Major survey shows most Americans support same-sex marriage

[Chicog]

If a man was meant to marry another man then they would have been created with the ability to conceive

This is the epitome of a bigoted statement at worst, or a naive/ignorant one at best. Marriage is a legal contract between two individuals (religious to some). The ability to "conceive" has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Not naive, ignorant or bigoted, I just believe a marriage is between a man and a woman

Fortunately "beliefs" have no place in law.

Or otherwise people like you would have infertile couples forced to divorce.

[Chicog]

Maybe if gays stopped trying to force it down peoples throat they would be more accepted

Maybe if they weren't discriminated against by narrow-minded bigots, they wouldn't feel the need to.

[jdinasia]

If a man was meant to marry another man then they would have been created with the ability to conceive

This is the epitome of a bigoted statement at worst, or a naive/ignorant one at best. Marriage is a legal contract between two individuals (religious to some). The ability to "conceive" has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Not naive, ignorant or bigoted, I just believe a marriage is between a man and a woman

Yeah....keep telling yourself that.

So what about someone who believes interracial marriage is wrong? Is that person a racist, or is it just what they "believe"?

You are a bigot.....plain and simple. You are trying to obstruct the rights of other based on something you claim to "believe" because these people have a different sexual orientation than you. You know.....America did that once to African Americans. Sure is embarrassing looking back on that......(well, maybe not to someone like you....but it is to the majority of us). This is no different.

Nothing wrong with interracial marriages as long as it is male/female

And to the other person about not being able to conceive ... yes they should still be able to get married as long as it is female / male

and another thing ... why do so many gays feel the need to announce they are gay?
like that NFL wanna be, or the CNN anchor, or the UK rugby player?
Why the need to publicize it?
You do not see hetro's making similar announcements
So I would like to announce to all TV readers ... I am straight .. I love women
Cannot wait to read stickboys column on me coming out as a straight man who loves women

Maybe if gays stopped trying to force it down peoples throat they would be more accepted

More than 1/2 of the people in the US already accept gays but that is irrelevant.

Why do people announce they are gay? Because the presumption is that they are straight.


The best for last, your initial argument was based on procreation but when asked about people unable to procreate you switched.


Thankfully your opinion is outdated

[Publicus]

Not naive, ignorant or bigoted, I just believe a marriage is between a man and a woman

Your "belief" does not match current reality. Yes you can marry a dude now! Assuming you're a dude.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Two dudes being together is repulsive and wrong

If you think gay sex in marriage is wrong or is wrong in any place then you're doing it wrong.

Keep trying though....

[Rykbanlor]

The world, or some of it, is growing up in some ways but sadly not in others. I was pleased to note that my native Scotland legalised same sex marriage a few weeks back, as did the state of Alabama; although for Alabama its a minor step really from Same-family marriages to same Sex marriages! Trrrrrrr, TSh!

On the downside we are all still wrecking the planet, killing each other in wars, and letting ourselves be <deleted> backwards by big banking and corporations.

Can't have it all I suppose.

Alabama its a minor step really from Same-family marriages...

You speaking from personal experience big boy...or just trying to be funny...?

What do you think, "big boy"?

I'm assuming from your comeback that you feel insulted by this. May have been funny, may have not. Don't take it too seriously - It's called having a lark, a jolly jape if you will!

[inbangkok]

This is the epitome of a bigoted statement at worst, or a naive/ignorant one at best. Marriage is a legal contract between two individuals (religious to some). The ability to "conceive" has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Not naive, ignorant or bigoted, I just believe a marriage is between a man and a woman

Yeah....keep telling yourself that.

So what about someone who believes interracial marriage is wrong? Is that person a racist, or is it just what they "believe"?

You are a bigot.....plain and simple. You are trying to obstruct the rights of other based on something you claim to "believe" because these people have a different sexual orientation than you. You know.....America did that once to African Americans. Sure is embarrassing looking back on that......(well, maybe not to someone like you....but it is to the majority of us). This is no different.

Nothing wrong with interracial marriages as long as it is male/female

And to the other person about not being able to conceive ... yes they should still be able to get married as long as it is female / male

and another thing ... why do so many gays feel the need to announce they are gay?

like that NFL wanna be, or the CNN anchor, or the UK rugby player?

Why the need to publicize it?

You do not see hetro's making similar announcements

So I would like to announce to all TV readers ... I am straight .. I love women

Cannot wait to read stickboys column on me coming out as a straight man who loves women

Maybe if gays stopped trying to force it down peoples throat they would be more accepted

People "announce" they are gay in solidarity with one another because they are an oppressed minority. They have do deal with horrible, disgusting people like you on a daily basis. Seems like you are in serious need of an education. Heterosexuals don't need to announce anything because they are the majority and are not discriminated against. The fact you are ignorant enough to even ask such a question in a serious manner says loads about just how empty your brain must be.

