I don’t agree with the gay lifestyle, but I realize people have a right to do what they want in the privacy of their own homes. Yet, there seems to be a big push lately to get people to not only tolerate, but accept and celebrate, the gay lifestyle. Why aren’t gays happy just being gay in private? Most people don’t really like the gay lifestyle, so why should we be forced to accept it when the gays are such an extreme minority?
For the same reason you aren’t happy just being straight in private?
Got a cite for this, or did you make it up all by yourself?
In our nation people of the Hindu religion are an extreme minority. Why should we be forced to accept them?
They’re not asking for everyone to celebrate their lifestyle, they’re simply asking for you to accept their rights as human beings.
A majority of people in the USA are against gay marriage. That’s good enough for me. I have not met very many people who approve of the gay lifestyle.
Would you be happy being heterosexual in private? Never talking about your girlfriends, and always trying to sidestep other guys who are hitting on you while not letting it slip that you don’t like guys that way?
For the record, I’m 100% straight. However, I have no problem at all with someone being gay, or with them being public about their orientation. A person’s romantic relationships are very important, both to the individual, and to the way that they interact with others. I might invite a friend and their SO over for dinner, or to play cards, or something. Why should gays be kept out of social interactions of that sort? Just because their SO happens to be the same sex? What difference does that make?
That’s because marriage tends to be religious in nature, and most religions are inherently anti-gay. I’ll bet that a fir number of anti-gay-marriage people would have no problem with gay civil unions that would grant gays the same legal rights as a married couple.
Then you really need to get out more.
So when you’re wondering what to think, what do you do, take a poll?
Sorry, that’s not “good enough for me.”
I don’t go around flauting my sexuality in public. Gay groups are always sponsoring these parades where people dress in flamboyant garb, grope each other in public, etc. No one should have to look at that. Besides, gays are in the minority, so they’re the ones who are going to have to be restrained in public if what they want to do offends the majority.
Every time you make an offhand comment about your girlfriend or wife, you are flaunting your sexuality in public.
Then it’s just as well that no one does have to look at that. I suppose you also complain about the St. Patrick’s Day parade. After all, who wants to look at a bunch of Irishmen?
As for why they have such gatherings, it’s because of people like you. If everyone accepted that they have just as much a right to fall in love as straight people, they probably wouldn’t feel the need to be overly obvious about the whole thing.
By that logic, blacks, Jews, people with blond hair, midgets, and people over the age of 100 should also be restrained in public, since they’re all minorities. Damn oldies flaunting their age with those “senior citizen discounts”. Bah!
The whole point of this nation is that minorities are free be who they are, even if it offends people. Me, I’m offended by homophobes like you. I rank homophobes on the same level as racists, but you still have a right to be a homophobe.
And you still haven’t shown that the majority of people are offended by homosexuals.
Hmmm. Tough question. Let’s see.
Ok. Let me ask you. If you had to choose between:
A. Being accepted
B. Hit in the head with a two by four
Which would you choose?
Maybe ignorance should be “restrained in public,” since it should offend everybody.
But none of those other groups are based on behavior, that’s just who they are. They’re not going around doing things that gross most people out. If I saw a gay guy dressed normally, I wouldn’t even know he’s gay, so there’s no way I could have aproblem. Most people don’t want to see 2 guys holding hands, kissing, etc., however.
And I found this link about a survey on homosexuality. Unfortunately, only 49% thought it was not an acceptable alternative lifestyle, not a true majority. Still, that’s higher than the percentage that thought it was. And the majority was against gay marriage.
You are aware that it was only a couple of months ago that this country finally got to the point where the right of gay people to lead their “lifestyle” in the “privacy of their own homes” was actually protected by law? And there are still lots of people who are vocally opposed to that right, or have expressed their opposition to that right as recently as the last two or three years (and not back in the Middle Ages or something)? And even though they can’t be enforced anymore, there are laws on the books in many states which criminalize the private consensual sex of adults–in most cases all adults, including heterosexuals–and those laws stay on the books mainly due to anti-gay prejudice?
I say we ban him for his ideas! It takes a lot of nerve flaunting his opinion when it’s clearly in the minority and the majority of the people here are against it. No one should have to hear his opinions and he should therefore be restrained. I have not met many people who agree with his opinion, and those homophobes are always stroking each other’s egos in public
GI Joe’s kinda hunky when he’s not wearing his flak jacket
What exactly is your problem with minorities? Do you think only people in a majority have rights, and everyone else has to sit in the back of the bus? People in minorities should have **exactly **the same rights that you have, and if my life offends you, you have the **right **to look the other way. Last time I looked, this wasn’t the United Heterosexual White Christian States of Amerika.
I’d rather see two guys kissing than some guy deriding some other guy because of his sexual orientation. But that’s just my opinion, I guess.
I still want to know what “the majority” has to do with the issue. At one point, the majority of people probably thought that slavery was a wonderful thing, and all them darkies were sub-human.
The issue, as I see it is, not whether or not the majority believes that the homosexual lifestyle is acceptable, but whether such a lifestyle should be suppressed an any way. Legally speaking, I can think of no reason for any such suppression. Morally speaking, it depends on your upbringing and, often, religion.
Can you think of any reason that homosexuality could be considered immoral, other than “it’s gross”? If not, I’d say that you don’t really have any good reason to request that gays hide their orientation from the public eye.
G I Joe, you need to define what you mean by “their lifestyle” – and in what ways you have a problem with it being “accepted.” If a person goes to work, has dinner in a restaurant with his/her spouse, perhaps takes in a movie with him/her, and then they go home and close their doors, in what way does that affect you? And what difference does it make if Doug’s spouse Chris is called that as short for Christine or Christopher?
My home town had an Army base adjacent to it. For four decades reservists doing annual training would come into town on passes and enjoy themselves. The sole time they made the front page news was when four drunk soldiers climbed on and destroyed the fountain downtown. My church has done some wonderful things in building houses through Habitat for Humanity, helping the destitute through a program called Passage Home, and a good dozen other wonderful activities. But the one time we got major news coverage was when we had John Shelby Spong for a guest speaker. News thrives on controversy. If 50 gay accountants march in matching three piece suits, twenty lesbian couples and their children show up to demonstrate how gay couples can have stable families, and two drag queens and two guys dressed only in thongs are also in the parade, guess which the news crews will get pictures of.
IMHO, you need to read this thread and this thread for a bit more perspective.
Joe: This might come as a complete shock to you; however, I think it bears mentioning. Remember: if some man does proposition you, you do not have to go to bed with him.
Listen, I’m not saying that it should be illegal for gays to hold hands, etc. But if the gay agenda gets its way, it’ll be virtually illegal to disagree with the gay lifestyle. For example, I think a private shopkeeper or restaurant manager should be able to eject people for PDAs, since it’s his own business. I don’t think it should be illegal for him to ban opposite-sex PDAs, but not same-sex PDAs.