[dcolton]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
I am not gay. Period. So I'm not a member of the gay left. Got it?

So you are offended that someone may infer that you are gay for supporting the gay left.

interesting.

my thoughts...if you truly were open minded, it wouldn't bother you in any way if you were lumped in with the gay left.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by dcolton:
So you are offended that someone may infer that you are gay for supporting the gay left.

interesting.

my thoughts...if you truly were open minded, it wouldn't bother you in any way if you were lumped in with the gay left.

I'm not offended by being called gay, I've been called gay quite a few times. But I'm a member of a different minority and I know what it's like to be excluded from society just because you are different, you don't fit in and you don't make many people feel comfortable around you.

I'm offended by people like you, because I can feel what it's like. Your use of the term gay implies that it is a negative thing, that it is corrupting society. I'm offended by your bigotry and lack of tolerance.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by dcolton:
<snip>

As for your attempt to justify gay marriage because your grandpa can't pro-create (Am I the only person who finds this vision of your grandparents trying to pro-create a little disguitsting?). Pro-creation is just one of many arguments against same sex marriages.

You keep expressing visual symbols to show your apparent distaste for, and fear of, sex in any form. You should really look into that; it might help explain why you believe the way you do. Sex is a natural act, even between old people.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by KarlG:
You keep expressing visual symbols to show your apparent distaste for, and fear of, sex in any form. You should really look into that; it might help explain why you believe the way you do. Sex is a natural act, even between old people.

Sex is a very natural act, we agree. I just place mmore importance on the idea of making love versus indiscriminate sex acts between two people.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Ah, but the faction fighting to redefine marriage and destroy family is correcty termed the gay left...no? Either way, I am not a changin' my terminology for you. The gay left prevents that pleasure.

Here's another heterosexual male wanting to change the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples.

Someone give me a rainbow pin and sign me up for the "gay left".
What kind of initiation's do they have?
Is there an oath? How about a secret handshake?

Can you actually tell someone you are a member of the "gay left" or
is it all hush-hush like AA: "Hi, I'm a friend of Blaine W."

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I think I get it now. "Gay left" is a term of art. Members of the "gay left" don't have to either be left wing, or gay. Anyone who supports gay marriage is ipso facto a member of the "gay left."

Exactly. It's the same brush used to paint anyone opposed to Bush as terrorists. It probably won't be long before "Gay left" becomes "terrorist" as well ... terrorists against Family Values.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Exactly. It's the same brush used to paint anyone opposed to Bush as terrorists. It probably won't be long before "Gay left" becomes "terrorist" as well ... terrorists against Family Values.

ABSOLUTELY!

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
As I said, you took my reply out of context.

No.

[MATTRESS]

Originally posted by KarlG:
Sex is a natural act...

I'll think of that next time I get the natural urge to slap my dick up on the counter and decide to start jerking off on the bread.

[MATTRESS]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Sex is a very natural act, we agree.

Sex between a man and a woman is a natural act. Sex between two men or two women isn't.

[GRAFF]

Originally posted by MATTRESS:
Sex between a man and a woman is a natural act. Sex between two men or two women isn't.

Define "natural". Does it not occur in nature?

[Athens]

Originally posted by MATTRESS:
Sex between a man and a woman is a natural act. Sex between two men or two women isn't.

Would you say sex between Mother and Son is natural? Because if you leave a family of rats together guess what, they have sex.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by GRAFF:
Define "natural". Does it not occur in nature?

I think something has to occur in the Bible for it to be "natural"

[Zimphire]

nat�u�ral __ _P___Pronunciation Key__(nchr-l, nchrl)
adj.

Conforming to the usual or ordinary course of nature.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
nat�u�ral __ _P___Pronunciation Key__(nchr-l, nchrl)
adj.

Conforming to the usual or ordinary course of nature.

The Simpsons are way ahead of you:

John Waters: Homer, what have you got against gays?

Homer: You know! It's not... usual. If there was a law, it'd be
against it!

[Zimphire]

I just posted it because every time someone says natural, another person that obviously KNOWS what the poster meant by it, will say "You mean occurs in nature?"

It's a tired bit.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I just posted it because every time someone says natural, another person that obviously KNOWS what the poster meant by it, will say "You mean occurs in nature?"

It's a tired bit.

It's also irrelevant. People's concepts of what is, or is not "natural" have nothing whatsoever to do with what is or is not Constitutional.

We are talking here about the relationship of a group of citizens to their government, and vice versa. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
It's also irrelevant. People's concepts of what is, or is not "natural" have nothing whatsoever to do with what is or is not Constitutional.

I never said it did Simey.

I was just giving a definition.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
It's also irrelevant. People's concepts of what is, or is not "natural" have nothing whatsoever to do with what is or is not Constitutional.

We are talking here about the relationship of a group of citizens to their government, and vice versa. Nothing more, nothing less.

No we are not.We are talking abour responsibility, cause and effect, and choice. We are talking about special rights for a faction that is upset because a black man can marry a white woman. We are talking about taking an age old institution and allowing a faction to molest it because they choose to sleep with people of the same sex. We are taling about one group's effort to redefine family and their effort to make gayness mainstream. We are talking about the gay left's effort to hijack America as they attempt to forcefully legitimize their behavior on our children.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by dcolton:
No we are not.We are talking abour responsibility, cause and effect, and choice. We are talking about special rights for a faction that is upset because a black man can marry a white woman. We are talking about taking an age old institution and allowing a faction to molest it because they choose to sleep with people of the same sex. We are taling about one group's effort to redefine family and their effort to make gayness mainstream. We are talking about the gay left's effort to hijack America as they attempt to forcefully legitimize their behavior on our children.

I think what you are talking about are your own prejudices.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Zimphire:

I never said it did Simey.

I was just giving a definition. [/B]

I was just amused that it was the same as Homer's. It just shows once again, that the Simpsons' writers really do have their finger on the pulse of the nation.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I was just amused that it was the same as Homer's. It just shows once again, that the Simpsons' writers really do have their finger on the pulse of the nation.

That's why it's still airing

No, but this is usually what it boils down to: people are afraid that their straight kids and society get `infected'.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by dcolton:
No we are not.We are talking abour responsibility, cause and effect, and choice. We are talking about special rights for a faction that is upset because a black man can marry a white woman. We are talking about taking an age old institution and allowing a faction to molest it because they choose to sleep with people of the same sex. We are taling about one group's effort to redefine family and their effort to make gayness mainstream. We are talking about the gay left's effort to hijack America as they attempt to forcefully legitimize their behavior on our children.

Ummm, where to begin.

Homosexuality should be mainstream. Heterosexuality is mainstream so why not homosexuality?

This is not about telling children that "being a homo" is OK. This is about the government providng the same legal rights to one faction of citizens it provides to every other faction of its citizens.

Now, in doing so one of the consequences of making same-sex marriages legal is to make it seem more legitimate. But you as a parent, or future parent, are still free to tell your children that homosexuality is wrong and illegitimate behavior. I mean, that is your right, and responsibility, as a parent? Is it not? You will be responsible for raising any children you bring into the world, won't you?

So, regardless of what the laws say you can raise any children you do, or might have, how you want. People do that now, you realize. Some parents even raise their kids to think that homosexuality IS an acceptable form of sexual expression. GASP! I know, the horrors of it.

So, you raise your kids to be intolerant and I will raise mine, when I have some, to be tolerant. We will see who has more of an impact on our society for the next generation. Bookmark this post so we can come back to it in about 30 or 40 years. Deal?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by dcmacdaddy:
Ummm, where to begin.

Homosexuality should be mainstream. Heterosexuality is mainstream so why not homosexuality?

This is not about telling children that "being a homo" is OK. This is about the government providng the same legal rights to one faction of citizens it provides to every other faction of its citizens.

Now, in doing so one of the consequences of making same-sex marriages legal is to make it seem more legitimate. But you as a parent, or future parent, are still free to tell your children that homosexuality is wrong and illegitimate behavior. I mean, that is your right, and responsibility, as a parent? Is it not? You will be responsible for raising any children you bring into the world, won't you?

So, regardless of what the laws say you can raise any children you do, or might have, how you want. People do that now, you realize. Some parents even raise their kids to think that homosexuality IS an acceptable form of sexual expression. GASP! I know, the horrors of it.

So, you raise your kids to be intolerant and I will raise mine, when I have some, to be tolerant. We will see who has more of an impact on our society for the next generation. Bookmark this post so we can come back to it in about 30 or 40 years. Deal?

Yea, in 30 - 40 years, we will be able to look back at this thread and figure out why the world is hell in a handbasket.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
That's why it's still airing

No, but this is usually what it boils down to: people are afraid that their straight kids and society get `infected'.

Infection. Or forcing gay values on American children? Either way, it is the gay agenda.

[Troll]

Originally posted by dcolton:
We are talking about taking an age old institution and allowing a faction to molest it because they choose to sleep with people of the same sex.

How does one molest an "institution", a societal construct like marriage? Who actually suffers? Does marriage sit itself down on a park bench and have a little cry? Does it go to the doctor and have its wounds treated? Do people suddenly start getting divorced because their marriages are suddenly somehow meaningless?

Marriage is society giving people an outlet to proclaim their love for each other in public. Marriage is society recognising what it sees as an inherent value in two people who love each other being able to express that love publicly. I fail to see why any of that is invalidated by the two people in question have the same sexual organs. Society defines marriage and it dishes out marriage licences. Religious nutters are defending their own sense of morals. They are not defending the institution of marriage. Marriage cannot be molested or attacked!

Saying that marriage is being molested by gays is like saying that 15 year olds demanding drivers licences are molesting driving?

[Troll]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Infection. Or forcing gay values on American children? Either way, it is the gay agenda.

What is it that you have a problem with? Gay values? In which case, please tell us what those are. Or forcing any values on children? In which case explain your infection comment.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Yea, in 30 - 40 years, we will be able to look back at this thread and figure out why the world is hell in a handbasket.

Try broadening youre horizons a bit. The issue of same-sex marriage might make the United States go to hell-in-a-handbasket but it is certainly NOT going to have that big an impact on the rest of the world. Come on, there are already a few countries out there changing their laws to make same-sex marriage legal and the world hasn't ended yet for their citizens. Why do you think it will happen for us?

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Yea, in 30 - 40 years, we will be able to look back at this thread and figure out why the world is hell in a handbasket.

So, what you're saying is that most people don't have enough inner strength to resist being "infected" with the homosexual "lifestyle", and you'll be the only straight person left on the planet? Homosexuals have been with us since the dawn of man, and they haven't managed to "infect" more than a couple of percent of the population yet. You're really giving them more power than they have, thanks to your irrational fears.

Let's hypothesize that your scenario comes true, and you're the only straight man left. If you're secure in your beliefs and actions, you won't have anything to worry about anyway, because you'll have lived your life according to your principles, and you'll be saved. What is the point of worrying about what others do?

[deomacius]

Originally posted by dcmacdaddy:
Now, in doing so one of the consequences of making same-sex marriages legal is to make it seem more legitimate. But you as a parent, or future parent, are still free to tell your children that homosexuality is wrong and illegitimate behavior. I mean, that is your right, and responsibility, as a parent? Is it not? You will be responsible for raising any children you bring into the world, won't you?

So, regardless of what the laws say you can raise any children you do, or might have, how you want. People do that now, you realize. Some parents even raise their kids to think that homosexuality IS an acceptable form of sexual expression. GASP! I know, the horrors of it.

Spoken like someone who probably doesn't have kids. You are aware of the pull the world has on young minds aren't you? Unless you cut your kids off from the outside world completely, they will be exposed to alternative views, opinions and morals. All of this thanks to the numerous, numerous outlets for it. TV, newspapers, magazines, radios, internet, billboards. All of this if not available at your house, is available at the store, a friends house, a neighbors house, a relatives house, walking down the street, riding in trains, plains and automobiles. Then if you do completely remove your child from society you're considered an extremist or nutter.

Do you hold the same opinions as your parents or were you influenced at some point by some outside influence?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Troll:
How does one molest an "institution", a societal construct like marriage? Who actually suffers? Does marriage sit itself down on a park bench and have a little cry? Does it go to the doctor and have its wounds treated? Do people suddenly start getting divorced because their marriages are suddenly somehow meaningless?

Marriage is society giving people an outlet to proclaim their love for each other in public. Marriage is society recognising what it sees as an inherent value in two people who love each other being able to express that love publicly. I fail to see why any of that is invalidated by the two people in question have the same sexual organs. Society defines marriage and it dishes out marriage licences. Religious nutters are defending their own sense of morals. They are not defending the institution of marriage. Marriage cannot be molested or attacked!

Saying that marriage is being molested by gays is like saying that 15 year olds demanding drivers licences are molesting driving?

If I came into your house and forced everyone to change to represent my values, I would be molesting your household.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by dcolton:
If I came into your house and forced everyone to change to represent my values, I would be molesting your household.

No you would just be a boor.

The question is, can you construct an argument without relying on hyperbolic language?

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by dcolton:
If I came into your house and forced everyone to change to represent my values, I would be molesting your household.

That statement shows exactly what you don't understand. You can't force someone to change their values; they have to do it of their own volition. What you're really afraid of is that you don't have the will needed to not change your values.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Troll:
What is it that you have a problem with? Gay values? In which case, please tell us what those are. Or forcing any values on children? In which case explain your infection comment.

My issue is with the gay left and their agenda to force the gay lifestyle into mainstream America. My problem is with teaching children that it is okay to experiment and my problem is with legitimizing poor behavior. We shouldn't give the okay to behavior that not only shortens the lifespan of its participants, but behavior that is wrong and attributes to widespread STD's. This isn;t even to mention the long term harms of allowing this type of behavior to be persistent in society. This isn't to mention the fact that the institution of marriage would be weakened considerably and opeb for widespread abuse.

It is apparant that the gays have an agenda. Destroying marriage is first. then it will be to redefine family. Before we know it, they will be lobbying to clone and fight for more special rights as they continue to exploit true minorities in their effort to redirect the moral compass of America.

We already see gay groups such as NAMBLA...lobbying for man-boy relationships while other groups encourage teens to experiment and have promiscuos sex. It is twisted. Very twisted and if it weren;t for groups like Traditional Family Values, thwe deception of the gay left would remain intact and further infect mainstream society.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by dcolton:
If I came into your house and forced everyone to change to represent my values, I would be molesting your household.

Nobody is coming in your house and forces anything on you or your children.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by KarlG:
So, what you're saying is that most people don't have enough inner strength to resist being "infected" with the homosexual "lifestyle", and you'll be the only straight person left on the planet? Homosexuals have been with us since the dawn of man, and they haven't managed to "infect" more than a couple of percent of the population yet. You're really giving them more power than they have, thanks to your irrational fears.

Let's hypothesize that your scenario comes true, and you're the only straight man left. If you're secure in your beliefs and actions, you won't have anything to worry about anyway, because you'll have lived your life according to your principles, and you'll be saved. What is the point of worrying about what others do?

What I am saying is that sex is a powerful demon and there are too many horny kids out there that could use the legitimization of homosexuality in an effort to get their rocks off. You guys are the ones that compare homosexuality of the animal kingdom. If true, think of the horny dog who will hump inanimate object as well as anything with a heartbeat in order to feel good. Do you really want a society of dogs?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by deomacius:
Spoken like someone who probably doesn't have kids. You are aware of the pull the world has on young minds aren't you? Unless you cut your kids off from the outside world completely, they will be exposed to alternative views, opinions and morals. All of this thanks to the numerous, numerous outlets for it. TV, newspapers, magazines, radios, internet, billboards. All of this if not available at your house, is available at the store, a friends house, a neighbors house, a relatives house, walking down the street, riding in trains, plains and automobiles. Then if you do completely remove your child from society you're considered an extremist or nutter.

Do you hold the same opinions as your parents or were you influenced at some point by some outside influence?

I don't have kids of my own yet but I do have several nieces and nephews for whom I am a frequent surrogate parent. And yes, I do have opinions different from my parents. But you tell me if that is a bad thing. Is it? Are you afraid that if you teach your children to think one way about homosexuality and society tell thems to think another way something bad is going to happen to them? I mean, if you raise your children to think homosexuality is one way (bad/good)and they eventually adopt the belief that it is actually a different way (good/bad) will you stop loving your children? Will you disown them? What will be the terrible consequences of your children holding beliefs different than you in regards to homosexuality, or specifically the topic at hand, same-sex marriage?

And yes, I am quite aware that you cannot block all external sources from influencing young children. However, my original point still stands. As a parent you do everything you can to raise a child with a certain set of values. And if you want to raise that child to believe homsexuality is wrong/bad/illegitimate then you certainly can. Now, if there are external influences telling the child otherwise you will need to address this discrepancy in values with your child.

