Gay Marriage- a general discussion.

[Josh/Devilman88]

One more thing - just for those who'd like to see it, this is the APA's official stance on sexual orientation: http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/answers.html

The APA is a wackyo liberal group

Yeah, whatever wackyo is

jk, I posted the link because they were mentioned, no other reason really

Its ok

[Brambila]

A) The question we have to ask about mental competence and stability is which one is defined in the consent laws? Clearly it's not mental stability, since there are mentally handicapped people who have just as much rights as another person but are still not mentally stable. For instance, my father is bipolar. Without medication, he can be very much mentally unstable. That of course does not mean the government can take away his rights as a legal adult. My point wasn't to make that all children are mentally competent, my point was that there are children who are mentally competent and stable, and of these children, should they be allowed to have sexual involvement with 40-year-old men?

B) First of all, I would like to make clear that these are my personal experiences, correct. But in this case, I have a huge amount of people to report (I probably know at least 15 men and women with same-sex attraction well, and dozens of others as aquaintances). With this large pool of surveyors, and the diversity of these people, I can tell you that yes this is a good example of how the majority of homosexuals have had problems as children. Every single story I have heard from these people has to do with parental imbalance, abuse, or sexual molestation. Now, what is the reason for this? I will explain later.

C) Firstly, there is no scientific evidence that homosexuality is genetic, which is your implication. The evidence given even by the homosexual-run APA suggests that homosexual attractions come from behavior in the childhood. It is NOT genetic, as no sexuality is genetic. Sexuality doesnt' appear until the third adolescence. Young children may have crushes, or find some people attractive, but they do not think about having sex, and if they do they are seriously disordered. In addition, children who have same-sex attraction are children who are showing signs of a perhaps future homosexuality, but it does not mean they are homosexual. After saying this, I would further say that it is unnatural for children to want to be placed in positions of sexual molestation. If they do, they must have a mental disorder or chemical imbalance, as it is not natural for humans in our youth to be sexually active. Since the study showed that homosexuals are TWICE more likely to have been molested as children (40-50% for both lesbians and homosexuals compared to around 20%), this is proof that they were disordered for having such implications to be in a position of sexual molestation. Interestingly enough, what you are implying is what sparked the APA to form a study saying that children like to be sexually molested. Fortunately, they took that statement back and apologized.

D) No, this study wasn't done by Paul Cameron (whoever he was), it was done by two APA psychologists, AP Bell and Weinberg, I believe was their name. It was done in 1978. I find it interesting that the APA kicked out Paul Cameron for not surveying correctly, since the APA is the master of that. Many of their studies are done here in the castro district of San Francisco, or in the bay area (hence, the 10% gay fallacy). The APA is the one who approved the study that showed 10% of Americans were gay, but the flaw is that there is basically no evidence for this. In addition, San Francisco is 10%-15% homosexual, and our population is the largest of homosexuals by national standards. Clearly, it is a flawed study. Actual studies show the number of homosexuals at around 3%-7%. Finally, most of the studies I used are what homosexuals themselves use.

E) Your last note is very interesting, and I am glad you brought it up. You are correct that homosexuals do not feel loved and so have sex to replace it, and you are correct that they are outcasts, but this is not because of society and them being homosexual, this is because of their search for masculinity. If you have ever noticed that most homosexuals are feminine, the reason is because they gain more feminine traits. Very early on in the childhood, they seek for masculinity with friends, but are unable to make friends because of their femininity. Instead, they becoem loners, or make friends with women. During their adolescence, they still seek this natural masculinity, and the only way to gain it they believe is by sexual pleasure.

From the very site, evidence that homosexuality is not genetic:

Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience.

[platypeanArchcow]

From the very site, evidence that homosexuality is not genetic:

Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience.

No contradiction.  Homosexuality has a significant genetic component.  Also, the way the brain develops early on is to a large extent a random process, so environmental factors are actually very insignificant.  However, homosexuality, like sexuality in general, only becomes apparent to a person in adolescence.

