On 7/25/2015 10:09 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 17:34:46 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 7/25/2015 5:17 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 23:34:47 -0500, Muggles wrote:

One argument in favor of being gay is people are born gay. I've always
countered that argument with a logical response. Do you think people are
born gay?

1) I'm inclined to think they are...
but
2) even if it is/was a choice, what possible concern is it of anyone
else that someone choose to be gay rather than straight?

Well, many people have used the argument that people are "born" gay in
order to force a mindset on others who disagree with the lifestyle.


I would quibble with your wording. Yes, people say that one is "born
gay" because that does push the discuss in a different direction. But
it's not an unreasonable starting point since the evidence is
overwhelming that a person IS born either gay or straight.

How can you tell if a baby is gay or straight?


However, I
don't think they do it specifically because others "disagree"with the
lifestyle, I think they do it because other ACDTIVELY try to prevent
gays from partaking of the SAME lifestyle that straights are allowed
to have, i.e. a married lifestyle and even before that point, many who
"disagree" want gays to be forced to hide in a closet. You know, the
people who think letting children know such a thing as a gay person
exists will somehow damage the child... those kind of people are not
content to just "disagree" but want to actively force gays underground
as well as prevent them from having a lifestyle comparable to
straights, i.e. the committed and possibly married lifestyle.

Frankly, I'd rather people keep their sexual preferences private. Why
do gays want everyone to know where they want to put their private
parts, anyway?

That aside gays could already marry anyone of age of the opposite gender
just like straight people could marry anyone of age of the opposite
gender. They already could have an equal lifestyle, BUT they don't want
an equal lifestyle. They want special rights to redefine marriage. So,
now that marriage is redefined, who is going to tell the next
combination who want to marry that they can't? How will our American
society define marriage in the future?

You've never addressed the legal precedence that now exists that
probably will be the precursor to such marriage combinations. I'd like
to see what you think will happen when the worst of the worst decides
they want the same privilege to marry.


--
Maggie