Posted on 08/14/2005 10:23:15 AM PDT by A. Pole
Weiner wanter, poot wooler, goober smoocher, pillow biter, batter for the other team, fruitcake, fruit loop, etc.etc.etc.
Well, yeah...although the only one I'd argue with is Freud. He is SO over (except on certain blocks of the upper West Side in Manhattan--shhhh--don't tell them).
Your point was well taken...I read it...curtains can hide or distort actions...they can also block out what you don't want or wish to be involved in...I've closed the curtains to the queers and don't want to be bothered with their issues...they keep tugging them open and to be honest...I've had just about all I can take of them...go to the West Coast and New England and "multiply"...LOL...just leave the driving to us (male+female = real people...prove me wrong!)
PING to this post!!!
Oh...I had misunderstood you. OK--it looks like we're together on this one. My philosophy--FWIW--is live and let live and I do not care what anyone does behind closed doors as long as it's consensual and no one is getting hurt. None of my bidness...what p*sses me off is their going public and not just shutting up. I am sick of their agenda-izing. Especially, leave the school kids alone.
Obviously it was Halliburton? Or maybe it was the contaminated air we breathe?????
Well, here are a few links on the subject. The links will tell you the major factor behind same-sex attraction is environment. Also, checkout I Do Exist and People Can Change
I know what you mean.
I just think the answer to that question does not end the debate on whether, say, same-sex marriage is somehow mandated as and "equality measure" or whatever.
ping for later research.
Oh, lol. It reminds me of a girl my son went to school with. I think that for some of these kids, it's role modeling. She insisted on wearing her hair short like her stay at home dad and much older brother. Mom was often absent and very 'cool' toward her daughter. She wore boys clothes only for years. I remember the tantrums she threw from about age 2 until 6 or 7 during the summers at swim lessons when she would be dragged kicking and screaming into the girls dressing room where she would then take off her swim trunks and change, still crying, into her boys underwear and clothes. The pool made her wear a tank top with the trunks when she was a little older. The school insisted she stopped wearing boys underwear to school after a year or 2, the other girls parents complained. I don't know how they knew. For her, only 'boy' toys and sport activities. She is a senior now, a nice girl, and an excellent basketball player. And very butch. But is it genetic?
Your example seems to say her tom boy behavior was reinforced by the benifit of all the attention she recieved. Seems she was showered with attention by being rebelious.
It is no different than any other child that acts up for attention. (even a little dog)
Nobody taught her how to "act like a lady." Your anecdote points completly to environment.
She really was. Still is, as a star bball player. I think all along she really did just want mom's attention and didn't get it. She is still rejecting of her mom, too.
It makes me wonder, there do seem to be genetic cases, like chromosonal issues and true hermaphrodites, but for so many others it appears to be resultant of modeling behaviors and reinforcements and also of abuse or molestation or loss of parent. Things that can be addressed and corrected. It's funny how one can 'come out' and they are congratulated but one can't go the other way, decide they're not gay, at least not easily.
Our founding fathers wanted citizens to have the freedom to practice a religion of their choice (or none at all), but they specifically did not want a national religion or specific ideology dictating what people should or shouldn't believe. Why are there thousands of religions all using the Bible that come up with different interpretations and translations if it is all so clear and straightforward? Even your words from Romans are a recent interpretation- a different translation or editing- one of hundreds just in the last few decades.
Where is this nation's freedom-the separation of church and state- an opportunity to live your own beliefs- not what someone else believes- including gay relationships? Not religious marriage, but civil marriage. There should be a difference. Gay and lesbian relationships have always existed in every era, nation, religion, race and social class- it is not something new to the world. There have been many cultures where homosexuality was accepted as an important part of society. Arguments against gay marriage are based on personal belief: It is wrong, against God's will, against nature; or even that it goes against thousands of years of recorded history. You are welcome to have your beliefs, but remember traditional religion once also included stoning people, slavery, not marrying someone of a different race, eating shellfish, using your donkey on the Sabbath and on and on. Does that mean it was correct because it was traditional? One can have high ethics, morals and family values even though they may have different beliefs than yours. Why should all people live YOUR interpretation of religion? Remember, Christ did not say a word about homosexuality after replacing the old Mosaic Law in the New Testament. It was no longer an eye for an eye, but to turn the other check. Christ's laws changed those put forth in the Old Testament and were about acceptance and love.
Where is your discussion about the science of homosexuality in this debate? The Boston globe among other articles give evidence of genetic homosexuality. It can no longer be denied. I know I am biologically gay and was different from the day I was born. No religious belief could change that- believe me- I tried. The only decision I made was whether or not to live honestly as the person I was created to be. It wasn't caused by something someone did or didn't do. Two straight parents have gay children just as two gay parents have straight children. Science will continue to reveal more knowledge than was available in past- Just like the religious belief the Sun rotated around the Earth.
So anything goes? No. Pedophilia, child pornography, incest, murder, rape and theft, for example, all take away others rights and property and are crimes. A marriage between two consenting adults takes away no ones rights and will only benefit those individuals, gay or straight, their families and society as a whole. The religious right are the ones wanting to remove the family values from gay relationships with no marriage or adoption rights. The relationship I have with my spouse of thirteen years is just as real, strong and normal as the relationship any straight couple has. It is not counterfeit. I find it ironic that people who are not gay are the ones professing to know what it means to be gay. No one can be recruited to be gay and no one expects others to become gay- obviously being gay will be a minority to allow the propagation of the species.
After gay marriage, what item is next on the constitutional amendment list? Will they change your rights next time? The day our leaders start restricting rights of specific groups of people by way of the constitution is the day we are no longer a free nation.
The homosexual agenda is to have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To live safe, productive lives- be good neighbors, benefit society and love and care for our families, even if they look a little different than yours. Now is the time for equality- "anything less creates second class citizens". No one is a second class citizen! Lastly, how will you be judged for your treatment of people that are different than you- including homosexuals? Are you really being Christlike in how you treat them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.