[DJ MacWoW]

My posts on these threads often get twisted into something else.

There's no way to twist this

I have no problem with so-called civil unions for homosexuals

[GSWarrior]

I don't have problem with civil unions. So what? I don't want homosexuals to be any more unhappy than they already are. I don't want to deny homosexuals the right to leave their inheritance to whomever they choose. Or to name whomever they choose as a beneficiary. Stuff like that.

For those of you who automatically assume the worst of posters who don't agree with you on EVERYTHING, I do not believe the conservative movement should embrace bestiality, pedophila, incest. The fact that I have to spell this out is an indication of just how warped some of you are.

[Secret Agent Man]

I will say that being for gay civil unions is not a conservative position. It is a foot in the door attempt for gay marriage, it is “gay marriage by another name”. It is normalizing perversion by deflecting the argument into ‘civil rights’. There is no civil right to practics perversion.

They already have the ability to make anyone they want inheritors in their wills, they can tell hospitals they want this person to be able to see them just like I do, they can make those people legally their healthcare power of attorney so they can make end of life decisions just like I can in my own legal healthcare power of attorney document.

In Wisconsin and many other states they have amended their constitutions to say there will be no gay marriage OR ANY OTHER constructs that mimic marriage, like civil unions, registries, etc.

The gay agenda works incrementally and with purpose. they have dedicated gay legal groups who have these steps all planned out. Human Rights Campaign, Lambda Legal, etc.

I believe I need to retract the apology, if you really believe this nobody is twisting your viewpoint around, it is crystal clear and it isn’t a conservative viewpoint. It’s a stepping stone for the homosexual agenda to eventually destroy the definition of marriage.