However, if you want to discuss the "societal influence on children" angle in regards to same-sex marriage you better be willing to bring drinking, smoking, drug abuse, and the whole teen pop-culture phenomena into the discussion. Because these are external influences that parents aren't going to want young kids exposed to, are they? Do you know any parents who want their children exposed to relentless advertising that promotes "being cool" with drinking? I don't.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by deomacius:
Spoken like someone who probably doesn't have kids. You are aware of the pull the world has on young minds aren't you? Unless you cut your kids off from the outside world completely, they will be exposed to alternative views, opinions and morals. All of this thanks to the numerous, numerous outlets for it. TV, newspapers, magazines, radios, internet, billboards. All of this if not available at your house, is available at the store, a friends house, a neighbors house, a relatives house, walking down the street, riding in trains, plains and automobiles. Then if you do completely remove your child from society you're considered an extremist or nutter.

Do you hold the same opinions as your parents or were you influenced at some point by some outside influence?

Your statement that children have many forces pulling on them is correct, as far as it goes. As the father of a lesbian, I don't know with 100% certainty if she is one because of cultural forces or genetic influence, but, when it comes down to it, I don't really care. I love her just the same, unconditionally, because she is my daughter. She's not harming anyone by being who she is, except for those who make a choice to allow themselves to get wrapped up in her business, because of their own insecurities.

The facts remain that homosexuality represents a tiny fraction of the population, has always represented a tiny fraction of the population, and will always represent a tiny fraction of the population, no matter what those who have irrational fears will propound.

What more people need to do is worry about having their own houses in order, instead of proclaiming others as impure.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by dcolton:
My issue is with the gay left and their agenda to force the gay lifestyle into mainstream America. My problem is with teaching children that it is okay to experiment and my problem is with legitimizing poor behavior. We shouldn't give the okay to behavior that not only shortens the lifespan of its participants, but behavior that is wrong and attributes to widespread STD's. This isn;t even to mention the long term harms of allowing this type of behavior to be persistent in society. This isn't to mention the fact that the institution of marriage would be weakened considerably and opeb for widespread abuse.

It is apparant that the gays have an agenda. Destroying marriage is first. then it will be to redefine family. Before we know it, they will be lobbying to clone and fight for more special rights as they continue to exploit true minorities in their effort to redirect the moral compass of America.

We already see gay groups such as NAMBLA...lobbying for man-boy relationships while other groups encourage teens to experiment and have promiscuos sex. It is twisted. Very twisted and if it weren;t for groups like Traditional Family Values, thwe deception of the gay left would remain intact and further infect mainstream society.

Wow, wow, wow, you do have issues.
Gays are around forever, since the beginning of humanity. If there were any negative side-effects from `having gays in society', the effects are already here. And they were there hundreds of years ago. Greek even advocated gay sex among soldiers.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by dcolton:
What I am saying is that sex is a powerful demon and there are too many horny kids out there that could use the legitimization of homosexuality in an effort to get their rocks off. You guys are the ones that compare homosexuality of the animal kingdom. If true, think of the horny dog who will hump inanimate object as well as anything with a heartbeat in order to feel good. Do you really want a society of dogs?

So you say, teens could try homosexual sex, coz they are so horny and can't find a partner of the other sex? BS, come on.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by dcolton:
My issue is with the gay left and their agenda to force the gay lifestyle into mainstream America. My problem is with teaching children that it is okay to experiment and my problem is with legitimizing poor behavior. We shouldn't give the okay to behavior that not only shortens the lifespan of its participants, but behavior that is wrong and attributes to widespread STD's. This isn;t even to mention the long term harms of allowing this type of behavior to be persistent in society. This isn't to mention the fact that the institution of marriage would be weakened considerably and opeb for widespread abuse.

It is apparant that the gays have an agenda. Destroying marriage is first. then it will be to redefine family. Before we know it, they will be lobbying to clone and fight for more special rights as they continue to exploit true minorities in their effort to redirect the moral compass of America.

We already see gay groups such as NAMBLA...lobbying for man-boy relationships while other groups encourage teens to experiment and have promiscuos sex. It is twisted. Very twisted and if it weren;t for groups like Traditional Family Values, thwe deception of the gay left would remain intact and further infect mainstream society.

Gays and cloning?

