<p>Allmusic,
I have no idea what you are talking about.</p>
<p>EK,
I know that people like to compare homosexual behavior with race and equate those who oppose homosexual marriage with racists, but the issues are entirely different, and many blacks oppose homosexual marriage and resent the comparison.</p>
<p>logos
I think what allmusic is doing is reversing the argument
while you are arguing that an adult who falls in love with someone of the same sex- should be able to “control” themselves and be abstinent,
Allmusic is saying that - is the reverse true?
If you are able to “turn” off love, and deny yourself the joy of being with someone that you want to share your life with, is the reverse then true?</p>
<p>In order to have the ability to participate in society in a way that is “approved” by a currently dominant portion of the community, that means marriage and children.
being married can even affect your ability to get a job, as companies may see married workers as more stable and committed.
So if you can’t marry who you love, should homosexuals then be expected to “love” someone they can’t in order to fit into society?
In order to have a family?
That is what she might have meant about forcing someone to love.</p>
<p>( Im not talking about bisexuals- who often do have relationships with the opposite sex, but those who arent attracted at all to the opposite sex, and couldn’t “fall in love” with them, in a way that in the U.S. we feel is required to have a stable adult relationship that will sustain itself during the stresses of family life-)
oh I guess we are not so successful at that are we :(</p>
<p>And yes logos I realize that some blacks resent the comparison, but it doesn’t make it less valid
<a href=“http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0421,boykin,53751,1.html[/url]”>http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0421,boykin,53751,1.html</a>
<a href=“http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week746/feature.html[/url]”>http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week746/feature.html</a></p>
<p>“And yes logos I realize that some blacks resent the comparison, but it doesn’t make it less valid”</p>
<p>Very true. I’m also among the many blacks who think the comparison is valid.</p>
<p>EK: Please give us a link to your quote in #1160, as I did in my links to the polls I cited. Thank you.</p>
<p>Yes, it is only a matter of time, EK, that people who do not oppose gays “forming a family” will be the majority in this country, because children are being indoctrinated in our public schools at younger and younger ages each and every day that if they oppose this they are hateful, intolerant bigots, and they are working their hardest to rid these poor kids of their “illness” (those old-fashioned ideas). And kids can’t stand up to that kind of ridicule; it’s even hard for some of us here contributing to this thread! :)</p>
<p>“indoctranated”- interesting choice of word</p>
<p>its okay HH, your choice of words and defense of the ban and you vehemence say all alot about where you really stand</p>
<p>you talk about how you feel, then use indoctranation to discuss diversity…sometimes walking the walk doesn’t meet with talking the talk</p>
<p>Yes - I-n-d-o-c-t-r-i-n-a-t-e-d - Indoctrinated.</p>
<p>Gee - “walking the walk” - I thought I MENTIONED I was against gay marriage??? You are using the propaganistic tactic of equating opposition to gay marriage to HATING GAYS. Stop. Enough, already. It is utterly transparent.</p>
<p>I still don’t understand the argument, but I’ll take a stab at responding.</p>
<p>People can and do practice homosexuality and some consider themselves to be in a committed relationship or “married” and that’s their business. However, there are other people who have homosexual desires and don’t wish to act on them. For these people, therapy might be helpful and might lead to their living a life that they are happier with. I’m not talking about kidnapping someone and forcing them to go through therapy. This would necessarily be voluntary, and may or may not result in their marrying a person of the opposite sex.</p>
<p>People don’t act on feelings of attraction for another person for any number of reasons, often because they are committed to being faithful to their spouse.</p>
<p>My mother might be happier as a gay person, but hasn’t yet come up with a therapy to help. However, as in her “adult community”, the men are dying off pretty quickly, the number of over 60s who are discovering their lesbianism is encouraging. What I don’t understand is why the government should provide “special rights” to my mother and not to her friends.</p>
<p>Hereshoping:</p>
<p>The “indoctrination” I have seen on this is in private schools. The public schools wouldn’t touch it with a 10-foot pole.</p>
<p>But, as far as I can tell, you still haven’t said what’s wrong with it. You’ve said “I won’t discuss it as long as 80% of the people agree with me” (but you pulled that 80% number out of thin air). You’ve said it will change the fabric of society (but how? and how for the worse?). You’ve said you believe some (many? most?) gay people are born that way. You’ve said they should have the right to visit their partners in the hospital. How about the right to inherit without paying taxes? How about the right to take a tax deduction for alimony (and an obligation to report alimony received as income)? How about the obligation to support children they have raised?</p>
<p>What aspect of “marriage” is it that you object to for gay couples?</p>
<p>To be clear: No one is suggesting that the state could force any religion to sanction gay marriage. The Catholic Church may withhold the sacrament of marriage from same-sex couples (unless one of them is transsexual) for as long as it likes. But why deny gay atheists the option to file joint tax returns or get family health insurance coverage?</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen, the students now are far more liberal about homosexuality than existed in my day when gays weren’t out and certainly weren’t doing things like adopting or giving birth to kids. </p>
<p>Where I live, which is a relatively small city in a relatively conservative state, a local family columnist is a gay mom, I have a good friend who is gay and has two kids, and I have other gay friends who have children, including one who is a transexual.</p>
<p>thank you NSM
I don’t think in any way- that the current fight for civil rights for gays, takes away from what blacks underwent during the fight for black civil rights & equality in earlier decades ( and which continues I admit- even despite passage of civil rights laws)</p>
<p>But I don’t see civil rights as a religious issue-
Those who advocate against rights for gay couples and families, seem to use the Bible as their source
However, while you can find bits of the Bible to back up just about any stance you would care to make , we do have precedent for the govt to take a stance that prohibits discrimination even when a religous group has it as a long standing tenet of their religion.</p>
<p>Example the Latter Day Saint church- taught that “if there is one drop of Negro blood in my children- they recieve the curse”.
