The Visible Vote? How will the gay community measure up in 2008?

I hate to sound insensitive here… But I woud hardly fault the Republican candidates for not showing up. In fact, I am disgusted by the whole concept of this debate anyway. Now, before you go jumping all over me, realize that I have absolutely no problem with gays. I couldn’t care less. So log as people are hard working, tax paying, civil americans, I couldn’t care less if they like men, women or goats.

With that said, let me explain why I am disgusted by this debate.

For the most part, I am annoyed with the efforts of left to separate American into sub-groups. America is no longer filled with Americans, it is filled with African-Americans, gay (or LBT)-Americans, Asian-Americans… Well, you get the picture. These people have all become “protected” classes while people who can’t legitimately put a hyphen in front of their name are treated like the bad guys even though they are quickly becoming the true minorities in many areas of this country.

I am bothered by the left’s constant pandering to these people. These days they go out of their way to not only acknowledge, but to also uphold the separatio of these groups, and by holdig presidential debates that are exclusive to one group or another, aren’t they simply flaunting divides in this country?

I understand that everybody wants equality and fairness, but how can anybody ever think that equality can be achieved when divides are embraced? I mean, couldn’t you simply hold a debate that is open to everybody, including gays, blacks, whites and goat lovers? If everybody’s voices are equally heard, how could anybody claim discrimination? I don’t think you need to separate people into groups and address each one as some sort of independant entity in order to achieve equality and fairness. After all, aren’t we all just American-Americans?

If not, well, then I want to be called eyeglass wearing-American and I want the democrats to hold a debate with only eyeglass wearing people…

Arclightzero, I feel sympathy for this cause, and objectively I think you’re right. However, the question is unfortunately still one of discrimination. If there were no LGBT community, do you think the issue of gay marriage would ever get addressed? How would that come up, if there were no visible groups of people advocating for it?

The way i see it, people form these minority groups to make visible their voting power. When we’re talking about civil rights, oppressed people can become singly issue voters, and so they form groups to show candidates that if they want a group’s vote, they need to address their legitimate issues.

At some point, one would hope that minorities would become equal to the majority, and so people could drop the labels. We’ve seen a move towards that with feminism, with less people self-identifying as feminist, or at least less people identifying with the radical feminism of the past. I feel this is mostly because the feminist movement has accomplished many of their main goals. There still are inequalities, and until they are erased we’ll still have a feminist movement, but as more goals get accomplished the division becomes less important.

Oh, and one note. This behavior is in no way solely a leftist phenomenon. The right constantly panders to evangelist Christians, gun rights groups, and others.

CarlosMencia had a pretty good take on this, he kind of put it this way.
There was a guy in a wheelchair at the DMV that wanted to go to the front of the line because he was handicapped. And he claimed that it was only proper that he be treated as an equal.
Carlos said; well I know you have a special need , but you have a chair to sit in, and when you get to the front of the line after me , your needs will be met.
If you truly want equality, get in line with the rest of us.
Gays are not disabled and dont see what civil liberties they are not getting, other than civil unions not being acknowledged in some states. I think the law should change so that these unions are respected in every state.
But if they want to be called married, and have their marriage blessed in the eyes of God they have a long road in front of them.

Not seeing what rights the LGBT community isn’t getting is a pretty ignorant thing to say. Here’s a quick rundown:

- marriage, not civil unions. Seperate but equal was ruled inequal and illegal a long time ago. (God has nothing to do with it. I’d imagine few churches would bless these unions and that’s fine, I’m just talking about legality. It needs to be legal marriage for all, or civil unions for all, not both.)

- protection from hate crimes. Not all states have hate crime laws that include LGBT crimes, and there isn’t one at the federal level.

- adoption rights. Homosexuals still have trouble adopting children in various places.

- military discrimination. Don’t ask, don’t tell is silly.

There are probably some more. Before they can get in line with the rest of us, we need to ensure they are actually equal.

I have to argue a couple points here.

First off, separation perpetuates inequality because it usualy angers the main body of the people who they are being separated from. After all, how is one difference between people more important than another? (i.e. why does being gay mean something different than mine wearing eyeglasses? After all, I was picked on notorioulsy for being a nerd and four-eyes in my younger years…)

That aside, I will argue that:

gay marriage is a big grey area. I’m all for civil unions but I don’t think that the government has the right to tell a church to recgnize a marriage, which the way things go is how it would be, since issues are treated in an all-or-nothing light.

