the support of homosexual intimacy. But guess which "right" is winning in our contemporary courts? The power of the mainstream media coupled with a powerful public education system in the hands of one party has never been more obvious.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Wow, this sentence should bring some real words from Che Chardo. Of course, he doesn't see one party control as being in existence, since the e******n of 2010.

PoliticalOrphan

Well said, Terbreugghen.

Ricktloml

I get tired of the term gay, it's homosexual special considerations. Homosexuality is one of the few subjects that have been studied rather extensively, mainly because homosexuals demanded it so they could prove they were "born that way", the only thing is the results didn't turn out the way they wanted them to. The scientific results are, while there MAY be a genetic link of some kind to homosexuality, it is mostly a matter of choice. It is likened to alcoholism, yet we don't tell alcoholics to go get drunk, and stay drunk, because that's what their genes ell them to do, no alcoholics are told to manage their illness. Instead of throwing our culture in the gutter for 2% of the population maybe we should be looking for a cure instead, and treat this as the genetic aberation that it is

PoliticalOrphan

Good comments, good points, Ricktloml.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Let me put some thoughts relating to a conversation with the two men up the block who have been together for fifteen years. To them, it is not about the word marriage but the benefits which accrue to a married couple, ie. joint filing of taxes; physical property inheritance without inheritance tax, Social Security spousal benefits; inheritance of private retirement accounts and so forth. Their statements have been if civil unions provided those types of benefit rights, there would be no issue using the word marriage. Having presented this, these men are on every other issue very conservative in a neighborhood that is VERY left leaning. Further, they are not rabid on the subject as so many others are. They found an excellent attorney who wrote up all necessary legal documents. Their issue continues to be the joint filing of taxes and Social Security benefit issue.

The Progressive Patriot

Gay rights including marriage is about civil rights. Plain and simple. It is incumbent upon those who oppose e******y make a case for their position. The burden of proof should not be on those seeking e******y any more than women should need to prove that they should be allowed to v**e. These are people who are being denied the same rights as others because of who they are. I fully believe that those who are opposed to full e******y, including marriage, will one day in the not too distant future be looked upon with the same scorn and disdain as most people have for the segregationists of the early 20th century. Your war is lost. You may win a few battles but at the end of the day, you will be on the wrong side of history.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

How accusatory using "you" repetitively. Further, marriage is not a civil right and continuing in that vain offends the American African community. Many people fail to ask the very important question of some individuals, "How do you define marriage?" Of course, considering where you are from and reading other of your comments, I just consider the source.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

How about finding out how they feel about the old marriage that some of us have to pay with our income tax? I don't think many of them know about that since it left us while Bush was there but will be right back there with our 2013 taxes.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Somewhat off my mettle this PM. Personal crying. We lost our 17 year old sweetheart cat today :cry:
Explain "old marriage" as you define it. I am totally not understanding.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Somewhat off my mettle this PM. Personal crying. We lost our 17 year old sweetheart cat today :cry:
Explain "old marriage" as you define it. I am totally not understanding.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I am off for no reason, at all. I meant that to read marriage tax, which we all get to pay on our 2013 income tax, that is, those of us who are married.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

In my entire life, I have never done nor have we as a couple done our own taxes. That is my preface for, it may be the mortgage interest write off. They own the house together; however, are not married. It may be only one gets the interest right off or something like that. Do they split the interest write off or what. They really are not about " marriage" but the other benefits you and I have had tax wise and beneficiary wise available as heterosexual married people.
I tend to get to personal, but these two men are the best kind of neighbors. They are always willing to help out any neighbor in need. They do not flaunt their life style, but just go about daily living. The best example is several years ago my progeny came down with a MAJOR case of Lyme Disease. It was determined it came from an area owned by the State who had not cleared it for over a year. Kids were using it to play in. They rented major shrub and riding mowers to totally clean the area so the kids could play in a safe area. It was totally stripped of all vegetation and covered with good soil, etc.
keep in contact!

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I have often asked those of that persuasion along with those here who support that life style but claim not to be among them if they will "get" to pay that tax known as "the marriage tax" according to my tax lady. Yes, we get to spend a bit more than single people do so I imagine wh**ever sex they are if they live together they don't have to pay it unless they are married. It is actually a penalty and intended to be so.