Are you some of this trashy irrational frogs haters ?

If so you’re out of touch and so are all your points…

But here is my argument: if you claim that I have no business in your bedroom (and I accept that) then I have no responsibility to be financially on the hook for the consequences of what you do in your bedroom. As a taxpayer, I have no responsibility to pay for your HIV medications you can’t afford. With your right to be you, comes my right to be free from you. If you want to claim that what you do in your bedroom is your private business, then you need to keep that business private.

Homosexuality is not a mark of Cain and is not visable to the eye. There are many men/women who are gay but it cannot be determined by simply looking at a person. It is not your looks, but your actions, that expose your private life style. Who would have ever dreamed that Rock Hudson was gay? Or Authur Ashe?

Basically this is a movement to make acting queer (queer in the traditional sense, not the “gay” sense) acceptable. To act in any outragous manner and have it accepted, not just tolerated.

If the gay movement forces the legalization of gay marriage, it will be based on their premise that homosexuality is a born trait and they should not be punished, socially, for that trait. That allows the door to open for someone to claim that they should be married to a 12 year old because they were born with the trait that causes them to be attracted to 12 year olds. Or a trait that causes them to be attracted to their cousin, their mother or some other sexual attraction that is now illegal. It has been proven that pedophilia is a inherant trait you are born with consequently it cannot be cured.

Pandora’s Box.

But, in some ways, having gay marriage for gays will not change anything for them. Long term relationships in the gay community is not the norm, it is the unusual. But if they are allowed to legally marry, changing the traditional defination of marriage, they will then be considered a “priviledged” class and that is really what they are after. Minority status, that is the goal because then they fall under “affirmative action” laws. A Boy Scout troop will not be able to keep a gay man from being a scout leader; a school district will not be able to refuse to hire a kindergarten teacher because he is gay; they will be given special consideration for all kinds of things under “affirmative action”.

But the argument that they use is that they should have the right to marry just as equally as heterosexuals. That argument, in any court of law, should be moot as they are allowed to marry equally now, just not to someone of the same gender. It is not the right to marry that is the push, it is the right to marry anyone, including someone of the same sex, they want.

I can see this opening a whole Pandora’s Box. If you allow the defination of marriage to be changed for gays, how do you prevent someone from marrying their own daughter? That would be discriminatory.

I don’t feel sorry for the people of California. They have allowed this movement to get out of control. The Folsom Street Fair comes to mind where gay sex acts are actually committed on public streets and no one is arrested.

Gays gain nothing by being allowed to marry. The excuse about not being able to make decisions for their “loved” ones if one gets sick is flat out bull. A living will takes care of all of that and even married straights need to have a living will. A standard will handles any inheritance issues. The one thing they will be able to gain is Social Security benefits and that is the main thing they are after. If one partner dies from HIV/AIDS, the other parter would then be eligible for SS survivor benefits without having reached the age of retirement.

What better way to destroy a society than from within?