[Brambila]

That's very silly, becuase psychological development is from our experience in the world, while neruological development is from our brain growth. Psychology isn't genetic. Neurology is.

[Akno21]

My question:

IF YOUR NEIGHBOR IS GAY, AND HE MARRIES ANOTHER GAY PERSON, HOW DOES THAT HARM YOU?

Well for one, I don't want my kids to see two guys kissing out on the front lawn. Also, If they was living in NC they would have rocks thrown that there house and I dont want someone coming by and shooting at them and miss and hit me or any my kids.....

What makes me think you would take or have taken, (I don't know if you have them) your kids to see Passion of the Christ, a movie with much more horrifing scenes then two men kissing. Teach your kids to accept people who are different, not shut them down. Now that is a real logical argument, your second one. I guess you couldn't live in the South during the Civil Rights Movement, you would probably have a black neighor and rocks were thrown at their houses plenty of times.

I will teach my kids(when I have them) the same way as my mom. Gay people are wrong for beging gay. The Bilbe preaches that it is wrong...Also what does the Passion have to do with anything?

My point with Passion is, two men kissing would be rated PG (possibly PG-13, depending on who is actually doing the ratings, although Holloywood is liberal, and more accepting of gays) while seeing Jesus get burned and all that stuff was rated R and is a bit more disturbing.

"Gay people are wrong for being gay" That is about the craziest thing I have ever heard. A) How is a person "wrong" B) What would you do if a gay man saved your child from drowning in a pool or burning in a fire?

I judge things by my own common sense, not the bible's opinion's.

What a liberal... thing someone can't be wrong.... Gau people are wrong because the Bible says so, and trust me God wrote the bible thorough men.. and God has awhole lot more common sense then you.

Yea I can tell J

"Gays are wrong because the bible says so" Think for yourself!

Hmm ok i will go by the bible and you won't... then we will see who goes to heaven and who goes to hell....

Well, at least I know I'll find Albert Einstein and Mohandus Ghandi waiting for me in hell.

[??????????]

My question:

IF YOUR NEIGHBOR IS GAY, AND HE MARRIES ANOTHER GAY PERSON, HOW DOES THAT HARM YOU?

Well for one, I don't want my kids to see two guys kissing out on the front lawn. Also, If they was living in NC they would have rocks thrown that there house and I dont want someone coming by and shooting at them and miss and hit me or any my kids.....

What makes me think you would take or have taken, (I don't know if you have them) your kids to see Passion of the Christ, a movie with much more horrifing scenes then two men kissing. Teach your kids to accept people who are different, not shut them down. Now that is a real logical argument, your second one. I guess you couldn't live in the South during the Civil Rights Movement, you would probably have a black neighor and rocks were thrown at their houses plenty of times.

I will teach my kids(when I have them) the same way as my mom. Gay people are wrong for beging gay. The Bilbe preaches that it is wrong...Also what does the Passion have to do with anything?

My point with Passion is, two men kissing would be rated PG (possibly PG-13, depending on who is actually doing the ratings, although Holloywood is liberal, and more accepting of gays) while seeing Jesus get burned and all that stuff was rated R and is a bit more disturbing.

"Gay people are wrong for being gay" That is about the craziest thing I have ever heard. A) How is a person "wrong" B) What would you do if a gay man saved your child from drowning in a pool or burning in a fire?

I judge things by my own common sense, not the bible's opinion's.

What a liberal... thing someone can't be wrong.... Gau people are wrong because the Bible says so, and trust me God wrote the bible thorough men.. and God has awhole lot more common sense then you.

Yea I can tell J

"Gays are wrong because the bible says so" Think for yourself!

Hmm ok i will go by the bible and you won't... then we will see who goes to heaven and who goes to hell....

Well, at least I know I'll find Albert Einstein and Mohandus Ghandi waiting for me in hell.

With Ghandi there at least you'll have Slurpees..... lol

Come again! <Apu from the Simpsons>

[Akno21]

My question:

IF YOUR NEIGHBOR IS GAY, AND HE MARRIES ANOTHER GAY PERSON, HOW DOES THAT HARM YOU?

