Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: shrinkermd
Isn't it kind of babyish to declare gays immoral because you think their sex lives are icky?

Isn't it kind of babyish for a grown woman to use words like "icky", Faye?

 

"People used to think it was revolting when two people of different races got married," [Arthur] Caplan says. Letting your sense of disgust guide your views on gay marriage, he adds, "is just bigotry and bias dressed up with the clothes of wisdom."

No, all you are doing is making rational people question whether interracial marriage was ever right. Which, understandably, is why black civil rights activists want nothing to do with the gay agenda of mainstreaming homosexuals.

Don't give "Civil Rights" a bad name, Arthur.

52 posted on 07/17/2007 4:56:17 PM PDT by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: SteveMcKing

Interracial couples can pass their genes to the next generation. In fact, there’s good evidence that their children may be healthier than people of more similar genetic origin. It used to be called ‘hybrid vigor’ in the less PC days.

Homosexuals can’t pass their genes on naturally. If there is a gay gene, it makes me believe that being naturally homosexual (as opposed to those who decide to be gay) would be a very good way to prevent that person’s genes from entering the gene pool. Perhaps, then, being born gay is a way to prevent certain individuals from passing their genes on.
So, interracial marriage can be seen as natural, and normal, resulting in the success of the species, while being gay can be viewed as a genetic off-ramp. There’s no comparison between the two. I’m with you.


69 posted on 07/17/2007 5:57:21 PM PDT by capt.P (Hold Fast! Strong Hand Uppermost!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson