Ask a Gay Guy - Objective Dialog

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Don't walk under a ladder.

Look both ways before crossing the street.

Queers are just as free as me. This is just another bullshit diversion from consequencial issues by the left.

Until 'queers' can claim a marital tax deduction, be next of kin at a hospital bed, enter a job interview without fear, and not be called 'queer' as a dimintive...i will continue to disagree.

I have often been at the bedside of very ill or dying family members. Not once was I asked for a marriage certificate.

If you're treated unfairly on the job or possible job court is your recourse not congress.

No one should have special tax breaks.

Queer eye for the straight guy begs to differ. And that was on tv all the time.

 

[MaxCha]

Interesting, what facts do you have that homosexuality is normal?

Just not following your logic or why you believe that others opinions should be discounted.

Okay. I guess I'll start with the APA (American Psychological Association) which is by far the largest and most influential mental health organization in the US, as well as being the largest in the world. Here is a link to dozens of peer reviewed articles that discuss homosexuality, as well as statements by the APA in regards to homosexuality. In short, they say that gay people are not "bad", their sexuality cannot be changed, they make effective citizens and gay couples should have the same rights as straight couples.

APA Policy Statements on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns

Ditto to the other top five largest scientific mental health organizations in the US.

Heres the opening sentence in the largest ever research study to determine the origins of sexual orientation - ""It builds on previous studies that have consistently found evidence of genetic influence on sexual orientation, but our study is the first to look at exactly where those genes are located," says researcher Brian Mustanski, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago."

Let me know if you want more.

 

[eflatminor]

I have no problem with the federal aspects as long as all law-abiding, tax-paying citizens are treated equally.

Impossible when it comes to marriage benefits. There are all kinds of people who cannot benefit from marriage perks provided by the federal government but may still choose to form a partnership with another person: Polygamists, Atheists, Libertarians, etc. Bottom line, government has no need to know your personal relationships with the possible exception of immigration and the military. Other than that, there should be no perks for married people, not even the right to ask who you choose to live your life with.

Then civil marriage needs to be eliminated across the board. But, to me, that sounds very "cut off nose to spite face"-ish.

If two parties wish to enter into a contract which they define as marriage, that's fine. The courts are there to handle disputes like any other contractual relationship. What I stand against is government giving any special treatment (tax breaks, hospital visitation...whatever) to people that chose to enter into such a contract while penalizing those that have not.

 

[Caroljo]

I am a fag. And a very happy faggot I am.

At least you don't breed.

How do you know? There is nothing preventing homosexuals from having children, one way or another...

You BREED by having sex with the OPPOSITE sex. How many women can get another woman pregnant? Or a man with another man? THAT's breeding dummy!

You breed to have children....

 

[Sunni Man]

Heres the opening sentence in the largest ever research study to determine the origins of sexual orientation - ""It builds on previous studies that have consistently found evidence of genetic influence on sexual orientation, but our study is the first to look at exactly where those genes are located," says researcher Brian Mustanski, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

There is No homo gene. Period

If a homo gene was found the fudge packers would be celebrating it from the roof tops.

And it would be head line news on every media source in the world.

 

[BDBoop]

At least you don't breed.

How do you know? There is nothing preventing homosexuals from having children, one way or another...

You BREED by having sex with the OPPOSITE sex. How many women can get another woman pregnant? Or a man with another man? THAT's breeding dummy!

You breed to have children....

One way or another, aka turkey basters are our friend.

 

[MaxCha]

This was said early, but gay rights don't matter, individual rights do. And all individuals have rights regardless of their sexuality. Using a label like gay rights gives the impression that they deserve something "extra", or that there is a difference between gay rights and straight rights. Or that somehow their rights are not covered under individual rights, or that they are somehow less human

If you ever want to convince anyone to accept gays, you cannot use terms like "gay rights". You must use terms like individual rights. For gays are individuals just like anyone else. Being gay does not change the rights they have by nature of being individuals.

"Gay rights" is a term. No one is asking for special rights. There will be no rights that "only gays" have access too. Asking for the right to marry is not some special right. Just as gay people are free to participate in straight marriages (which would be against their instinctual sex drive and hence sexless) just as straight people could participate in a gay marriage (but they wouldn't for the same very reason - they wouldn't want to because they are incapable of feeling sexual attraction to someone of the same sex).

The definition of marriage before states started adding the clause "one man and one woman" in the last decade would be retained.

And allowing gay people to adopt kids and serve their country just like everybody else is not a special right, that's equality.

 

[Sunni Man]

One way or another, aka turkey basters are our friend.

So your a lezbo??

No wonder you stick up for these perverts all of the time!!

 

[MaxCha]

Heres the opening sentence in the largest ever research study to determine the origins of sexual orientation - ""It builds on previous studies that have consistently found evidence of genetic influence on sexual orientation, but our study is the first to look at exactly where those genes are located," says researcher Brian Mustanski, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

There is No homo gene. Period

If a homo gene was found the fudge packers would be celebrating it from the roof tops.

And it would be head line news on every media source in the world.

Seems you haven't done any research.

But oh well, it's not like you're anyone of importance!

 

[Moonglow]

One way or another, aka turkey basters are our friend.

So your a lezbo??

No wonder you stick up for these perverts all of the time.

you wish

 

[Moonglow]

Heres the opening sentence in the largest ever research study to determine the origins of sexual orientation - ""It builds on previous studies that have consistently found evidence of genetic influence on sexual orientation, but our study is the first to look at exactly where those genes are located," says researcher Brian Mustanski, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

There is No homo gene. Period

If a homo gene was found the fudge packers would be celebrating it from the roof tops.

And it would be head line news on every media source in the world.

there is no stupid blow yourself up gene, yet Muslims yell from the roof tops when a Muslim blows himself up and kills innocent peole. between fudge packers and Muslims that commit suicide bombings, I'd rather hang around with those fudge packers. At least they aren't out to murder you because your not a crazy like one of them

 

[Sunni Man]

Seems you haven't done any research.

But oh well, it's not like you're anyone of importance!

And you are of how much importance??

OK, Mr/Miss/or It

Please link me to any research that absolutely proves there is a gay gene that has been found by a reputable scientific/medical source?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If two parties wish to enter into a contract which they define as marriage, that's fine. The courts are there to handle disputes like any other contractual relationship. What I stand against is government giving any special treatment (tax breaks, hospital visitation...whatever) to people that chose to enter into such a contract while penalizing those that have not.

The marriage contract is not only between two equal partners, but those partners also enter into a contract with the state:

The marriage license is an ongoing contractual relationship with the State. Technically, the marriage license is a business license allowing the husband and wife, in the name of the marriage, to enter into contracts with third parties and contract mortgages and debts. They can get car loans, home mortgages, and installment debts in the name of the marriage because it is not only a secular enterprise, but it is looked upon by the State as a privileged business enterprise as well as a for-profit business enterprise. The marriage contract acquires property throughout its existence and over time, it is hoped, increases in value.

http://www.alimonyreform.org/content/articles/How Did Government Get Involved in Marriage.pdf

It is therefore impossible for government to ‘stay out’ of marriage, as it is a participant as well. And as we can see from the cited above, ‘civil unions’ are in no way a substitute for an actual marriage contract; it’s not just about hospital visits.

 

[flacaltenn]

Impossible when it comes to marriage benefits. There are all kinds of people who cannot benefit from marriage perks provided by the federal government but may still choose to form a partnership with another person: Polygamists, Atheists, Libertarians, etc. Bottom line, government has no need to know your personal relationships with the possible exception of immigration and the military. Other than that, there should be no perks for married people, not even the right to ask who you choose to live your life with.

Then civil marriage needs to be eliminated across the board. But, to me, that sounds very "cut off nose to spite face"-ish.

If two parties wish to enter into a contract which they define as marriage, that's fine. The courts are there to handle disputes like any other contractual relationship. What I stand against is government giving any special treatment (tax breaks, hospital visitation...whatever) to people that chose to enter into such a contract while penalizing those that have not.

Not sure if it's a tax break to raise the tax bracket on you when you choose to live together as a couple. After all, under the law of most states, you only own 1/2 of the stuff including what was recieved in wages. Why should the BRACKET be determined by their JOINT wages??

Perhaps the best thing would be for EVERYONE to file singly.

 

[eflatminor]

The marriage contract is not only between two equal partners, but those partners also enter into a contract with the state.

I understand that. My point is that government need not define who can enter into such a contract.

Two people can form a business relationship with a contractual partnership. The government does not tell us that either of those people must be straight or gay or whatever. That is how is should be for marriage.

 

[eflatminor]

Perhaps the best thing would be for EVERYONE to file singly.

Yes, agreed.

Of course, I don't support the very idea of taxing a person's labor, but that's another topic for another day.

 

[bodecea]

One way or another, aka turkey basters are our friend.

So your a lezbo??

No wonder you stick up for these perverts all of the time!!

Are people like you the Alternative?

 

[BDBoop]

One way or another, aka turkey basters are our friend.

So your a lezbo??

No wonder you stick up for these perverts all of the time!!

Are people like you the Alternative?

Exactly!

Like Eddie Izzard, talking about Italians being fascist.

"Er, okay - ciao!"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PmuHWPZSkY]Eddie Izzard about italians - YouTube[/ame]

 

[bodecea]

So your a lezbo??

No wonder you stick up for these perverts all of the time!!

Are people like you the Alternative?

Exactly!

Like Eddie Izzard, talking about Italians being fascist.

"Er, okay - ciao!"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PmuHWPZSkY]Eddie Izzard about italians - YouTube[/ame]

I LOVE his "flag" routine.

 

[MaxCha]

Seems you haven't done any research.

But oh well, it's not like you're anyone of importance!

And you are of how much importance??

OK, Mr/Miss/or It

Please link me to any research that absolutely proves there is a gay gene that has been found by a reputable scientific/medical source?

Umm, I just posted a comment with links to all the APA's statements a few minutes ago in this very thread.

And did you read the above comment -

there is no stupid blow yourself up gene, yet Muslims yell from the roof tops when a Muslim blows himself up and kills innocent peole. between fudge packers and Muslims that commit suicide bombings, I'd rather hang around with those fudge packers. At least they aren't out to murder you because your not a crazy like one of them

Now tell me why you don't sound like as big of an asshole as that? Because as stupid and embarressing as I think it is to be a muslim, I haven't once insulted you for it, nor do I wish to forbid Islam in the US.

Think about it. And stop being a douche bag.