How are gay people forcing their life down your "throat"? Are they demanding you become gay? Or is it by simply demanding equal rights and recognition under the law. Yeah...I totally agree. These gay people should just lay down and be lucky they are even alive! Just like those crazy blacks during the civil rights movement! How dare a human being fight discrimination and demand equal justice and protection under the law.

In all seriousness though, you are a terrible excuse for a man. No real man who is confident in himself and his life feels the need to such hatefully discriminate against others who are different and make such statements. Sorry you have such a horrible life that has filled you with such hate......I really am as I can only imagine what that would be like.

[Credo]

I think it was straight people and there high level of divorce that removed the sanctity of marriage from the equation.

[Harveyg]

The world, or some of it, is growing up in some ways but sadly not in others. I was pleased to note that my native Scotland legalised same sex marriage a few weeks back, as did the state of Alabama; although for Alabama its a minor step really from Same-family marriages to same Sex marriages! Trrrrrrr, TSh!

On the downside we are all still wrecking the planet, killing each other in wars, and letting ourselves be <deleted> backwards by big banking and corporations.

Can't have it all I suppose.

For sure its not easy to be optimistic about the future. Human free will exercises itself in all directions. Because of my spiritual and emotional experiences(no religion please, no dogma) I feel we are evolving to a better world. It does seem that things will get a lot worse before they get better - banking and corporations will likely be the last line of defense. How does it go? The night is darkest just before the dawn.... Perhaps the day will come when the young men will say no to fighting older men's wars. How close are we to the straw??

[sdanielmcev]

Maybe if gays stopped trying to force it down peoples throat they would be more accepted

Maybe if they weren't discriminated against by narrow-minded bigots, they wouldn't feel the need to.

Rather a bit bigoted yourself there.

[Thorgal]

If a man was meant to marry another man then they would have been created with the ability to conceive

This is the epitome of a bigoted statement at worst, or a naive/ignorant one at best. Marriage is a legal contract between two individuals (religious to some). The ability to "conceive" has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Not naive, ignorant or bigoted, I just believe a marriage is between a man and a woman

Your "belief" does not match current reality. Yes you can marry a dude now! Assuming you're a dude.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Two dudes being together is repulsive and wrong

"You can cut all the flowers, but you cannot keep spring from coming." Pablo Neruda...

[sdanielmcev]

There is a definite social impetus for a male-female definition of 'marriage,' despite any legal terms. And what the gay community gets wrong is that a homosexual marriage will never be the same as a heterosexual marriage. It is about procreation and the rearing of children. Why the gay community wants to usurp the term 'marriage' is beyond me. (Spit on your keyboard yet, JT?) It really needs to be called something else. It is not about equality in the eyes of the law, it is about finding a place in society, of which this nonsensical battle over same-sex marriage deviates from. Not subservient or shunned.

[Jingthing]

There is a definite social impetus for a male-female definition of 'marriage,' despite any legal terms. And what the gay community gets wrong is that a homosexual marriage will never be the same as a heterosexual marriage. It is about procreation and the rearing of children. Why the gay community wants to usurp the term 'marriage' is beyond me. (Spit on your keyboard yet, JT?) It really needs to be called something else. It is not about equality in the eyes of the law, it is about finding a place in society, of which this nonsensical battle over same-sex marriage deviates from. Not subservient or shunned.

sssdddIn the U.S. gay marriage is now widely legal in the states and those state marriages are fully recognized federally.

You suggest going back in time to a civil union alternative debate.

That ship has sailed in the U.S. Very passe. Totally irrelevant.

Gay marriage is now widely legal in the states and fully recognized federally.

The strong probability is that the supreme court will rule to make it legal in all 50 states this year.

If you want to have an intelligent discussion on this topic, suggest you start grounded in current realities.

[Tep]

There is a definite social impetus for a male-female definition of 'marriage,' despite any legal terms. And what the gay community gets wrong is that a homosexual marriage will never be the same as a heterosexual marriage. It is about procreation and the rearing of children. Why the gay community wants to usurp the term 'marriage' is beyond me. (Spit on your keyboard yet, JT?) It really needs to be called something else. It is not about equality in the eyes of the law, it is about finding a place in society, of which this nonsensical battle over same-sex marriage deviates from. Not subservient or shunned.

How boringly bourgeois. Learn the definition of marriage in Sunday School while in short pants did we? Marriage, for most segments of society, for most of history, has been and remains an economic activity often quite unremoved from emotional considerations. LGBT people demanding the same benefits and privileges for same sex unions as those enjoyed by opposite sex unions is a fundamental human right. The battle is won. Surveys like the one referenced on this thread demonstrate this repeatedly. Time to realise that you are being offensive.