I don’t believe in any hate crime legislation period. It assumes that one murder is worsr than another when both people are equally dead. Persaonlly I think that all crimes are hate crimes in their own right.

Children need a mother and father. I appreciate gay couples’ efforts, but my interest and schooling in psychology makes me question how well rounded a child could grow up in a homosexual household.

Don’t ask don’t tell is very important. having been in the service, I know what it’s like and I know the prevailing attitude towards gays. You can’t take something that is predominantly occupied by rednecks from the south and force them to be ok with something that they are morally or dundamentally opposed to and hope for a good outcome.

I’m in agreement about the church. You can’t force churches to recognize gay marriage, nor should you. My view here is legal. The word marriage is used in our laws, outside of the church. If we want marriage to continue to be a legal term, then we need to recognize it on the state level for homosexuals, no matter what church does or does not condone it. If we don’t want to do that, then we need to make marriage a completely religious word, write it out of the law altogether, and make civil unions the only option when the government is involved. All people would get their civil union approved by a judge or magistrate, and then get married in a church if they want, but as far as the law goes, it only recognized civil unions (or marriages), just not both.

Hate crimes, you have a point, but I’m not quite ready to go there. I believe there is a particular kind of evil that governs the minds of those who kill out of hate. I think KKK members who lynch African Americans deserve stronger sentences than regular murderers, and the same with those who harm homosexuals. It seems to me that as a society if we rightly look upon bigotry as a larger transgression than simple agression.

As for children, that’s simple bigotry right there. If there are to be requirements for having kids, perhaps single mothers shouldn’t be allowed to have children, or parents who are too poor, or those who fight too much. There are many things that can harm kids. You can’t just pick out one.

And lastly, your argument for don’t ask, don’t tell proves the argument for hate crimes and the argument that the LGBT community needs to differentiate itself. If there is bigotry in the army (which you admit), then there need to be special laws to protect those who suffer from it.

I agree with you on principle. It would be great if there were no minority groups, if we were just all Americans. But as you so astutely point out, this isn’t the case. Homosexuals face descimination from their government and from their fellow Americans. Until that is erased, I can’t argue against their organizing efforts. I know you’ll say that these divisions only perpetuate the hate, however I can’t think of a group of people that has successfully eliminated that discrimination simply by assimilating. Can you?

J-ro said;
“As for children, that’s simple bigotry right there. If there are to be requirements for having kids, perhaps single mothers shouldn’t be allowed to have children, or parents who are too poor, or those who fight too much. There are many things that can harm kids. You can’t just pick out one.

It is by no means bigotry.
Its what you feel you should or should not expose children to. Which is a very, very inportant choice.
What is bigoted about not wanting my boy to see one man kissing another?
Watching two men be intimate { not necessarily sex}is going to be a lot harder for a 8 year old boy to process than watching mommy and daddy.
There’s poor gay people that fight too much also, but to top it of , they are gay.
A single mother holds a lot better chance of exposing a child to a heterosexual relationship than a gay couple does.
She might even have multiple male partners in the course of the childs growth.
I saw from my father how a man should treat a woman in all departments of life. And the same goes for my Mom.
I find it ridiculous that anybody could argue that a Homosexual household can raise a child just as well as a heterosexual couple could. Its just absurd.

Micky, you dissapoint me. That was one of the most ignorant and hateful things I’ve read in a while. Sorry man, but I gotta call you out on that.

While I appreciate your views, I strongly disgaree with some of your points…

As far as hate crimes go, I have to say that there is evil behind any murder. I’m not going to get into it full blown, but I took some great issue with hate crimes this past spring when a young white couple was brutally raped and murdered by five black men yet it wasn’t classified as a hate crime. If there is to be hate crime legislation it has to apply to everybody, not jst to “protected” classes because hate can apply in any direction. However, since I think everything should be equal and that thought shouldn’t be looked at as a factor, I still don’t belive that hate crime legislation is a good idea.