Well for one, I don't want my kids to see two guys kissing out on the front lawn. Also, If they was living in NC they would have rocks thrown that there house and I dont want someone coming by and shooting at them and miss and hit me or any my kids.....

What makes me think you would take or have taken, (I don't know if you have them) your kids to see Passion of the Christ, a movie with much more horrifing scenes then two men kissing. Teach your kids to accept people who are different, not shut them down. Now that is a real logical argument, your second one. I guess you couldn't live in the South during the Civil Rights Movement, you would probably have a black neighor and rocks were thrown at their houses plenty of times.

I will teach my kids(when I have them) the same way as my mom. Gay people are wrong for beging gay. The Bilbe preaches that it is wrong...Also what does the Passion have to do with anything?

My point with Passion is, two men kissing would be rated PG (possibly PG-13, depending on who is actually doing the ratings, although Holloywood is liberal, and more accepting of gays) while seeing Jesus get burned and all that stuff was rated R and is a bit more disturbing.

"Gay people are wrong for being gay" That is about the craziest thing I have ever heard. A) How is a person "wrong" B) What would you do if a gay man saved your child from drowning in a pool or burning in a fire?

I judge things by my own common sense, not the bible's opinion's.

What a liberal... thing someone can't be wrong.... Gau people are wrong because the Bible says so, and trust me God wrote the bible thorough men.. and God has awhole lot more common sense then you.

Yea I can tell J

"Gays are wrong because the bible says so" Think for yourself!

Hmm ok i will go by the bible and you won't... then we will see who goes to heaven and who goes to hell....

Well, at least I know I'll find Albert Einstein and Mohandus Ghandi waiting for me in hell.

With Ghandi there at least you'll have Slurpees..... lol

Come again! <Apu from the Simpsons>

LOL. Hey, I'll have Homer and Bart too.

[John Dibble]

A. No, even if a child is mentally competent and stable, he/she is still a child. They do not yet have the life experience or maturity to make such a decision. Even if a child is capable of supporting a family with an alcoholic at the head, that's more for survival than anything else. I still maintain that a child at any age before 16 at the very least(which is the legal age to get married where I live, but need parental consent before 18). A child can also not enter into a contract under the law, which marriage, under the law, is.

B. I'd be interested in hearing where exactly you meet most of these people. That could have something to do with it. For instance, if you met most of them in therapy sessions of some sort then you would definitely run into more problem cases.

C. I didn't imply it was genetic, or if I did, it was not my intent. I agree with the APA that homosexuality results as a complex interaction between biological and environmental factors, and the balance between the two varies from person to person. Biological factors can include more than DNA, for instance a mother who drinks while pregnant is affecting the unborn child biologically, or even being exposed to hazardous chemicals after being born while still developing. Environmental factors include parents, family, friends, and other social factors. Also, I was definitely not implying children like to be molested, no such thing at all. What I was trying to say was that some might be predisposed to put themselves in positions that would end up in molestation, like some people are predisposed to take more risks than others. For instance, I might cut through an alley to save time getting where I want to go, but unintentionally put myself at risk for getting mugged, same deal with the kids - they want the added affection the person is giving them, but the affection turns into molestation. I don't imply that they want or like it, just there are unintended consequences for their predisposed wants. I could be wrong, I'm no expert, nor do I claim to be.

D. While I agree that the APA was wrong about the 10% statistic, I said Mr. Cameron was also kicked out for intentionally misrepresenting other studies by fellow APA members. I don't claim the APA is perfect. Also, 1978, an old study, but that doesn't make it invalid(I can't find the research methods atm, but the numbers seem ridiculously high to me). All organizations need to use proper study methods, which are emphasized much more today than they were back then(I'm in a psychology class right now, and proper research methods was the first topic right after the introduction).

E. Interesting theory. Is there proof to back this, or is just a theory? Seems to me there's lots of people who outcast homosexuals merely for being homosexuals, though I can see that among children there would be other reasons.

