[PKRWUD]

Jim, you're becoming a conspiracy theorist, and you sound scared. For the life of me, though, I can't understand why. You have nothing to fear, you know perfectly well that you can't turn gay because your neighbor is. You surely also know that no matter who else gets married, anywhere on the face of this earth, it couldn't possibly affect the marriage you share with your wife. So what are you afraid of? Why are you so bent on denying others what you, and many other folks have? You've built this up into an 'us versus them' situation, where they're plotting against you, trying to twart your happiness with their hidden agenda. That's so ridiculous, I have trouble believing you'd imply it. No one is trying to take anything away from you. No one is trying to infringe upon your rights. And the only reason the polls and opinions are the way they are is because no one started including homosexuals in their teaching of tolerance until very recently.

Saying that you 'love' someone isn't good enough, either. If that were the sole critera for marriage, pedophiles could marry children, sisters could marry brothers and some folks would marry their dog or cat. Yes, I'm exaggerating, but only to make a point as how shallow some of the arguments for so-called 'gay marriage' really are.

The only thing shallow there was the point you were trying to make. The odds are exactly the same that someone would do away with any age requirement for marriage whether gays can get married or not. Don't be ridiculous.

Your arguments are your personal opinions, and just don't make any sense, Jim, which is not like you. You chose instead to ad-lib my post, which was written in plain and simple English. There were no hidden meanings, no ulterior motives, it was just exactly what it was. I tried no "routines", and had no "ploys". Calling your friend an "EX-homosexual" is too funny for words. It's not a light switch under your hair that you can flip at any time. I can't even imagine any circumstances that would make me want to be gay, but with your logic, anyone could, overnight. Sorry, I don't buy that.

Once again, the canard that tries to equate logical opposition to homosexual marriage as some sort of religious-driven' hate'. That's a bogus argument and I, for one, am sick of it and resent it. We know you're a macho straight guy Chris and you don't have to tell us how repulsed by homosexual behavior you are to prove it but the lame attempt to connect religious rejection of homosexuality (not in all churches, by the way) with 'hatred' of gays is bull.

Have you read any of the other replies to this post? Don't even blame me for someone else's church telling them that homosexuality is a sin. The author of this thread was alerted to the situation at a meeting at her church. And I'm sorry again, Jim, but that was no "attempt" at anything. I'd prefer you read what I wrote, rather than turning it into some twisted interpretation of it. There was nothing inbetween the lines. This conspiracy thing goes deep with you, it would seem.

You said yourself that religion has nothing to do with this, which is refreshing to hear. Most of the arguments I've seen and heard against gay marriage revolves around someone's interpretation of their God, and what they felt was right and proper. I'm glad to see that you are past that, although that does shoot down most of the other peoples arguments in this thread. You also acknowledged that gay people are 'nice'. lol. I'm guessing that's your way of saying it's not their personalities, or their flamboyant behavior that keeps you objecting to them being allowed to marry. We both know that that would be blatant discrimination, though, so I'm not surprised. They have loud and obnoxious parades because they no longer feel they have to lie about their sexuality. They're proud of what they are. So are the Irish, every March 17th. So what? If you don't like it, don't go to see it. I do my best to avoid both.

I find it rather 'scary' that 'marriage' - in all cultures all around the world - has been understood and defined (legally and culturally) as a union between a man and a woman throughout human history and suddenly, in 2004, in America, that simple and totally logical definition is now called 'discrimination' - by homosexuals. Sorry Chris, I don't buy it for a moment.

I'm heterosexual, and I call it discrimination. And I'm not the only one.

You talk of a long history of marriages being between women and men, but you should also know that in many civilizations, older than ours, homosexuality was not only accepted, it was encouraged. The primary purpose for the union between men and women was for procreation, which brings us to another of your points. I don't recall ever reading where the ability to procreate was a requirement for a marriage license. If that's the case, there's a whole bunch of married couples out there who's license is null and void. And as far as the point of being natural, and of being anatomically compatible, I hate to say it, for many reasons, but gay couples have worked that out, too. There are many heterosexual couples that are no longer "naturally compatible", are they to be denied as well?

What you're claiming is that any minority group that says it wants something changed to suit them (like the definition of marriage) and doesn't get it are being 'discriminated' against. That's ridiculous.

Once again, no, that's not what I'm saying at all. I don't know how to make it any more clear; EVERYONE should be entitled to the same rights and restrictions.

Any two legal adults, of sound mind, should have the same rights as any other adults of sound mind. And according to the US Supreme Court, in 1964, declared that the freedom to marry was a basic right of all Americans. The constitution protects everyone, not just the majority. When it comes to defining criminal offenses, the majority rules, but under no circumstances can the majority maintain a right while taking it away from the minority. If it's a right for you, it's a right for every other legal adult. At least that's the way it's supposed to be. That's what makes this country as great as it is; EVERYONE of equal status is entitled to the same rights.

IMO, the bottom line here Jim is you personally object to it, for whatever personal reasons you have, but your personal feelings don't justify denying the right of marriage to a gay couple. Everything you may or may not hate and detest about a gay couple being together is going to continue to happen, even in your neighborhood, whether we like it or not. All that is being accomplished by trying to deny the right of marriage to those couples, is denying them equal (not special) rights.