By the way, a fundamental rule of identity politics is that you don't get to define anything for LGBT people. They own this issue. They have fought for this issue. It is theirs. You don't get to say what the LGBT community has wrong or not. Another score against you. Another score against your prejudice. This survey and common humanity demonstrates that most people stand with the LGBT community. That will soon be revised to be almost all people will stand with the LGBT community by the next generation.

[Publicus]

There is a definite social impetus for a male-female definition of 'marriage,' despite any legal terms. And what the gay community gets wrong is that a homosexual marriage will never be the same as a heterosexual marriage. It is about procreation and the rearing of children. Why the gay community wants to usurp the term 'marriage' is beyond me. (Spit on your keyboard yet, JT?) It really needs to be called something else. It is not about equality in the eyes of the law, it is about finding a place in society, of which this nonsensical battle over same-sex marriage deviates from. Not subservient or shunned.

How boringly bourgeois. Learn the definition of marriage in Sunday School while in short pants did we? Marriage, for most segments of society, for most of history, has been and remains an economic activity often quite unremoved from emotional considerations. LGBT people demanding the same benefits and privileges for same sex unions as those enjoyed by opposite sex unions is a fundamental human right. The battle is won. Surveys like the one referenced on this thread demonstrate this repeatedly. Time to realise that you are being offensive.

By the way, a fundamental rule of identity politics is that you don't get to define anything for LGBT people. They own this issue. They have fought for this issue. It is theirs. You don't get to say what the LGBT community has wrong or not. Another score against you. Another score against your prejudice. This survey and common humanity demonstrates that most people stand with the LGBT community. That will soon be revised to be almost all people will stand with the LGBT community by the next generation.

Once again, someone that, instead of asking question because they failed to comprehend my post, immediately starts the bashing. That is boorish.

I did not bring up emotion, I brought up child rearing and procreation. I never brought up benefits and privileges. But, then you are so bigoted you can't see having an alternative idea to create a lasting solution. Your alternatives are selfishness driven.

Identity politics is divisive. For either side. Yes I do "get' to say it is right or wrong, or don't you believe in freedom of speech?

And to show your hateful prejudice, I was best man (one of two) at my friends wedding. Also I am in entertainment and had many gay and lesbian friends. And, yes, I like musical theater. So, next time you want to spew your vile hate speech, know who you're talking to.

Your best post.

Btw, the procreation line about marriage is out of date and passe'.

Medical science has enabled procreation outside of sexual intercourse, what with test tube babies then later more refined and better methods such as in vitro fertilization, donor eggs, embryo adoption and a good number of other means of procreating.

The number of single mothers or simply single parents has reduced the role of marriage as an institution and that is just a fact of life, regardless of how or what one thinks about it.

The bottom line is that marriage was created by society for a reason and in recent decades society is redefining and remaking marriage, to include significantly reducing its rationale, justification, desirability for societal reasons as much as personal ones.

And the world is grossly overpopulated so the need to reproduce to keep the human race alive has become considerably negated.

Some people are uncut besides but that would be another thread.

[Scott]

Please take care to make sure your reply is outside the nested quotes. Posts have been removed.

[jdinasia]

There is a definite social impetus for a male-female definition of 'marriage,' despite any legal terms. And what the gay community gets wrong is that a homosexual marriage will never be the same as a heterosexual marriage. It is about procreation and the rearing of children. Why the gay community wants to usurp the term 'marriage' is beyond me. (Spit on your keyboard yet, JT?) It really needs to be called something else. It is not about equality in the eyes of the law, it is about finding a place in society, of which this nonsensical battle over same-sex marriage deviates from. Not subservient or shunned.

Procreation isn't the issue with marriage in any legal sense. If it were then people unable to conceive would not be allowed to marry.

In the US, marriage itself is secular. It conveys many rights. Imagine yourself after 20 years with your partner ; when he dies who inherits? When he is hospitalized , who can visit or make medical decisions?

The concept covered by Brown vs the Board of Education applies here. Separate but equal is not constitutional.

Since I AM legally married in the US, none of the remaining holdout states in the US have the right to not recognize that marriage.

(btw the social impetus is not for a definition of marriage as male + female --- it's for marriage equality as stated in the OP)

Edited March 8, 2015 by jdinasia

[inbangkok]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Maybe if gays stopped trying to force it down peoples throat they would be more accepted

Maybe if they weren't discriminated against by narrow-minded bigots, they wouldn't feel the need to.

Rather a bit bigoted yourself there.

Yeah, because wanting to have a world without bigoted people is "bigoted". Get real....lol. These types of statements are truly funny.

There is a definite social impetus for a male-female definition of 'marriage,' despite any legal terms. And what the gay community gets wrong is that a homosexual marriage will never be the same as a heterosexual marriage. It is about procreation and the rearing of children. Why the gay community wants to usurp the term 'marriage' is beyond me. (Spit on your keyboard yet, JT?) It really needs to be called something else. It is not about equality in the eyes of the law, it is about finding a place in society, of which this nonsensical battle over same-sex marriage deviates from. Not subservient or shunned.