One other thing - the brain.  Neurolgy is how the brain works, Psychology, among other things, involves how the brain interacts with the mind(that is, our conciousness), my psychology book has about 3 chapters on nerves and the brain. Also, psychology does involve genetics - there's a nature vs. nurture debate among psycholgists, but most agree it is an interaction between the two that determines how a person ends up(for instance, you can be genetically predisposed to be a risk taker, and in that case it is majority biological).

[Brambila]

A. John, your argument just goes on in circles. To play by this logic, I can state I still hold that two homosexuals are suffering from the disorder and therefore are not mentally stable to make the decision of having sexual intercourse, and it could prove fatal (AIDS, Hepititus, other STDs). The point I am trying to make is that in the late 60s and early 70s homosexuals were arguing for the same rights as pedophiles are now, and further, they are suffering from the same disorder in separate forms.

B. My best friend is from school. Two of them are from Boy Scouts (seeking masculinity). Two of them are from Church. Two of them are best friends with my aunt. One of them is my uncle. Two of them are from alcoholism meetings (non-AA). The rest are from school or just around. None of them are from therapy meetings, except for those two form the Alcoholics meetings.

C. First of all, please acknowledge that the APA has been run by homosexuals since the early 1970s, so any information you give me is not very crediable, since they hold such a pro-homosexual stance. Actually, within six months the APA changed from an organization openly treating homosexuals and putting them on the list of disorders, and all the board members believed this. But the president resigned, and the organization completely changed its' platform on homosexuality, and now on its way pedophilia.

The problem with the biological theory is that first of all there's almost no support, and the support they get are from studies of twins. Unfortunately, these studies are voulentary and mostly taken in homosexual regions, and so the results are not very accurate. Further, drinking beer isn't going to effect your psychology, but your neurology and there is a difference. Psychology is your conscious, the way the human mind works. Neurology is the physical aspect of the brain, and how the brain works. Hence, when you drink beer during a pregnancy, that effects the neurological aspect, not psychological. So from this act children come out having forms of retardation or dyslexia, which are neurological conditions effecting psychological patterns, not psychological patterns. While it seems to be possible that homosexuals can get this from a neurological disorder, there is no evidence of this, but very much evidence that this stems directly from the childhood enviroment. As I have shown 46% of homosexual men were molested as children. This is a prime example of how homosexuality is disordered.

Whatever the reason for this disorder, your theory does not prove that homosexuality is normal. This only adds to my point. Though I staunchly disagree, let us assume you are correct and homosexuality is indeed biological. If this is the case, then we still can assume that homosexuality is a disorder and can be treated by use of chemical balancers. As I said in my previous post, homosexuality is either a mental disorder or chemical imbalance, the latter having to do more with neurology rather than psychology. Hence, homosexuality must still be treated, like any other chemical imbalance in the brain.

D. You are absolutely correct in your speaking of proper research methods. It is essential to have such methods done to present accurate representations in surveys, studies, and other researches. But I assure you that the study I have shown is accurate, as it was done by two APA approved psychologists, and the APA (a homosexual organization!) approved it. In addition to that survey, Journal of Sex Research surveyed 2,583 older homosexuals and found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [was] 101-500." 10-15% had between 500- a thousand partners, and an additional 10-15% have over a thousand. In a study of Dutch homosexuals published by AIDS, the average homosexual has eight sex partners a year.

E. The theory is the pre-1971 APA theory, and the theory that NARTH keeps.

For your last statement, I know that most psychologists think that genetics can influence the way a person thinks psychologically. However, this theory is based solely on surveys, and not on actual physical evidence. In addition to believing homosexuality is genetic, they also believe that addiction, pedophilia, and several other disorders are genetic. As much as I disagree with this, it still does not disprove my point that homosexuality is not a disorder, but only shows that it is in a different way.

I actually got into a short debate with a psychologist who was stating that alcoholism was genetic. I completely disgree.