As for the bogotry thing, well I would hardly think that it’s fair to refer to what I said about parents as bigotry. All I am saying is that from a psychological viewpoint it’s better for a child to have a mother and a father than any of the other options. Interestingly, as far as adoptin goes, people are severely scrutinized before they are allowed to adopt so that it is ensured the child will be going into the best household possible. Yes, shit happens and kids end up in all sorts of bad situations, but is it ok to place a child in a questionable situation from the get go? I’m not saying I feel one way or another, I am simply speaking from a textbook psychological persepctive on child growth and development here.

And the military? Well, hate crimes have nothing to do with what I was talkig about. I’m just saying that you can’t expect them to work side by side. If you try and forc the issue you ru the risk of losing people and cuttig the number of enlistees, since military service is voluntary after all. Can you expect people to voluntarily put themselves in situations they are opposed to? Some may, others won’t, but I can assure you that the gay population, despite all of their whining about wanting an open military, aren’t going to provide enough people to make up for the loss.
You can read my full analysis including the numbers I came up with here:
http://arclightzero.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/dont-ask-dont-tell-redux- why-it-needs-to-stay/

All I am saying is that from a psychological viewpoint it’s better for a child to have a mother and a father than any of the other options.

Prove it. Until you do, it is bigotry.

Some may, others won’t, but I can assure you that the gay population, despite all of their whining about wanting an open military, aren’t going to provide enough people to make up for the loss.

On the whole, true. However, what about this story: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/23/america/NA-GEN-US-Military-G ays.php

You’ve got a class of people that are in high demand, yet are being kicked out for their sexuality. That’s not just bigoted, that’s dangerous.

Theres a glitch in the system so the posts arent showing at the same time my e-mail is.
So I’ll just post this now and let J-ro edit things accoringly.
I just recieved an e-mail from J-ro that says my last post{#7}was hurtful and bigoted.
I understand some would come to this conclusion, especially since sometimes I type faster than I think.
But my feelings about this have been around for quite a while.
So lets offer some background here first.
One of my closet friends is gay and his name is Leon.
He is 15 years older than me and was the shoulder I cried on over my first love{little vietnamese girl} when I was 12, and I mean tears. He is one of the kindest most tolerant and forgiving men I have ever met in my 50 years. And anybody that fucks with him will have me to answer to.
I was raised in a very open and non discriminating household. We had anything but white mainstream mayonaise fed white people hanging around.I grew up being surrounded by Leons friends and grew up watching him with his friends, he was a very close friend of our family and still is to this day. He comes to all our family gatherings and is just as important as anyone in our family. That was an understatement, he is family.
I also have spent most of my life in the restaraunt business and have worked and gotten along with more gays than most people. And I actually would much rather work in this field with them for the reason that gay men are more prone to detail than hetero men. Gay men, for some reason have a much better work ethic.
For those of you that have never been to Hawaii, we have a very large gay population, and very much so in Waikiki.
In my younger days my daughters mother and I would only go to gay bars together for a number of reasons.First reason was that we were respected as a couple. And every smuck in the place wouldnt try to pick up on my ole lady, or me.
The music was way better, and so was the food.{If anyone makes it over here check out “HULA’S BAR AND LEI STAND”.

So as far as my statements above go lets make one thing clear.
I am sure that a gay couple could raise a child just fine.
But the “NATURAL” choice that is dictated by most procreating species around us shows us that it was and is natures plan to have an offspring raised by one of each..
And I strongly object to being called bigoted just because I think Dick and Jane could do a better than job than Tom and Harry.
I grew up from the time I was 12 watching a lot of gay men and having them as friends. I always wonderd what it was like to be with another man, after all, if they could do it so comfortably maybe it wasnt as repulsive as I thought it was. So when I was 24 years old I gave it try.
I was an emotional wreck for years after that. I felt so stupid and small for not reckognizing my own identity.
I hated myself. I felt as though I had broken a bond I had with myself.
I do not blame anyone for this. But the exposure to very many gay people drove a curiosity in me. And sent me to a place that was not necessary. Some guys probably would of killed themselves.I usually dont run around telling people about this, but in this case I will. I now know who and what I am,and I dont care what anyone thinks. I have forgiven myself.
So I can safely say that it would not be in my best interest for me to over expose my 12 year old boy to a number of gay relationships, or two gay parents for that matter.And I’m not saying the same thing will happen to every kid with my level of exposure.
Also anyone speaking out on the subject of gay parenting I believe should “actually be a parent”! before they can be so judgemental of me or anyone with their own kids.
I’ve raised two so far and they are REALLY good kids.
I think I have just a little more credibility than those who have no kids, period.
Up untill my kids were about 8 I steered them away from homosexual displays because I didnt think it was fair to expose them to a situation that was too hard for them at that age to comprhend or process. They didnt even know about heterosexuality yet and I have to start explaining homosexuality to them ? Give me a break!
Let them grow up for christ sake. At the age of 4 or 5 a kid with gay parents will notice that his family is a little different.And he WILL ask questions. So now… we have to start explaining things ? To a 4 year old, thats just too early.
So now… Am I bigoted or just trying to be a good dad ?

