How do we separate "the person from the activity" when the debate descends to such a level?
You call yourselves the gay community, which if logic dictates the subject matter, demands that you wrap yourself around and celebrate the activity. By every action, and by every motive, you associate yourself and identify your being with the activity of homosexuality. It's not a skin color. It's not a religion. It's not a party affiliation. You weren't born with it like someone with palsy. And you didn't lose a leg in the war. YOU ARE GAY. THAT'S WHAT YOU CALL YOURSELF. GAY=lifestyle of a particular activity. I work with people that are humans. They don't say they are gay. I have no way of knowing. I have no problems with them until they become militant. By militant, I mean that they demand to shove their vial POS agenda down my throat. They reveal their activity and revel in their activity. Their activity is who they are. Don't pull this passive-aggressive victimhood BS.
As for fear: I don't fear you as a grown man. I fear for my children. They love children because they're so innocent, unknowing, and easily-led.
As for disgust: Your activity is by very nature absolutely revolting. And I will add that hetero-males packing female fudge is just as sickening. Heteros who gravitate toward this act have unresolved issues with a past experiences IMO.
As for revulsion: Your acts would sicken the strongest constitution. Fisting comes to mind as well as S&M/fetishes, and bathhouse orgies. The gay agenda has made homosexuality in TV/movies/radio seem funny and happy. They don't ever talk about gays being ugly (but doesn't all shows reveal gays as happy, witty, beautiful, rich people), mentally unstable, irritationally violent, and/or suicidal. And they don't talk about the fact that gays have to wear diapers after their long, dark journey down the road of nightmares they call a *alternative lifestyle choice."
Please troll, give me a freakin break.
Tranvestitism is a sexual fetish (as are the other BLTGWITHOUTMAYO types). We are born naked. The differences in the clothes we wear are purely fashion.
The desire to wear the clothes society has deemed for the "opposite" sex is the result of cultural conditioning and sexual identity confusion. Purely psychological. There is no "wear the other person's clothes" gene.
The identity of the BLTGHOLDTHEONIONS types is firmly rooted in sexual fetishes. Why not include S&M or BD as a sexual persuasion? What about GL for girl lover and BL for boy lover?
What happens when sexual preferences overlap (like those who support NAMBLA)?
Why isn't vegan/meat eater included among "identities"? It could be made a civil rights crime to feed a prisoner a meal with any sort of animal byproduct involved.
What about those who want to eat horse meat? Horses are raised and killed in this country for meat which can be exported to other nations for food but cannot be sold to Americans. We can eat cow, buffalo, antelope, etc. The horses are already being killed. Why can't we eat horses?
Sounds like somone is being denied a civil right to eat horse meat.