[John Dibble]

Brambila,

I don't think we're getting anywhere, we're just going to have to agree to disagree on the issue. I don't think the APA is 'run by homosexuals' as you put it, nor do I think homosexuality is a disorder(if it was, I'd consider it a minor one, it doesn't really impede on a person's ability to function too terribly much, like narcissitic personality disorder can do), and it's not the same as pedophilia(so even if they use the same arguments, they need to be treated as seperate cases). As for the NARTH theory, well, it could be right, could be wrong, but until it's proven one way or the other it's just a theory - it would most likely be a combination of that and multiple other social factors, not merely a search for masculinity.

I do think you are a bit more scientific about homosexuality than many of the opponents of gay marriage, who just simply say "being homosexual is a choice", since you view it as disorder(disorders not really being a choice, something influences you to have one). That has made this little debate interesting because you actually use some reasoning outside of the normal conservative box(there's a liberal box too ). Thanks for that. I'm always up for a good debate.

I also agree that alcoholism isn't genetic, per se. As I said, many things are a combination. One person may be predisposed more than another, but the other may have been abused or something and is an alcoholic for that reason. People develop disorders such as alcoholism for various reasons, attributing it to a single cause is foolish, few things happen in life for one reason.

[platypeanArchcow]

Brambila, I'm sorry I don't have a sufficient attention span when it comes to these kinds of arguments to read your whole post, but homosexuality stems not from a chemical imbalance, as you suggest, but from the neurological development, the wiring, if you will, of the brain in the womb and early in childhood.  To some extent, of course, this is affected by experiences, but mostly it is a genetically guided, but relatively random process.

[John Dibble]

platypeanArchcow,

I'm gonna tell you what I told Brambila - back it up. Please link us to something backing this statement up so we may judge it accordingly. I try not to accept anything(even if it does agree with my way of thinking) unless I have some valid proof of it's truth(in this way, I'm a common sense, classical liberal, as opposed to the kind that just calls itself liberal but isn't open minded nor tolerant[not racially, but in tolerating those who think differently]).

[platypeanArchcow]

I believe I read it either in Matt Ridley's Genome or Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate.  I may try to find the page and quote it later if you want.

[John Dibble]

Would be nice, but don't go to too much trouble.

[The Duke]

My question:

IF YOUR NEIGHBOR IS GAY, AND HE MARRIES ANOTHER GAY PERSON, HOW DOES THAT HARM YOU?

Since no one else will answer, I will.

Let us say that I have a wife and two children.  Let us say that one day, a perfectly normal, quite nice gay couple moves in next door.  They do not molest children or have orgy parties late at night.  They are for all intents and purposes just like a normal couple, only gay.  Where is the harm?

Well, here it is.  Because my chidren will observe this gay couple, they will presume that the behavior of this couple is normal.  Perhaps, they will think it is so normal that they will try this behavior out.  All of a sudden, I don't get grand kids.

This is not the worst thing that could happen though.  Worse would be that my children would see this gay couple and decide that the old definition of marriage that me and my wife live by is outdated, and the new gay married couple is the way to go in the future.  This is a problem, because there is really not much of a reason for the gay couple to get married except to legitimize their relationship in the eyes of society.  They can be in love without getting married.  In other words, marriage doesn't seem relevant to my kids.  So, my kids don't actually get married, they have live in girlfriends or boyfriends.  My daughter gets pregnant out of wedlock, and her baby's daddy does not stick around to raise Jr. since their is no legal contract that binds him to stay.  My son never feels a social pressure to enter a commited relationship, so he bounces from one night stand to one night stand, terribly unfulfilled in his meaningless bachelor's life.

Will I be hurt?  Maybe not directly, but my kids will.  And at that point in my life, that will be more important anyway.

[afleitch]

Wouldn't your kids be taking their initiative from YOUR marriage, hypothetically, not your neighbours? I have neighbours who are divorced, yet my own mum and dad are happilly married, does that mean my brothers and sister are going to get divorced, because of our neighbours? I thought it was a very lacklustre argument you made, that didn't seem to be going anywhere and get flat towards the end. So what if you don't get grandkids? Aren't you happy your children (whether real or hypothetical) are healthy and happy? Or will you forever be unhappy because they didn't give you grandkids! Selfish if you ask me.  

