Gay Marriage?

[cheeseburger]

Oh they want to get married? Sure." there would be no big deal.

I guess if I could dictate a policy on gay marriage it would be that. Which is why I can't say I'm convinced this is a big deal.

Oh the 'right' I was referring to was your opinion that the people who want this are only doing it to make a ruckus. And you know, I really wouldn't care if my kids saw someone with a leash. I'd take them aside and explain it as best I could. Same as I do when they see a hundred other things they don't understand. I'd probably use a wedding ring analogy.

You're treading in the deep end now. Every parent has the 'right' - I mean that very strongly - to choose how he raises his children (within accepted boundaries, of course.) If he chooses to explain to his kids what sex is when they're 16 (good luck), then thats his choice. By walking around with a sub, you would be making that choice for him, and that is infringing on his 'rights'. I understand that in todays world sex is pretty much everywhere; still it isn't as blatant as walking around with a sub.

Yeah I remember when I thought it wasn't any different too.

I guess i'll learn someday and get back to you

So because there aren't that many and those few there are would have to be put under a microscope because....? I still don't get the because. Your earlier statement seems a tad biased. Almost as if because they are gay they are going to make bad parents.

You can bash me for this, but I actually think they would make bad parents. Most people are not gay, and as far as I know its not a hereditory trait. If a kid saw that his parents were gay, s/he might want to be gay too (the whole 'be like daddy' concept. you know what I mean). And imho, quite a few gays are only gay because they want to be different, or whatever. Don't immediately quote me as saying there are no 'actual' homosexuals - there are - but I think you get the point. And it just... doesn't seem fair to the kid.

I'm not against it.

Then you're hypocritical, and here's why:
If you think that two mommy's or two daddy's is fine, then why wouldn't 2 mommy's and 1 daddy (be fine too)? I don't understand that one leap of faith.

Well now I'd be interested to know where you are getting your information from. I have a large number of both female and male friends. Almost all of my female friends were at one time or another sexually abused or almost sexually abused by a trusted male. One of my male friends was. And even if you take into account that they don't want to talk about it, that still puts the number of hetero abuse higher than homosexual abuse. Besides something this country really should understand is that homosexual does not equal pedophile. I think the words I used are fair words for people who generalize without looking at the situation. I wasn't calling you those things. You stated you have no personal interest in this topic and I took that at face value. If you were insulted I do apologize.

Well, I don't have personal interest in this, but one of the things you just don't do is call people names. Nothing positive comes from that, even if you think its deserved.

And I agree, homosexual != pedophile, but you do understand where this idea comes from. I get my information from watching TV sporadically, and i admit thats about as bad of a source as it gets. You may be right on this, its just that until then, if you do that cheesy psychology 'association' test on me, I associate homosexuals on some level with pedophiles; as I suspect plenty of other people do too. Thinking back on it, probably not such a good thing.

Well it's been my experience that people who are ready to slap a label on someone because of their sexual preference are also (generally speaking of course) the same kind of people who assume moral authority. It isn't that far a leap for me from no gay marriage to no kinky sex at all.

That's 100% off the mark. As I said before, I'm not against gay marriage. I could care less. But I don't enjoy getting metaphorically pushed around either. Its not a good thing when anyone that has the revolutionary concept that marriage at some point was between a man and a woman, and deeply religious at that, automatically becomes 'small minded' or whatever. Play fair; I'm not running around calling you a pervert or a freak because you enjoy 'kinky sex', or whatever. Heck I do too. But it irritates me when you have to toe the line, or you get this 9 foot lecture on 'openmindedness' and 'free thinking'.

Is there a reason we have to choose between issues? Yes I agree that hungry people take precedence over this issue as far as resources are concerned, but it doesn't take any of my resources to say, "Go ahead, get married if it makes you happy."

I wasn't making you choose between the issues, only illustrating the difference between a real issue and a fake one. Hunger is an issue because it matters even when you strip away all the hype. If people just said "whatever" to gay marriage, the problem would go away. Its an artificial problem, unlike hunger which is very real.

Lol. Well we agree on something at least.

See, theres this little trick in verbal arguments: if you agree with someone, even if its partially and on something totally unrelated, the person you argue with is much more likely to give your point of view a chance. Only this isn't exactly verbal

I'm sorry my friend, but that really seems like a trivialization of something very important to a lot of people.

I actually am trivializing the issue, because I think it is trivial. This is probably our fundamental difference; I just don't get what all the fuss is over. I'll give you a fair chance at explaining it to me, if you want.

I couldn't be calmer cheeseburger.

Thats always good, its kind of annoying when you can't argue because you're afraid the other guys going to blow up on you any minute.