Its not about procreation. Plenty of heterosexual couples marry and never have kids....some by choice, some because of medical complications by either the man or the women. So your argument is flawed to the core. Not even worth 2 seconds of serious consideration or analysis.

Secondly, you can "procreate" without marriage. So to claim that marriage is about "procreation and the rearing of children" is flat out wrong as well. Marriage and having children are not mutually inclusive. Your argument is juvenile and flat out ridiculous. Seriously just another talking point by people who have limited intellectual capacities.

[Neurath]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

If a man was meant to marry another man then they would have been created with the ability to conceive

And you find gay marriage inconceivable. Married are you?

[sdanielmcev]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Maybe if gays stopped trying to force it down peoples throat they would be more accepted

Maybe if they weren't discriminated against by narrow-minded bigots, they wouldn't feel the need to.

Rather a bit bigoted yourself there.

Yeah, because wanting to have a world without bigoted people is "bigoted". Get real....lol. These types of statements are truly funny.

There is a definite social impetus for a male-female definition of 'marriage,' despite any legal terms. And what the gay community gets wrong is that a homosexual marriage will never be the same as a heterosexual marriage. It is about procreation and the rearing of children. Why the gay community wants to usurp the term 'marriage' is beyond me. (Spit on your keyboard yet, JT?) It really needs to be called something else. It is not about equality in the eyes of the law, it is about finding a place in society, of which this nonsensical battle over same-sex marriage deviates from. Not subservient or shunned.

Its not about procreation. Plenty of heterosexual couples marry and never have kids....some by choice, some because of medical complications by either the man or the women. So your argument is flawed to the core. Not even worth 2 seconds of serious consideration or analysis.

Secondly, you can "procreate" without marriage. So to claim that marriage is about "procreation and the rearing of children" is flat out wrong as well. Marriage and having children are not mutually inclusive. Your argument is juvenile and flat out ridiculous. Seriously just another talking point by people who have limited intellectual capacities.

Excuse me but you misunderstand. Firstly, calling someone narrow minded because they do not share the same beliefs as you is bigotry. It's not just for the minority.

Secondly,I was talking about a historical/sociological reasoning. I never said I agreed with it. Merely pointing it out. As far as being juvenile, name calling is quite juvenile. I admire your passion, but it is misplaced.

Thirdly, name calling, failing to see the other side, and flailing at anyone that disagrees with you is the antithesis of objective reasoning.

[sdanielmcev]

There is a definite social impetus for a male-female definition of 'marriage,' despite any legal terms. And what the gay community gets wrong is that a homosexual marriage will never be the same as a heterosexual marriage. It is about procreation and the rearing of children. Why the gay community wants to usurp the term 'marriage' is beyond me. (Spit on your keyboard yet, JT?) It really needs to be called something else. It is not about equality in the eyes of the law, it is about finding a place in society, of which this nonsensical battle over same-sex marriage deviates from. Not subservient or shunned.

How boringly bourgeois. Learn the definition of marriage in Sunday School while in short pants did we? Marriage, for most segments of society, for most of history, has been and remains an economic activity often quite unremoved from emotional considerations. LGBT people demanding the same benefits and privileges for same sex unions as those enjoyed by opposite sex unions is a fundamental human right. The battle is won. Surveys like the one referenced on this thread demonstrate this repeatedly. Time to realise that you are being offensive.

By the way, a fundamental rule of identity politics is that you don't get to define anything for LGBT people. They own this issue. They have fought for this issue. It is theirs. You don't get to say what the LGBT community has wrong or not. Another score against you. Another score against your prejudice. This survey and common humanity demonstrates that most people stand with the LGBT community. That will soon be revised to be almost all people will stand with the LGBT community by the next generation.

Once again, someone that, instead of asking question because they failed to comprehend my post, immediately starts the bashing. That is boorish.

I did not bring up emotion, I brought up child rearing and procreation. I never brought up benefits and privileges. But, then you are so bigoted you can't see having an alternative idea to create a lasting solution. Your alternatives are selfishness driven.

Identity politics is divisive. For either side. Yes I do "get' to say it is right or wrong, or don't you believe in freedom of speech?

And to show your hateful prejudice, I was best man (one of two) at my friends wedding. Also I am in entertainment and had many gay and lesbian friends. And, yes, I like musical theater. So, next time you want to spew your vile hate speech, know who you're talking to.

Your best post.

Btw, the procreation line about marriage is out of date and passe'.

Medical science has enabled procreation outside of sexual intercourse, what with test tube babies then later more refined and better methods such as in vitro fertilization, donor eggs, embryo adoption and a good number of other means of procreating.

