I think Weaver's logic is just fine. It's the ones who try to dispute his opinion that are leaking flaws like nothing I've ever seen before.
Don't agree with the gay rights movement? Be prepared to be called all kinds of names. Don't agree with their self-styled way of life? You are the bad guy.
Good for you Dan for stating what you stated. There's a lot of nuts in this world and I'm glad to know you aren't among them.
Re May 16 letter, “Practice homosexuality, but don’t call it a marriage”: Daniel Moran makes several curious claims in his letter arguing against gay marriage, but the silliest of them is that there are no civil rights issues involved — inasmuch as “Civil rights laws are based on immutable physical attributes like race, sex, origin of birth and physical disabilities,” whereas “choosing which gender and what form of sexual relations to have is a choice.” Really? As a straight man, I don’t recall choosing my sexuality. Does Mr. Moran remember the day he chose to be straight?
PAUL KAZEE Schenectady
Quoted Text
Anne Heche says she “changed her mind” about being gay, closed that door
If Anne Heche was born gay, she apparently "changed her mind" and apparently "chose" a different lifestyle. Does that make her a bigot now?
They probably meant to spell----mirage.......cause if there aint nothin' in it then it doesn't exist.....depends on what/who is in it......regardless of sex... I say let them get married....have at it.....you will become a stat like the rest of American marriages/mirages/divorces etc.......it will polarize 'your group' just like it did the heterosexual group.....BTW---if it turns out the stats are better....then by all means copulate, procreate and proliferate.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Arguments against same-sex marriage don’t hold water
Once in a while, a letter is printed from a reader who is disgusted by gay sex. They are zeroing in on the sexual aspect of the relationship, forgetting that heterosexual couples also may practice these same sex acts (i.e., anal and oral). And to top it off, you don’t have to be married to do so. If they are disgusted by these sex acts, it really has no bearing on sexual orientation. So if it is these acts that disgust them, let them complain about that — not whether it’s man and man or women and women engaging in them. Also, some men and women may engage in sadomasochism, three-ways, adultery, etc. Homo sapiens are sexual beings. As to why the protest about gay marriage: Marriage historically is an economic contract — that’s why you need a license. If you have a ceremony in a church, that’s up to you, but doesn’t make it any more legal. If a gay couple wants the sanctity of a church marriage, let the church decide if it wants to bestow it or not — separation of church and state. Marriage is meant to provide some legal safeguards and benefits to stabilize a relationship. Some of these are the ability to combine both incomes to qualify for a mortgage, the rights of a surviving spouse regarding pension and Social Security, the ability to make medical decisions as the spouse, and so on. It’s ludicrous to deny these rights to [those of the] same sex who love and want to commit to each other through marriage. And as to the childbearing issue surrounding marriage, 40 percent of births in America are to unwed mothers. That blows that reason out of the water. There are so many more pressing issues that should concern us and on which we should expend our energy, i.e., abuse of children, battered wives, children without fathers living in poverty, never-ending wars, etc. It comes down to there [being] so much hate in the world. Love should be celebrated, not hindered.
Historically marriage has been a union between a man and a woman. What baffles me is that many of the gay community reject a civil union between same sexes which would afford them all the rights and benefits that married couples enjoy, why?
2009. 2009. ignorance is still alive and strong. Who are you to decide or have any input into who can marry who. Two people in a commited relationship want to get married. Who the f*uck are you to say that it's wrong or it should be illegal. This blows my mind, even though it shouldn't anymore because you are the same people that are so upset that we have a black president. Racist, elitist, ethnocentric, typical Rotterdamian.
Who are you to decide or have any input into who can marry who. Two people in a commited relationship want to get married.
You are correct. And there is a law already on the books, decades old, that states just that. The law states that a marriage is between a man and a woman. Some people want to keep that law as it was and still is. Simple as that! k?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
yea bum. there were laws against alcohol, and "laws" that made it illegal for blacks to drink from a "white only" water fountain, "laws" that wouldn't let women vote. I could go on and on. This "law" should have the same fate as those. ! K? Bumblethru from Rotterdam, NY .... I just can't believe that your not embarrassed that you are so ignorant, the world is so much bigger than crappy Rotterdam. Maybe if you were more cultured or exposed to other people's way of life you would think differently. But it''s so much easier and safer to sit on the computer and type blogs with a handful of other yokles and b**ch about how Alfred's Bakery is closed, and that how "i used to get my sunday desserts there" WHO CARES? lmfao..... ahhhh so small time.
I don't remember anyone saying anything about a black President other than you Righteous. Many of us weren't very happy about Bush's spending either and like the liberal you are you try to bring race into the issue when you can't answer the question.
Im sorry what question am I not answering? I mentioned our president because of peoples prejudices......race, sexual prefrence...etc... etc... but you knew that. It's just easier to label someone a "liberal" when they call you out on your prejudices.
I have no problem with Obama being the president of the USA I only have a problem with his out of control spending with no means of paying for the programs being created. The question was why does the gay community reject civil unions with all the same rights and benefits as married couples have?
Simple question. Simple answer. Because they want to get married. Who the hell are we to say your not allowed to get married. It may be the same on paper, but it's not the same.
Ok, so if two people of the same gender 'really really' love each other, than they have the 'right' to get married. Who am I or anyone else to say they can't. Let the government make a new law or amend the existing marriage law so they can. Right? And one is clearly a bigot and prejudice if they don't agree.
Now human rights are human rights....right? So if a person 'really really' loves his dog, sheep or goat and feels a strong attraction to them, who am I or anyone else to say they can't have sex? After all, the government has no business in anyone's bedroom. Right? Let the government make a new law for them. They do have rights ya know. And one is clearly a bigot and prejudice if they don't agree.
Now then there is the group NAMBLA that has been fighting for rights (for decades) for men to legally have sex with consenting young boys. So who am I or anyone else to say that a 10, 14, or 16 year old boy and a 30 or 40 something man can not have consenting sex together? Especially if they 'really really' love each other. And perhaps even get married. Let the government make a new law for them. They do have rights ya know. And one is clearly a bigot and prejudice if they don't agree.
Then there is the question of pedophilia. What the heck is a pedophile anyway? An adult (male/female) who has sex with an underaged (male/female)? What if they were both consenting? Especially if they 'really really' love each other. Perhaps the experience would create a relationship that would only grow into a meaningful one that would enhance society. They have rights to ya know. So who am I or anyone else to say they can't be together? They have rights too ya know. Let the government make a new law for them or strike the laws that are on the books now preventing such loving behavior. And one is clearly a bigot and prejudice if they don't agree.
These are just stupid, antiquated laws on the books, like the alcohol and women voting laws that enslave people's human civil rights. People need to be free of all inhibitions. Hey, ya can't give some people in society some rights and not others. I think it is actually unconstitutional.
I think we should all 'have' to celebrate and tolerate perversion.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
"I think we should all 'have' to celebrate and tolerate perversion. "
This says it all bum. You believe that homosexuals are perverts. And you are associating gays with child rapists, and people who have sex with animals. That is why you are a bigot & prejudice.
Logged