And I strongly object to being called bigoted just because I think Dick and Jane could do a better than job than Tom and Harry.

My answer here is the same as above. If you can prove it, then it isn’t a bigotted idea.

As for your children, first you need to prove that “being exposed” to homosexual relationships somehow make people more likely to be gay. The science I’ve read points to a genetic or neo-natal cause, so being exposed later in life most likely wouldn’t do anything. Second, I’d ask you what you would do if one of your children came out as a homosexual. I hope you’d support full rights (including adoption and marriage) for your own children, and I’d expect that if you do, you’d support them for everyone else’s as well.

-ro said;
My answer here is the same as above. If you can prove it, then it isn’t a bigotted idea.

This makes little sense since the rates of gays raising children is almost nothing compared to that of hetero households. Its almost like asking me to prove something is extinct
But we have been raising kids in hetero households for thousands of years right now and there is alot more proof in favor of hetero’s than there is gays.
It is the gay community that has something to prove, not the heterosexual community.
YOU have to proove that a child will do better in a gay household than a hetero household, not the other way around
I stand nothing to loose, the gay commnunity does.

I dont need to prove shit!
To you or anyone. They are my children, not yours.
You got any kids ?
Theres nothing saying that a kid will be anything if I expose him to it now. BUt why chance it?
And nobody said anything about turning out gay.
If you are selfish enough to expose a kid to something out of your own ideoligy that wiil give him bullying problems at school you have no right in this world to raise a child.
It amazes me again. How people who dont have a clue what they are talking about can act as if they know better.
Our children will be subjected to all kinds of influences when they grow. But to steer them away from certain influences as “I” see fit is called PARENTING.

If there were omly 2 couples left on this earth, and one was gay and the other hetero. Both financialy and emotionally stable, do you mean to tell me that the hetero couple would not be your choice ?
If you say it doesnt matter, then your opinion of me and the matter is irrellevant. Because then an opinion is not needed if it doesnt matter.
Fathers and Mothers are a role played in our kids lives that is irreplacable. Gay parents I’m sure can do VERY good job of parenting. Hetero familys can offer anything a homosexual family can offer, but more in the context of role modeling.
Just because I think a certain sect in society wont raise children better than the other does not make me biggot.
And I really wish you would take that back!

Well, well, well. Lots of conversation… so good to see. I’m humbled my guest post brought out some great dialogue.

Where to start? There is so much to consider. I’ll take it in order.

On Minority Status/Labels
Yes, Arclightzero, I too feel as though the world would be much better served if we did not have labels and we did not have to have different groups. It is the discrimination which has caused the presence of these “minorities” (if we use the term in the sense of a group of people who do not have the same power, privilege and rights as others, i.e. Women are not a numerical “minority” but are a “minority” in the political, economic and social sense, although not so much now as in the past). I would love to see the day when lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) advocacy and lobbying groups are no longer needed; when the society has become fully equal.