Do you think the "gay left" agenda is to turn the whole world into a writhing den of hot, sweaty man-on-man love action via cloning? You really have lost your mind, dcolton. After that statement there is NO MORE possibility of logical discussion with you.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by dcolton:
What I am saying is that sex is a powerful demon and there are too many horny kids out there that could use the legitimization of homosexuality in an effort to get their rocks off. You guys are the ones that compare homosexuality of the animal kingdom. If true, think of the horny dog who will hump inanimate object as well as anything with a heartbeat in order to feel good. Do you really want a society of dogs?

And there is the crux of your issues. You don't have enough faith in humanity, or yourself, to resist this "demon," so you're going to be the one to declare that it's all evil, and kids shouldn't "get their rocks off." Homosexuality has been with us forever, and will be with us forever. Your constant use of graphic language is a clear sign of how much inner strength you have. I don't worry about what horny dogs do. I only worry about what I do.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
Wow, wow, wow, you do have issues.
Gays are around forever, since the beginning of humanity. If there were any negative side-effects from `having gays in society', the effects are already here. And they were there hundreds of years ago. Greek even advocated gay sex among soldiers.

You think that we aren't already seeing the effects of the gay culture and lifestyle? Do you own a tv? Read the paper?

[Troll]

Originally posted by dcolton:
My issue is with the gay left and their agenda to force the gay lifestyle into mainstream America. My problem is with teaching children that it is okay to experiment and my problem is with legitimizing poor behavior. We shouldn't give the okay to behavior that not only shortens the lifespan of its participants, but behavior that is wrong and attributes to widespread STD's. This isn;t even to mention the long term harms of allowing this type of behavior to be persistent in society. This isn't to mention the fact that the institution of marriage would be weakened considerably and opeb for widespread abuse.

It is apparant that the gays have an agenda. Destroying marriage is first. then it will be to redefine family. Before we know it, they will be lobbying to clone and fight for more special rights as they continue to exploit true minorities in their effort to redirect the moral compass of America.

We already see gay groups such as NAMBLA...lobbying for man-boy relationships while other groups encourage teens to experiment and have promiscuos sex. It is twisted. Very twisted and if it weren;t for groups like Traditional Family Values, thwe deception of the gay left would remain intact and further infect mainstream society.

I see. Okay, well I can't see that debate is possible with you. You're a lost cause. Anyone with that much ignorance and bigotry is beyond help. End of conversation from my perspective.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
So you say, teens could try homosexual sex, coz they are so horny and can't find a partner of the other sex? BS, come on.

Absolutely. I have seen it happen and been involved with counseling kids who experiment this way. A hard on is a hard on for a horny teen. If some perverted man offered...well, think about it. Allowing gay marriage not only brings sex to its lowest level, but it also opens the door for gay pedophiles to manipulate horny teens.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by KarlG:
And there is the crux of your issues. You don't have enough faith in humanity, or yourself, to resist this "demon," so you're going to be the one to declare that it's all evil, and kids shouldn't "get their rocks off." Homosexuality has been with us forever, and will be with us forever. Your constant use of graphic language is a clear sign of how much inner strength you have. I don't worry about what horny dogs do. I only worry about what I do.

And I worry about what horny dogs want to do with my children and family.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Absolutely. I have seen it happen and been involved with counseling kids who experiment this way. A hard on is a hard on for a horny teen. If some perverted man offered...well, think about it. Allowing gay marriage not only brings sex to its lowest level, but it also opens the door for gay pedophiles to manipulate horny teens.

Children who experiment with homosexuality are as small a percentage of the population as homosexuals themselves. Your anecdotal evidence does not extrapolate to the population at large. Your constant use of graphic language illustrates quite blatantly what you spend your time thinking about.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by dcolton:
And I worry about what horny dogs want to do with my children and family.

We can see that; it's quite obvious.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by dcolton:
You think that we aren't already seeing the effects of the gay culture and lifestyle? Do you own a tv? Read the paper?

If there was an effect of the `gay left' on culture and lifestyle, you wouldn't notice. Coz it's been around forever.

[MATTRESS]

Originally posted by GRAFF:
Define "natural". Does it not occur in nature?

Let's see: man has penis. Woman has vagina. Penis goes into vagina. Natural. Exactly as nature designed humans.

Woman has vagina. Woman has vagina. There's no penis. Impossible to have natural characteristic sex for two humans.

Man has penis. Man has penis. There's no vagina. Impossible to have natural characteristic sex for two humans.