You are correct. You have never said that you are for special rights for 'homosexuals'. Your posts, however, especially with the subject of the article, seem to imply that you favor rights for 'homosexuals' that mentally healthy people don't have.
from 138: You know you're right. That is a good analogy. I would suggest to you that we are in the midst of a very similar cultural shift where a good number of people, perhaps soon a majority if not already, see homosexuals as fully human also and wish for them to participate in the full range of rights and dignities as all others without having to pretend they're something they're not.
And what rights do they not have that we have?
from 143:. But to the extent that certain segments of society feel that homosexuals are not entitled to the same rights and dignity as everyone else, much as the mentality towards slaves was, I think it's a very valid analogy.
And what rights do they not have that we have?
from 149: They are what they are and that trait is immutable. If someone whose nature is to find comfort and romance with someone of the same sex finds someone else similarly inclined, they are behaving according to their nature. To behave contrary to that would not be the "proper expression" of their sexuality.
And what rights do they not have that we have?
BTW the practice opf homosexual behavior is not immutable, both religious and secular therapies have had great success in healing and restoring these people to a normal healthy lifestyle.
And what rights do they not have that we have?
None. That's exactly my point. Gays have the same rights as everyone else. No more and no less. Only some people (especially here) seem to have no problem refusing to recognize those rights.
Protecting and defending those rights is what I'm arguing for. Some on here seem to think it's OK to abridge someone's rights if they personally are offended by what the person might do with their freedom, or if their behavior isn't given the blessing of the government.