The number of single mothers or simply single parents has reduced the role of marriage as an institution and that is just a fact of life, regardless of how or what one thinks about it.

The bottom line is that marriage was created by society for a reason and in recent decades society is redefining and remaking marriage, to include significantly reducing its rationale, justification, desirability for societal reasons as much as personal ones.

And the world is grossly overpopulated so the need to reproduce to keep the human race alive has become considerably negated.

Some people are uncut besides but that would be another thread.

That is an idea worthy of Josef Mengele.

[Choctastic]

Younger people like myself are indeed waiting for people like you to go to your grave. The world will be a kinder and more accepting place.

Thank you for demonstrating what is wrong with many homosexuals. The aggression they show and viciousness with which they attack critics, or even those who simply defend their own sexual preference, is shameful. High-fives if you are on-board the program and vilification if you are not.

The majority will will support anything they have been conditioned to accept. It's easy to drive the herd, once you have control of the media.

Holdouts reject gay marriage because they reject homosexuality. I don't see their resistance as less legitimate than your need for acceptance. Mostly I think heterosexuals reject gay men because they refuse to act normally...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gay+Agenda

'their androgynous personalities, cross-dressing/drag queen fetishes, feminine behavior, Gay Pride Parades and strange speech will continue having their group receive the hate. Act like everybody else and stop promoting your sexuality.'

Anal sex is practiced by both heterosexual and homosexual couples. It must feel good otherwise they wouldn't do it. Whether they SHOULD do it is another question.

This article points out the disproportionate incidence of disease amongst gay men, compared to heterosexuals. http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

'Anal intercourse is the sine qua non of sex for many gay men.⁴ Yet human physiology makes it clear that the body was not designed to accommodate this activity. The rectum is significantly different from the vagina with regard to suitability for penetration by a penis.'

I think I have stated my son is HIV-positive. He took Amyl Nitrate (poppers) to relax his anal muscles to assist penetrative sex. Please explain to me how this is 'natural'. Now, he and his partner wish to adopt children. Again, explain to me how this is 'natural'? It isn't.

You cannot get around the physiological drawbacks of homosexuality. Until you do, you will NEVER get universal acceptance.

Consenting adults can do as they please as long as they don't harm others. But if my son dies from either AIDS or the toxic meds, please don't come knocking on my door asking if I approve of gay marriage.

[jdinasia]

Younger people like myself are indeed waiting for people like you to go to your grave. The world will be a kinder and more accepting place.

Thank you for demonstrating what is wrong with many homosexuals. The aggression they show and viciousness with which they attack critics, or even those who simply defend their own sexual preference, is shameful. High-fives if you are on-board the program and vilification if you are not.

The majority will will support anything they have been conditioned to accept. It's easy to drive the herd, once you have control of the media.

Holdouts reject gay marriage because they reject homosexuality. I don't see their resistance as less legitimate than your need for acceptance. Mostly I think heterosexuals reject gay men because they refuse to act normally...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gay+Agenda

'their androgynous personalities, cross-dressing/drag queen fetishes, feminine behavior, Gay Pride Parades and strange speech will continue having their group receive the hate. Act like everybody else and stop promoting your sexuality.'

Anal sex is practiced by both heterosexual and homosexual couples. It must feel good otherwise they wouldn't do it. Whether they SHOULD do it is another question.

This article points out the disproportionate incidence of disease amongst gay men, compared to heterosexuals. http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

'Anal intercourse is the sine qua non of sex for many gay men.⁴ Yet human physiology makes it clear that the body was not designed to accommodate this activity. The rectum is significantly different from the vagina with regard to suitability for penetration by a penis.'

I think I have stated my son is HIV-positive. He took Amyl Nitrate (poppers) to relax his anal muscles to assist penetrative sex. Please explain to me how this is 'natural'. Now, he and his partner wish to adopt children. Again, explain to me how this is 'natural'? It isn't.

You cannot get around the physiological drawbacks of homosexuality. Until you do, you will NEVER get universal acceptance.

Consenting adults can do as they please as long as they don't harm others. But if my son dies from either AIDS or the toxic meds, please don't come knocking on my door asking if I approve of gay marriage.

You use a site that attempts to bolster their lies by tearing down actual medical associations.

There is not a single significant medical association in the Western world that supports the insanity stated in your first link

The AMA APA etc are all against reparative therapy. The same for all the major Western. pediatric medical associations. The group your link was created by has a membership of less than 200 pediatricians (out of 60,000 in the US) that's .33%..... You may wish to see what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about your hate group.

Your second link, the urban dictionary, in case you missed it, is poking fun at the idea of the "gay agenda".

Lastly, I don't need your approval for marriage equality. I am married to my partner of 12 years. The US population has grown past your bigotry, and the SCOTUS is likely to legalize marriage equality throughout the country this summer.

