Replies

=== But keep in mind that 10K for drugs is not the full bill. Hospitalizations, opportunistic infections, etc. --

Keep in mind that $500 or so a year for every woman taking birth control is not the full bill.

Cervical cancer, breast cancer, blood clots, warts, syphilis, Hepatitis, gonorhhea, etc. ... they all add up to over-burden with "elective" diseases and complications a medical system that's got its hands full trying to make women look like Drag Queens by providing them plastic breasts and boyish hips ... and dealing with the inevitable fallout.

And given the fact that abortion remains the most popular of all elective surgeries should give one pause. At $300-900 bucks a pop to kill a kid, those costs surely are staggering and the damage at least as patently lethal as that inflicted by homosexuals who manufacture excess lives sacrificed for "humanitarian" use by the sorts of Profiteers from whom our President procured his already-been-killed "stem lines".

To the related costs of heterosexuality as practiced post-Sexual Revolution, I'd also add the chit for anti-depressants and sexual aids necessary, it seems, to stay on an even keel and keep one's performance up to par when partaking of a more Evolutionary model of sex as based on the non-monogamous and sterile of the animal kingdom. I doubt very seriously Bob Dole's hawking a drug for which insurers won't pay up, big-time, to the pharmas.

If folks are going to decry homosexuals and their "elective" contracting of AIDS, I think the same finger ought to point to the costs of providing scrips for Viagra or treatment for the insanity that is surgically implanting toxins in your body for Effect.

=== Perhaps we should try to change the discussion toward the costs to the society and children from the "Gay Marriage" idea.

The costs to society from the "Hetero Marriage" idea as currently premised in the courts and most Enlightened minds today far exceed that which the homosexuals are incurring.

The notion we're protecting anything like a sacred institution at present from the evil homosexuals is ludicrous. Let them have their State marriages ... it's a drop in the bucket of what the Heteros currently are inflicting on all.

Your points are not in opposition to the opposition to the normalization of homosexuality. Sexual libertinism is a continuum, with man+woman sex divorced from lifelong marriage, fidelity, and children as the norm. IOW, you seem to be saying the why worry about homosexual marriage when promiscuity and sexual libertinism among heterosexuals is so much more grievous?

The answer is that they are different manifestations of the same problem. But one point is that as screwed up as relations between men and women are (generally speaking, as evidenced in your posts) at least there is the potential, between a man and a woman, for having a lifelong commited marriage. Between a man and a man, there is only the potential for sexual aberration. Nothing else. So when one accepts same sex acts, one crosses a line in the sand. It is not just more of the same, it is stepping off the cliff.

Homosexuality has always been forbidden in civilized societies, barring some Greeks here and there. But the norm for accepted sexual behavior has always been marriage. Add to that every monotheistic religion has forbidden same sex acts, and for a good reason. Acceptance of homosexuality opens the floodgates to "anything goes".

I am not denying that the slippery slope has already been slid down in the form of birth control, pre-marital and post-marital sex, abortion, and so on. But I think your focus is a little off. Rather than complaining that people shouldn't single out homosexuality for criticism, I think all forms of degrading and destructive sexual behavior should be condemned. And at the very least, should not be forced on everyone, especially kids in school.