Gay marriage in California (homosexual, single, hospital)

[katnip kid]

Originally Posted by Flame Angel

Same Sex is NOT marriage. It is something else. I am not against it per se, it just isn't marriage.

It just gets more ridiculous! What about the straight couples who have NO SEX even though they are married?

Gay marriage is something else? WRONG! It is 2 people in love, same as heterosexual love.

[katnip kid]

Originally Posted by jaijai

It's my understanding (from the latest research and insight) that human sexuality is on a spectrum ... that's it's not always black and white and that on one end of that spectrum are people who are "totally" heterosexual and that on the other end there are people who are "totally" (i can't think of a better word at the moment) homosexual and that there are a whole lotta people between those two extreme ends or poles.
Perhaps it's the people floating around in between those two ends of the spectrum and who can't be o.k. with it that more nebulous place (who are probably not even conscious of it) who have issues with homosexual expression.
I don't know .... just a thought.

Jai Jai, I agree with you about the spectrum idea, and the nebulous place concept also.

[jaijai]

Originally Posted by TrueTimbers

Oh you always make so much sense and say things in such an articulate way....... Pretty soon I am going to just post... "ya what jaijai said"

ah shucks.
i do o.k. sometimes but thank you.

[TheCalifornianWriter]

Same sex love is not marriage, and you need to realize it.

To help certain folks: I am against gay "marriage". Be my enemy and call me names, okay?

Now, back to reality: Gay rights is a nonexistent thing. I think that what gays want is all the privileges of marriage. It's sort of an equality thing--that is they want to be equal to heterosexuals in status. Then again, I'm not sure I could speak for them, since I already speak rationally...

Anyway, many say that gay rights is a parallel to civil rights. No, not at all. It is wrong to discriminate against different races for no reason. Being gay is natural, and it just happens? Then why does it go against nature to be gay?
Without bringing religion into it, it really is just a an unnatural decision to be gay. If you cannot procreate, as nature (remember, no religion here) intended, then you are not being natural.
Also, the marriage thing: it's just a facade. What gays want, I believe is the equal standing that comes with marriage.
The fact is, they want the government to say that we must all accept this to be natural and honor it.
If it's made legal, that means that the government is going to officially tell me and many, many others that this is a marriage, when it isn't.
To those who say gays are born that way, the well-known Simon LeVay brain study of 1991, which tried to find differences in the hypothalamuses (a very small part of the brain) of homosexual and heterosexual men, found no evidence that there is any genetic cause for homosexuality. Nothing in the study showed that gay men are born that way. Many gays might not like to hear that...

Also, religion is not the only thing that opposes homosexuality; I think all societies have recognized it as a dead-end choice--something not good or productive for society. Christianity, Judaism, Muslims, the ancient societies of Egypt and many others have seen what I say.
Finally, for those who equate gay rights with civil rights: homosexuality is not the same as skin color, and not being in favor of gays is not the same as hating someone just because of their race. Also, being black isn’t dangerous to your health (unless you’re subject to extreme and violent racism). Active homosexuals are vulnerable to dozens of sexually transmitted diseases. According to one report, the risk of anal cancer rises by an astounding 4,000 percent for those engaging in homosexual intercourse and doubles again for those who are HIV positive.AIDS remains the fifth leading cause of death among those aged 26 to 44, and 60 percent of new cases are contracted by men who have sex with men. An estimated 30 percent of all 20-year-old homosexual men will be HIV positive or dead by the age of 30. According to the Centers for Disease Control, homosexual men are a thousand times more likely to contract AIDS than the general male heterosexual population."9 None of that can be compared to race, or anything else for that matter.

Civil rights deals with discrimination and, in actuality, popular opinion. The Jim Crow laws were civil rights laws back when whites thought they were right. The whole history of homosexuality is just one long list of overwhelming common sense. Gays are stigmatized in society because society knows that sort of perversion is not productive for the society. Good people, maybe, but not good in their beliefs and in the ways they act out their beliefs.

By the way, call me a bigot if you will, and call me uneducated or say I don't have a brain, but I think therefore I am. I have logically stated my point of view, with research, and I expect your counterpoints.

[TheCalifornianWriter]

And I realize that it may seem out of order a bit, but I had to get all my information and write it in between what I had already before I forgot.

[jaijai]

o.k., you're a bigot with faulty logic and poor writing skills (which i wouldn't say except that you identify yourself as a writer).
And i can't bare to counter all of your "points" but, bottom line, homosexuality is not harmful to society. period.

[.highnlite]

643 words, and you don't even have a dog in the race, by the way, could you come up with the stats for disease for anal sex among heterosexuals. It would be good to compare.

The survey, released last year, showed that 38.2 percent of men between 20 and 39 and 32.6 percent of women ages 18 to 44 engage in heterosexual anal sex.

[Fontucky]

[TheCalifornianWriter]

Ah, so I am a bigot! Great!

And I suppose you're extremely smart because you can insult me...
You don't know who I am, so how can you say I'm bigoted?

Oh and you don't "bare" to counter my points? Well can you bear to? Sorry, I couldn't help it...
Anyway, please, find any FACTS that support your argument. You ca't say, "I've got facts, but, eh, I can't be bothered to say 'em!"
Also, I write much better when I am not quickly thinking of points to put down in an argument, thanks.

[TrueTimbers]

Originally Posted by TheCalifornianWriter

Active homosexuals are vulnerable to dozens of sexually transmitted diseases. According to one report, the risk of anal cancer rises by an astounding 4,000 percent for those engaging in homosexual intercourse and doubles again for those who are HIV positive.AIDS remains the fifth leading cause of death among those aged 26 to 44, and 60 percent of new cases are contracted by men who have sex with men. An estimated 30 percent of all 20-year-old homosexual men will be HIV positive or dead by the age of 30. According to the Centers for Disease Control, homosexual men are a thousand times more likely to contract AIDS than the general male heterosexual population."9 None of that can be compared to race, or anything else for that matter.

.

What about homosexual woman? They getting a lot of anal cancer these days?????...

So you think gay is a choice people make because of some study done by who with what bias....

Please explain to me why two people who love each other should not be able to be a family.. ie next of kin via civil union or marriage or whatever one wants to call it...

News flash.. Their is more to sex and love than procreation.... Or is it you procreate types stop having sex once you have had enough children??