Boys in the LDS church enter the Aaronic priesthood at 12 years old in devout families- except that blacks were not allowed to do so.
It wasn’t until 1978- that there was a * revelation from God* that now blacks would be allowed into the priesthood.
Was it just a coincidence that this came at a time when they were under pressure from the federal government that threatened their non-profit status after compliants from civil rights groups about discrimination in the Mormon church?</p>
<p>EK: Can you supply the link to your quote about polls I asked you for? Thanks again.</p>
<p>Yes, EK explained my position very nicely. Thank you.</p>
<p>Who is being indoctrinated?</p>
<p>HH, you’ve asked for a comment on Stanley Kurtz’ theory about gay marriage attacking the “fabric of society.” I’ll bite. My own take on Kurtz was that he egregiously ignored the maxim that “correlation is not causation.” This article suggests that even the correlation is missing: <a href=“http://www.slate.com/id/2100884/[/url]”>http://www.slate.com/id/2100884/</a></p>
<p>EK: Please give us a link to your quote in #1160, as I did in my links to the polls I cited. Thank you.</p>
<p>HH
Sure I posted the link in #1138</p>
<p>to the post
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=243637&page=76[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=243637&page=76</a></p>
<p>[same - sex marriage in U.S.](<a href=“Same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States</a>)</p>
<p>JHS: I did not pull the 80% number out of thin air. Did you READ the link I supplied? It is from a Gallup poll, but it is admittedly out of date. I earlier mentioned 70-80%. The numbers that EK supplied do not even dip much below 70%. I, unlike others here, strive to be intellectually honest.</p>
<p>I don’t think you are clear about what goes on in public schools.</p>
<p>Frankly, your fight is with Logos, not me. I do not believe gays can change, nor should they have to, nor do I want them to.</p>
<p>I previously stated that I believe the disintegration of marriage (due to loosening constraints on divorce) have already hurt children since the '70’s. I believe some gay activists are not playing straight (no pun intended) when they say they intend to lead monogamous lives once they are married. In fact, some studies show that gays are NOT flocking to the alter as much as people were led to believe.</p>
<p>JHS, if you really want to see what I believe, read Stanley Kurtz. His articles are archived at nationalreview.com. I mentioned this before.</p>
<p>Pick your fights with the right people, ok. Thanks.</p>
<p>So when my mother gets sick, and is unconscious, my stepfather is guaranteed the right to visit, and is automatically granted responsibility to make decisions regardind her care.</p>
<p>But when my mother’s 70-year-old nextdoor neighbor, who is now a lesbian, gets sick and is unconscious, her partner can be completely denied visiting access, is not provided with any medical information whatsoever, and has no say whatsoever regarding her care.</p>
<p>Why is my mother given “special rights”? Certainly it has nothing to do with procreation or childrearing (she married my stepfather when she was 60.) Nothing to do with inheritance (if anything, her remarriage muddies the waters, and has to be dealt with through separate documentation.) So why does the government treat her to special benefits not available to her next-door neightbor? It seems to me that it is the government (and the vindictive promoters of the heterosexual lifestyle) who are attacking the fabric of society.</p>
<p>Actually, I happen to agree with HH, that the disintigration of marriage has hurt children. I think people do not take their marital vows seriously enough, and divorce far too easily and quickly, without taking the needs of their children into consideration.</p>
<p>But this is a heterosexual problem, not gay problem, because gay people tend to be MORE monogamous than straight people, with their 50% divorce rates.</p>
<p>AM: If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.
No, two bridges.
EK: Your “source” is WIKIPEDIA?</p>