Replies

With regard to homosexuality we would be better of to simply say its a sin, that there should be no special rights for sexual orientation and that legal marriage is a incentive to provide the best home for children so it doesn't apply except for one man one woman.

Efforts to stop homosexuals from forming domestic partnerships, to have equal rights or to be forced to hide who they are run counter to good strategy and counter to American principles.

Equal rights yes, special rights no.

Efforts to stop homosexuals from forming domestic partnerships, to have equal rights or to be forced to hide who they are run counter to good strategy and counter to American principles.

There really aren't many people proposing any such thing. Most people just want to protect traditional marriage and keep the gay propaganda/indoctronation out of schools.

That's the point - in the US, everyone has the right to marry:

someone of the opposite sex

someone who is not a close blood relative (and some parts of Mississippi....hehehe)

Someone of the legal age to consent

EVERYONE has that right. Allowing males to marry males, women to marry women, heck - how about Woman to Mule??? - would be an ADDITIONAL special (ugh -hate that word) rights based on a chosen trait.

"Efforts to stop homosexuals from forming domestic partnerships, to have equal rights or to be forced to hide who they are run counter to good strategy and counter to American principles."

I suppose when a father and his 18 year old daughter want to marry, that would be ok too?

We would never want to hide who we are would we? Better if we just show and get public approval for all our deviant and evil behaviors.

Hell we can just change the law re. sex with children? Couldnt we? Then everything would be open no sense in restricting anything right? of course you know I am being sarcastic.

Its filthy apologists like yourself that allows for this continued spiral into the abyss. Laws can discriminate based on behavior and the public good to protect the family.

Yes by family I mean a dad (male) and mother (female) and their children.

Efforts to stop homosexuals from forming domestic partnerships, to have equal rights or to be forced to hide who they are run counter to good strategy and counter to American principles.

First of all, why should homosexuals have "domestic partnerships" and not three men? Three women? Two women and a man? etcetc. Or a brother and sister? Aunt and nephew? Why should same sex sexual practices be rewarded and other sexual affinities (such as a threesome) not be? Why should platonic relationships not be so rewarded?

There are NO RIGHTS that everyone else has that homosexuals do not already have.

What do you mean, "hide who they are"? Are you talking about gay bath houses and gay pride parades here, or are you talking about "out" homosexuals being teachers and joining the military? Write in clear English, please, not slogans that are designed to heighten emotion but have no meaning.

Additionally, your comment "hide who they are" is a talking point of gay rights activists. It means that their sex acts ARE their identity. Sex acts are chosen and voluntary. If you mean their feelings, we all have zillions of feelings. Are people supposed to be grouped in identity brackets because of their "feelings"? Or because of their chosen sex acts? What about bestialophiles not hiding who they are? What about incestophiles not hiding who they are? What about pedophiles not hiding who they are? What about polyamoryphiles not hiding who they are?

you are only advocating a prior stage of the homosexual agenda.

The point where the only wanted domestic partnerships.

Your statements go with the "orientation" propaganda vs the science of the choice of homosexual behavior.

Homosexuality is a PREFERENCE not an orientation. Treating it like any other sexual fetish is entirly appropriate and equal. Homoseuxals should be viewed in the same light as those who have sex with animals.

Efforts to stop homosexuals from forming domestic partnerships, to have equal rights or to be forced to hide who they are run counter to good strategy and counter to American principles.

Equal rights yes, special rights no.

But they do have equal rights! A homosexual has exactly the same rights as a heterosexual. A homosexual may marry one person of the opposite sex and enjoy every opportunity that anyone else enjoys.

See, the truth is that homosexuals want to change the consequences of their own decisions. It's like complaining that the fact that robbing banks will get you arrested, while those who don't rob banks are able to remain free is discriminatory and unfair. In both cases, it is the consequences of their own choices, consequences of which they are perfectly aware, against which they rebel!

The same argument could be made by those who want to be married to a child, seven women, or a car. When our law refuses to recognize or condone those "marriages", it is likewise not discrimination.

Efforts to stop homosexuals from forming domestic partnerships, to have equal rights or to be forced to hide who they are run counter to good strategy and counter to American principles.

1.) There should be no special approbation of one's sexual fettishes when it comes to contract law. If two sodomites want to form a partnership, they are perfectly able to do so right now. There need be no special acknowledgment in the law of a deviant sexual relationship or of the mental disorders of the individual parties as the rationale behind the contract.

2.) Homosexuals have exactly the same rights as everyone else right now. Any laws specific to homosexuals are by definition special rights.

3.) There is no "American principle" that says that who you are is predicated upon where you put your penis. That is a principle of the hedonist left which emerged from the sexual revolution of the 1960s.