[Brambila]

Wouldn't your kids be taking their initiative from YOUR marriage, hypothetically, not your neighbours? I have neighbours who are divorced, yet my own mum and dad are happilly married, does that mean my brothers and sister are going to get divorced, because of our neighbours? I thought it was a very lacklustre argument you made, that didn't seem to be going anywhere and get flat towards the end. So what if you don't get grandkids? Aren't you happy your children (whether real or hypothetical) are healthy and happy? Or will you forever be unhappy because they didn't give you grandkids! Selfish if you ask me.  

Afleitch, though I disagree with Ford and believe that if parents raised their children well, they would know that the gay couple next door are suffering from serious disorders, children ARE influenced by homosexuals. This IS teaching children that the behavior is normal, when it is seriously disordered.

I gave me spew last night about the APA to HTMLDON. Your teenage son will discover this sexuality, and will be afraid. The first instict he's going to think is a natural one- that this sexuality is unnatural. So he goes to his schools' psychologist. Instead of helping the young man, this psychologist encourages him, telling him the behavior is normal, when the teenager knows that it isn't. The teenager starts experiementing with this sexuality as is reccomended by the psychologist, but it doesn't help the teenager. He continues to feel scared, abnormal. THe psychologist tells him that he is gay for the rest of his life, and that is simply who he is, and the teenager can't believe it. The teenager then goes through the same symptoms of a teenager who was sexually molested- dirty, afriad, et cetera. The teenager becomes suicidal.

This is the threat of the homosexual movement.

[afleitch]

Well done Brambilla, you obviously remembered our earlier spats. Much of what I said back then applies now. I also remember you went all quiet when I stumpted you Perhaps you want me to retaliate. I'm afraid I have better things to do. I'm just glad my parents are quite happy with me and my 'choice' and that they didn't seem to think I needed therapy. Set foot in Britain Brambilla and say what you said just now and you will be eaten alive. One would think that gay people run around looking for converts like some shady little fundamentalist church. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but it doesn't work like that. Consider this confrontation over, before it has even begun.

[Brambila]

If I died trying to save the lives of homosexuals, then let it be.

[The Duke]

afleitch,

All people learn from all that is around them.  It is not reasonable to expect me to seal my children off from any and all things that I do not want them to learn from.

[afleitch]

Well you see theres your problem. You cant shield them. They could be taught at school by a lesbian, could have their arm put in a cast by a gay doctor, or they could drive the ambulance that takes them to hospital. You wouldn't know. The vast majority of gay men and women simply knuckle down and get on with their lives and interact with everyone elses. In the UK a gay man is the junior Minister for Education, and Tony Blair think's he's doing a damn fine job. A lesbian actress voiced a fish in Finding Nemo for heavens sake! And me? I want to teach History, a subject I love to children and teenagers, and yes I'm gay. Shelter your children if you wish, but if they rebel or become 'immoral' in your view, you will have nothing to blame but your own parenting.

[??????????]

Well you see theres your problem. You cant shield them. They could be taught at school by a lesbian, could have their arm put in a cast by a gay doctor, or they could drive the ambulance that takes them to hospital. You wouldn't know. The vast majority of gay men and women simply knuckle down and get on with their lives and interact with everyone elses. In the UK a gay man is the junior Minister for Education, and Tony Blair think's he's doing a damn fine job. A lesbian actress voiced a fish in Finding Nemo for heavens sake! And me? I want to teach History, a subject I love to children and teenagers, and yes I'm gay. Shelter your children if you wish, but if they rebel or become 'immoral' in your view, you will have nothing to blame but your own parenting.

Of course you can't shelter your children. BUT you have to teach them right from wrong in regards to homosexuality.