Edited March 14, 2015 by jdinasia

[Choctastic]

Younger people like myself are indeed waiting for people like you to go to your grave. The world will be a kinder and more accepting place.

Thank you for demonstrating what is wrong with many homosexuals. The aggression they show and viciousness with which they attack critics, or even those who simply defend their own sexual preference, is shameful. High-fives if you are on-board the program and vilification if you are not.

The majority will will support anything they have been conditioned to accept. It's easy to drive the herd, once you have control of the media.

Holdouts reject gay marriage because they reject homosexuality. I don't see their resistance as less legitimate than your need for acceptance. Mostly I think heterosexuals reject gay men because they refuse to act normally...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gay+Agenda

'their androgynous personalities, cross-dressing/drag queen fetishes, feminine behavior, Gay Pride Parades and strange speech will continue having their group receive the hate. Act like everybody else and stop promoting your sexuality.'

Anal sex is practiced by both heterosexual and homosexual couples. It must feel good otherwise they wouldn't do it. Whether they SHOULD do it is another question.

This article points out the disproportionate incidence of disease amongst gay men, compared to heterosexuals. http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

'Anal intercourse is the sine qua non of sex for many gay men.⁴ Yet human physiology makes it clear that the body was not designed to accommodate this activity. The rectum is significantly different from the vagina with regard to suitability for penetration by a penis.'

I think I have stated my son is HIV-positive. He took Amyl Nitrate (poppers) to relax his anal muscles to assist penetrative sex. Please explain to me how this is 'natural'. Now, he and his partner wish to adopt children. Again, explain to me how this is 'natural'? It isn't.

You cannot get around the physiological drawbacks of homosexuality. Until you do, you will NEVER get universal acceptance.

Consenting adults can do as they please as long as they don't harm others. But if my son dies from either AIDS or the toxic meds, please don't come knocking on my door asking if I approve of gay marriage.

You use a site that attempts to bolster their lies by tearing down actual medical associations.

There is not a single significant medical association in the Western world that supports the insanity stated in your first link

The AMA APA etc are all against reparative therapy. The same for all the major Western. pediatric medical associations. The group your link was created by has a membership of less than 200 pediatricians (out of 60,000 in the US) that's .33%..... You may wish to see what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about your hate group.

Your second link, the urban dictionary, in case you missed it, is poking fun at the idea of the "gay agenda".

Lastly, I don't need your approval for marriage equality. I am married to my partner of 12 years. The US population has grown past your bigotry, and the SCOTUS is likely to legalize marriage equality throughout the country this summer.

My gay son is married and did not need my approval, either.

'Bigotry'? Please desist from personal slurs. I support my son and I support the right of homosexuals to do as they choose, unless it harms or infringes on the sensibilities of others. Just like heterosexuals. Unless we live in a homosexual dictatorship, expressing or defending one's sexual preference does not automatically mean you 'hate' those who make a different choice. The hate-filled rhetoric of tormented 'heterophobes' who seem to have lost all balance, in their desperate need for acceptance and parity, goes too far.

You malign these Paediatricians, then refer to the Southern Poverty Law Center, whose very existence and funding depends on them finding 'hate groups'. 'Junk science' is a major problem in medicine. The site claims its views are supported by FACTS. If the facts are wrong, then please state how. Mentioning 'reparative therapy' is a deflection. Paediatricians are no different to anyone else. They aren't going to express their true feelings, in a political environment that is toxic. The influence of political correctness is obvious. The Medical Associations need tearing down. They are corrupt.

The urban dictionary description is accurate. There is nothing 'normal' or 'natural' about being overtly camp. It is a learned behaviour which many people find objectionable.

[jdinasia]

Younger people like myself are indeed waiting for people like you to go to your grave. The world will be a kinder and more accepting place.

Thank you for demonstrating what is wrong with many homosexuals. The aggression they show and viciousness with which they attack critics, or even those who simply defend their own sexual preference, is shameful. High-fives if you are on-board the program and vilification if you are not.

The majority will will support anything they have been conditioned to accept. It's easy to drive the herd, once you have control of the media.

Holdouts reject gay marriage because they reject homosexuality. I don't see their resistance as less legitimate than your need for acceptance. Mostly I think heterosexuals reject gay men because they refuse to act normally...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gay+Agenda

'their androgynous personalities, cross-dressing/drag queen fetishes, feminine behavior, Gay Pride Parades and strange speech will continue having their group receive the hate. Act like everybody else and stop promoting your sexuality.'

Anal sex is practiced by both heterosexual and homosexual couples. It must feel good otherwise they wouldn't do it. Whether they SHOULD do it is another question.

This article points out the disproportionate incidence of disease amongst gay men, compared to heterosexuals. http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

'Anal intercourse is the sine qua non of sex for many gay men.⁴ Yet human physiology makes it clear that the body was not designed to accommodate this activity. The rectum is significantly different from the vagina with regard to suitability for penetration by a penis.'

