Quote Originally Posted by cheeseburger
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.
Yep every parent has that right, but a leash isn't sexual in and of itself. It's a leash.

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 won't bash you for it. I will say I think you may need to expand your horizons a bit though.

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.
Did I say 2 mommy's and 1 daddy wouldn't be fine? If I did I certainly didn't mean to. Any combination is okay by me.


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.
Well you know generally I agree with you, but what do you call people who just decide an issue based on stereotypical information?

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.
Yeah TV isn't the best place for good information.

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'.
I am playing fair. You call it what you want, believe what you want. Just let me do the same. Perfectly fair.

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.
Do you have any idea how insulting it is to call this issue fake? I only ask because you seemed to take a great deal of offense to my labels and yet have no problem throwing up your own as though they are acceptable.

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
Sigh...are you really lecturing me on verbal arguments?

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.
To be honest, I don't think you'd really listen to me. I hope you can understand that I'm not trying to be insulting here, but I have tried to explain the importance of it before and so have some of the others in the thread. I feel that you are incapable at this time of seeing the other side of this issue. To you it is "fake". Nothing I have said so far has shaken your position on that at all. Which is fine. You're free to believe as you wish.

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.
Lol. I don't know if you know this cheesburger, but I'm usually the one coming into the threads telling folks to keep it calm. I'm not about to blow up here. I'd really be the hypocrite you accused me of being then.