[The Duke]

Well you see theres your problem. You cant shield them. They could be taught at school by a lesbian, could have their arm put in a cast by a gay doctor, or they could drive the ambulance that takes them to hospital. You wouldn't know. The vast majority of gay men and women simply knuckle down and get on with their lives and interact with everyone elses. In the UK a gay man is the junior Minister for Education, and Tony Blair think's he's doing a damn fine job. A lesbian actress voiced a fish in Finding Nemo for heavens sake! And me? I want to teach History, a subject I love to children and teenagers, and yes I'm gay. Shelter your children if you wish, but if they rebel or become 'immoral' in your view, you will have nothing to blame but your own parenting.

They can't be sheltered rom knowing homosexuals, but we can teach them what kind of behavior is expected from them regarding marriage.  Legalizing gay marriage undermines our ability to do that.  If they are taught at school by a lesbian, they don't necessarily have their idea of marriage redefined as legalizing gay marriage would do.  If the have a gy doctor, they don't necessarily have their idea of marriage redefined as legalizing gay marriage would do.  If prominent government officials are gay, they don't necessarily have their idea of marriage redefined as legalizing gay marriage would do.

One of my favorite US congressmen, Jim Kolbe, is gay.  One of my favorite radio hosts, Al Rantel, is gay.  I would not consider these people to be subversive because they don't try and redefine social institutions to suit their personal lifestyle.  As long as we don't blur the distinctions between groups.  I am what I am, they are what they are, and we don't pretend to be the same.  This makes normal interaction different from radical social revolution.

[John Dibble]

Even if your kids see homosexuals kissing or whatever, most would probably find it out of the ordinary, and they'd probably ask you about it(if you are a good parent, your kids trust information you give them more than anyone else). I'll grant you it's not a comfortable subject to explain to your kids, but there's lots of uncomfortable subjects they can ask about(like "where do babies come from?", or a question I asked my godfather when I was a kid "why do women bleed sometimes?"), but there are actually easy ways to answer them, usually dumbing them down a bit if the child is especially young. If you found homosexuality to be immoral a good explanation would probably be "What those people are doing is unnatural/immoral(whatever you'd prefer, give some basic reasons if you feel it necessary), and while I think they should stop it is not our business to make them, and it would be best that you do not follow their example." I would explain differently myself, since I don't think homosexuality is immoral and I don't think they have a choice in the matter or that homosexuality is destructive. Your kids will adopt a view on homosexuality one way or another - why not tell them yours before they get another(which could even be an extreme opposite or an extreme extension of yours)?

[TomatoSoup]

My question:

IF YOUR NEIGHBOR IS GAY, AND HE MARRIES ANOTHER GAY PERSON, HOW DOES THAT HARM YOU?

Well for one, I don't want my kids to see two guys kissing out on the front lawn. Also, If they was living in NC they would have rocks thrown that there house and I dont want someone coming by and shooting at them and miss and hit me or any my kids.....

What makes me think you would take or have taken, (I don't know if you have them) your kids to see Passion of the Christ, a movie with much more horrifing scenes then two men kissing. Teach your kids to accept people who are different, not shut them down. Now that is a real logical argument, your second one. I guess you couldn't live in the South during the Civil Rights Movement, you would probably have a black neighor and rocks were thrown at their houses plenty of times.

I will teach my kids(when I have them) the same way as my mom. Gay people are wrong for beging gay. The Bilbe preaches that it is wrong...Also what does the Passion have to do with anything?

My point with Passion is, two men kissing would be rated PG (possibly PG-13, depending on who is actually doing the ratings, although Holloywood is liberal, and more accepting of gays) while seeing Jesus get burned and all that stuff was rated R and is a bit more disturbing.

"Gay people are wrong for being gay" That is about the craziest thing I have ever heard. A) How is a person "wrong" B) What would you do if a gay man saved your child from drowning in a pool or burning in a fire?

I judge things by my own common sense, not the bible's opinion's.

What a liberal... thing someone can't be wrong.... Gau people are wrong because the Bible says so, and trust me God wrote the bible thorough men.. and God has awhole lot more common sense then you.

Yea I can tell J

OK. First of all, there have been linguistic test by an unbiased source on the bible and it was written by five different people. Second, how does God have any common sense? Why doesn't he come down here and tell us if gay marriage is wrong?