Gay Marriage for Conservatives

[Spence]

Alan Simpson, former Republican Senator from the state of Wyoming and Bob Dole's #2 man in the Senate, wrote this in today's Washington Post:

As our country has gained honest and steady knowledge about homosexuality, we have learned that it is not a mental illness or a disease or a threat to our families. The real threats to family values are divorce, out-of-wedlock births and infidelity. We all know someone who is gay, and like all of us, gay men and women need to have their relationships recognized in some way. How are gay men and women to be expected to build stable, loving relationships as all of us try to do, when American society refuses to recognize the relationships?

Not long ago the daughter of an old family friend of mine came home for a Thanksgiving dinner with her lesbian partner -- and my friend is one of those "old cowboy" dads, too! He and his wife gently took their daughter's hand, and her partner's hand, and said grace together just as millions of American families do every year.

To reach the best understanding, the debate over gay men and women in America should focus not on what drives us apart but on how to make all of our children -- straight or gay -- feel welcome in this land, their own American home.

Read it all here. I wish Senator Simpson could make other conservatives see that.

[Green-Is-Good]

I don't know why the hell anybody should make such a big deal of this. I actually agree with a politician, and a republican at that.

[BigCountry]

I wish everyone was like him.

[RedskinsDave]

But then no one would be gay.

[Green-Is-Good]

we need to be tolerant, that much is evident, and all should practice it. However, there have been many extensive reports about the part of the brain that produces sex drives (hypothalamous I believe), and in gay men, that part of the brain is the same size as a womans. (abnormal size) Meaning it is (but not in all cases) a brain disorder.
So, tolerance is one thing, allowing it (same sex marriage) to be glorified is another.

[Spence]

Originally posted by jsarno
we need to be tolerant, that much is evident, and all should practice it. However, there have been many extensive reports about the part of the brain that produces sex drives (hypothalamous I believe), and in gay men, that part of the brain is the same size as a womans. (abnormal size) Meaning it is (but not in all cases) a brain disorder.
So, tolerance is one thing, allowing it (same sex marriage) to be glorified is another.

This is junk science, JSARNO. Neither the American Medical Association or the American Psychiatric Association agree with you on this. In fact, they both disagree and condemn your viewpoint as ignorant and false.

[BigCountry]

Among other things. Hey I wish I could decide what qualifies as natural too, would be a great gig but I can't. Nobody has the right to make that decision for other people. Being gay isn't a mental or physical dissorder. Being gay is just being a human being like the rest of cause believe it or not, gay people are your equals.

[NamVet4]

Originally posted by jsarno
....So, tolerance is one thing, allowing it (same sex marriage) to be glorified is another.

I beg to disagree and request you expalin this statement.
How does marriage, either civil or religious act, glorify same sex marriage and/or homosexuality?

[Spence]

I've never understood the right-wing argument that gay marriage is a threat to heterosexual marriages. Somehow, if two homosexuals are married it poses a threat to all the traditional marriages out there. I don't see it. Seems to me if marriage can survive all the cheating and abuse that heterosexuals engage in, a few gays crashing the party shouldn't be such a big deal. After all, how could gays screw up marriage more than straights?

Originally posted by Spence
I've never understood the right-wing argument that gay marriage is a threat to heterosexual marriages.

I never said it was a threat. Marriages were made for man and woman, to allow same sex marriages is opening the door for all sorts of other crazy things, like no more statutory rape. (who's to say a 10-17 year old can't be an adult?) Hw about beastiality. You KNOW there are crazy people out there that prefer sex with animals. So where do we draw the line? Just because society has been taught to embrace the gay people as people (which is a GREAT thing, because we are all human and deserve to be treated as such) doesn't mean that you can desicrate he sanctity of marriage, and destroy moral fiber throughout the country.
Why do they HAVE to be married anyway? Why does it matter? Marriage was something that came from religious roots. If there is no God (which is clear if they are gay since it's against all God stands for) then who cares if they are married? If I truely didn't believe in God, Iwouldn't care if I was married or not. If they truely love one another, then a piece of paper doesn't matter. So why are they forcing abnormality on the world? Hey, if they want to live in sin, that's thier choice, we're all sinners, but our laws shouldn't glorify it and make it right.

Sorry Spence...it's not junk science, it's recently tested science that is still doing research on. Just like at one time the world was flat.

also...don't forget multiple marriages (man married to more than one woman etc)...marriages to brothers / sisters / cousins etc.
Think that's going too far? It isn't if their "in love" right? That's the excuse to warrent same sex marriage right? Well what if a man is in love with more than one woman? Or a woman in love with more than one man...why should they be denied that? What if a man is madly in love with his first cousin? Should that be allowed? If they are in love why not?

[BigCountry]

The fact that you're comparing gay relationships with pedofiles and beastality is pretty much the problem. There's nothing that perverted about being gay and it won't open any of those doors because gay people are NORMAL people.

Originally posted by BigCountry
The fact that you're comparing gay relationships with pedofiles and beastality is pretty much the problem. There's nothing that perverted about being gay and it won't open any of those doors because gay people are NORMAL people.

That's your opinion...just a few decades ago, same sex couples were considered just as bad. I direct you to my last e-mail about multiple marriages as well.
By the way, people that like younger people are NORMAL too, they just have an abnormal sexual drive, as do gay people.

[IowaSkinsFan]

Originally posted by Spence
I've never understood the right-wing argument that gay marriage is a threat to heterosexual marriages. Somehow, if two homosexuals are married it poses a threat to all the traditional marriages out there. I don't see it. Seems to me if marriage can survive all the cheating and abuse that heterosexuals engage in, a few gays crashing the party shouldn't be such a big deal. After all, how could gays screw up marriage more than straights?

Spence,

Your choice of verbiage when talking about heterosexuals and homosexuals implies to your audience that you think one choice is proper and the other is something less than that.

You are talking about 2 groups of people and you identify one group as "straights." Since you already called the other group gays, I am assuming that you think heterosexuals are "straight" and therefore, gays being the opposite of that, must be something less than that? Not normal? Not proper? Not Natural?

I think you take pride in pushing the "homophobic fear of the right wing" being a liberal yourself, but the labels you choose leads one to believe deep down you really don't fully subscribe to what you are trying convey here. You subconsciously support jsarno. HDYFAT?