I think I have stated my son is HIV-positive. He took Amyl Nitrate (poppers) to relax his anal muscles to assist penetrative sex. Please explain to me how this is 'natural'. Now, he and his partner wish to adopt children. Again, explain to me how this is 'natural'? It isn't.

You cannot get around the physiological drawbacks of homosexuality. Until you do, you will NEVER get universal acceptance.

Consenting adults can do as they please as long as they don't harm others. But if my son dies from either AIDS or the toxic meds, please don't come knocking on my door asking if I approve of gay marriage.

You use a site that attempts to bolster their lies by tearing down actual medical associations.

There is not a single significant medical association in the Western world that supports the insanity stated in your first link

The AMA APA etc are all against reparative therapy. The same for all the major Western. pediatric medical associations. The group your link was created by has a membership of less than 200 pediatricians (out of 60,000 in the US) that's .33%..... You may wish to see what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about your hate group.

Your second link, the urban dictionary, in case you missed it, is poking fun at the idea of the "gay agenda".

Lastly, I don't need your approval for marriage equality. I am married to my partner of 12 years. The US population has grown past your bigotry, and the SCOTUS is likely to legalize marriage equality throughout the country this summer.

My gay son is married and did not need my approval, either.

'Bigotry'? Please desist from personal slurs. I support my son and I support the right of homosexuals to do as they choose, unless it harms or infringes on the sensibilities of others. Just like heterosexuals. Unless we live in a homosexual dictatorship, expressing or defending one's sexual preference does not automatically mean you 'hate' those who make a different choice. The hate-filled rhetoric of tormented 'heterophobes' who seem to have lost all balance, in their desperate need for acceptance and parity, goes too far.

You malign these Paediatricians, then refer to the Southern Poverty Law Center, whose very existence and funding depends on them finding 'hate groups'. 'Junk science' is a major problem in medicine. The site claims its views are supported by FACTS. If the facts are wrong, then please state how. Mentioning 'reparative therapy' is a deflection. Paediatricians are no different to anyone else. They aren't going to express their true feelings, in a political environment that is toxic. The influence of political correctness is obvious. The Medical Associations need tearing down. They are corrupt.

The urban dictionary description is accurate. There is nothing 'normal' or 'natural' about being overtly camp. It is a learned behaviour which many people find objectionable.

LOL

So your hate group won't express their true feelings? Or are you suggesting that the 99.67% of all pediatricians in the US that won't join your hate group are afraid? Your hate group is in favor of reparative therapy.

You claim that it is easy to lead the masses but strangely your bigotry isn't shared by the majority....

Your claims regarding the urban dictionary link actually did make me laugh out loud!

BTW... Poppers don't cause AIDS. A virus does.

[Choctastic]

LOL

So your hate group won't express their true feelings? Or are you suggesting that the 99.67% of all pediatricians in the US that won't join your hate group are afraid? Your hate group is in favor of reparative therapy.

You claim that it is easy to lead the masses but strangely your bigotry isn't shared by the majority....

Your claims regarding the urban dictionary link actually did make me laugh out loud!

BTW... Poppers don't cause AIDS. A virus does.

Thank you for that scholarly work.

Read my previous posts. I'm well aware poppers don't cause AIDS. But thanks for raising the question.

It IS remarkably easy to lead the masses. Ask the gay community. Tom Hanks and the health industry made a fortune pretending the side effects of poppers were AIDS. The gay community were completely taken in. Then they demanded AZT, also based on 'junk science', which turned out to be not only useless but a killer. The gay community were completely taken in. AIDS spreading through the heterosexual community was another myth, based on 'Junk Science'. Most of us were taken in by that one. 'The Swiss Study' is but the latest example of 'Junk Science', once again enthusiastically welcomed by the gay community. Hey. No need to use condoms. Your absolute risk has gone from 0.00009 to 0.000018. Big deal. Please take these (profitable) shiny toxic pills and cross your fingers they don't kill you. When it comes to incontrovertible science, if you ever find a live AIDS virus in an AIDS victim, please let me know.

Pity the SPLC doesn't investigate junk science 'terrorists'. They have killed far more Americans than any Muslims will ever do.

Since you have decided to abandon discussion in favour of juvenile responses, welcome to my ignore list.

Edited March 17, 2015 by Choctastic

[jdinasia]

LOL

So your hate group won't express their true feelings? Or are you suggesting that the 99.67% of all pediatricians in the US that won't join your hate group are afraid? Your hate group is in favor of reparative therapy.

You claim that it is easy to lead the masses but strangely your bigotry isn't shared by the majority....

Your claims regarding the urban dictionary link actually did make me laugh out loud!

BTW... Poppers don't cause AIDS. A virus does.

Thank you for that scholarly work.

Read my previous posts. I'm well aware poppers don't cause AIDS. But thanks for raising the question.

It IS remarkably easy to lead the masses. Ask the gay community. Tom Hanks and the health industry made a fortune pretending the side effects of poppers were AIDS. The gay community were completely taken in. Then they demanded AZT, also based on 'junk science', which turned out to be not only useless but a killer. The gay community were completely taken in. AIDS spreading through the heterosexual community was another myth, based on 'Junk Science'. Most of us were taken in by that one. 'The Swiss Study' is but the latest example of 'Junk Science', once again enthusiastically welcomed by the gay community. Hey. No need to use condoms. Your absolute risk has gone from 0.00009 to 0.000018. Big deal. Please take these (profitable) shiny toxic pills and cross your fingers they don't kill you. When it comes to incontrovertible science, if you ever find a live AIDS virus in an AIDS victim, please let me know.

Pity the SPLC doesn't investigate junk science 'terrorists'. They have killed far more Americans than any Muslims will ever do.

Since you have decided to abandon discussion in favour of juvenile responses, welcome to my ignore list.

AZT is still in use today.

AZT - the very first drug found to be effective against HIV. AZT is also called Retrovir or Zidovudine. In the early days, AZT got a bad reputation because it was often given in excessively high doses and because it didn't work for long by itself. (Nothing does - see "Drug Cocktail.") Now, however, they've got the appropriate dosing figured out, and it is still in use. It is an ingredient of both Combivir and Trizivir. http://www.hivpositivemagazine.com/HIV_Dictionary.html

AZT isn't "junk science" at all.

In the world, 50% office all cases of HIV infection are women. Not junk science. (source = avert)

In the US the percentage of men is higher than women. The percentage of minority races is way higher than whites.

You seem to be denying that HIV causes AIDS. Science deniers make me ill.

[Scott]

Please get back to the topic.

[Publicus]

<<snip>>

Btw, the procreation line about marriage is out of date and passe'.

Medical science has enabled procreation outside of sexual intercourse, what with test tube babies then later more refined and better methods such as in vitro fertilization, donor eggs, embryo adoption and a good number of other means of procreating.

The number of single mothers or simply single parents has reduced the role of marriage as an institution and that is just a fact of life, regardless of how or what one thinks about it.

The bottom line is that marriage was created by society for a reason and in recent decades society is redefining and remaking marriage, to include significantly reducing its rationale, justification, desirability for societal reasons as much as personal ones.

And the world is grossly overpopulated so the need to reproduce to keep the human race alive has become considerably negated.

Some people are uncut besides but that would be another thread.

That is an idea worthy of Josef Mengele.

Introducing Nazis or former Nazis to the discussion means you lost the argument, and that you lost the argument big time. The claim in the post is as extreme and as out of bounds as the Nazis themselves were and remain. The claim is that the matters in my post constitute "an idea worthy of Josef Mengele."

My post presents and discussed the modern medical science and the legal research, means, methods in which civilized and democratic societies among other societies that have nothing to do with Nazism or fascism resolve issues of reproduction, from infertility to number of fertilizations, conceptions, births.

There are laws that govern the variety of contemporary assisted reproductive technologies in highly specific and limited ways. To say the matters presented in my post relate in any way to Josef Mengele the Nazi war criminal is OTT.

You would need to explain yourself, to present in specific and analytic terms how your sensational and outrageous claim is justified. It would be insufficient to state you might only be presenting the point of view held by others, even if particular others might hold such views and even if you cannot identify such others.

You would need to make the case that assisted reproductive technology in wide global use today "is an ideal worthy of Josef Mengele." Failure to do this would suggest the post could well be a troll post because the statement is a vague and unsupported opinion when more than a two-cent opinion is required.

[neverdie]

All I've learnt in this thread is chocatistic's son takes it in

The blurter, got hiv and is a bit bitter about it.

So what.

It's time and long overdue that bigotry towards gay people is eliminated. People need to learn to live and let live, it's as simple as that really.

Most of those that protest too loudly have something to hide I suspect, are you having kinky dreams choc ? Your tvf handle seems to indicate so

[Choctastic]

All I've learnt in this thread is chocatistic's son takes it in

The blurter, got hiv and is a bit bitter about it.

You could have learned so much more but I accept your limitations.

People need to learn to live and let live, it's as simple as that really.

Militant homosexuals and Russians disagree with you. If it were that simple a decades-long struggle would not have been necessary. There are always consequences for our behaviour. If you are dying of AIDS, experience bigotry or come to regret you will never have children, you may wish it were more simple but it isn't. Is it?

Most of those that protest too loudly have something to hide I suspect, are you having kinky dreams choc ? Your tvf handle seems to indicate so

Crude, insensitive and now baiting. I have been suspended for less.