On what rights the LGBT community does not have
Legal and social recognition of LGBT relationships are not the only rights lacking for the LGBT community. At present, LGBT people can be discriminated against in employment and in housing. LGBT people can have and have had their children taken away from them by courts simply because of their sexual orientation. LGBT youth continue to suffer daily torment, harassment and extreme emotional, verbal and physical bullying in schools across the nation, in districts which refuse to include sexual orientation and gender-identity in anti-bullying policies and/or enforce existing “zero-tolerance” anti-bullying policies in a fair and consistent manner. Socially, LGBT people suffer discrimination at the hands of both religious and non-religious people who seek to place LGBT people in the outer realms of society. Transgender people continue to face extreme hardship in finding adequate psychological and medical care. In many prisons, both LGB and Transgender people are denied basic rights and basic access to services which would help them to either survive in such harsh conditions or, if transgender, continue their medical treatments (hormone therapies, etc.) prescribed by licensed medical professionals.

Children and LGBT Parents
It was mentioned that “psychologically speaking” it was “better” for a child to have a mother and a father. The American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have said time and time again children raised by LGBT parents grow up to be as emotionally and mentally well-adjusted as those children raised in two-parent, mother-father homes, as well as single parent homes. Across the board, children raised by any loving, nurturing family providing the children with the needed emotional, mental and physical needs, do indeed grow up to be well-adjusted, mentally stable, capable of friendship and companionship and contributing members of their homes, communities, schools, states, nation and world. As per the comment regarding a child’s acceptance of intimacy of LGBT parents: I’d posit that any intimacy beyond a hug or kiss is wrong to be acted upon in front of children. Amazingly, children are accepting of the love around them. Just as children are color-blind when they are born into this world and even in the most racist of societies one can see children of many races willing to befriend each other… children are also loving and accepting of almost any human difference. In my opinion, the eyes of a child are like the eyes and soul of Christ: Unconditional love without exclusion. Perhaps this is just one more reason why Christ said one must “be as a child” in order to enter the kingdom of heaven?

The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Policy
The Military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Policy was instituted by the US Congress and President Clinton in 1993, and was first enforced in 1994. Prior to 1993, the Military’s policy was simply, “No Homosexuals Allowed.” The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) Policy was crafted as a compromise between President Clinton (who wanted to lift the gay ban completely, through executive order) and a Republican Congress and Military officials who basically said, “No way.” The matter was taken out of the hands of the Office of the President and was made United States law, inserted into the Federal Code. DADT is federal law and as such, cannot be changed by executive order. In order to repeal DADT, the Congress must take action. Whew… Now that we have the history out of the way, here are the effects of DADT: Since 1994, over 11,000 servicemembers have been dismissed under the policy. That number includes dozens, if not at least 100, linguists (many of the Arabic linguists) and other personnel in “critical needs areas,” such as Homeland Security and anti-terrorism specialists. Besides the obvious fact that the DADT policy has written into a law a second-class, discriminatory position for LGBT citizens, the DADT Policy is also a very stupid, costly and unwise one. We have lost and been unable to recruit many, many individuals who have gravely needed skills and abilities. How can we be present in Iraq (whether or not if you agree with the war) and have any chance of doing what we need to do to communicate with the citizens if we are dismissing so many people skilled in the language of the region? There are two major federal laws that place LGBT citizens in a second-class category. The first is DADT. The second is the Defense of Marriage Act, something which is clearly unconstitutional as the Constitution leaves issues of the family (as well as education) to the states.

To Micky…
Yes… I believe you are trying to be a good father. I congratulate you on that and encourage you to keep doing the same. I will ask of you two things to consider: The first are the statements of the American Psychological Association and American Academy of Pediatrics as I presented them above. You can do further research if you like. The second is this notion: As a child I had no model of what a gay person in America looked like, acted like or anything. All I had were heterosexual models of living and existing. When I began to struggle with who I was and am and my identity as a person and how and where I related to this world and how the world related to me, I had no way to do that; I had never had a model of what “gay” was, except from my pastor (and this is a totally separate story, in short: he had a very hateful model - and I don’t use the word “hateful” lightly here). Children will get it. They will get other people. As far as “explaining it”… Children understand what it is to have a crush or a love or a boyfriend or a girlfriend, even if it is very limited. Just simply say to them, “These people love each other and they love each other deeply and they take care of each other like I take care of your mother.” Or if it is in response to a friend who has gay parents: “Some people have one daddy or one mommy. Some people have a mom and a dad. And some people have a mom and a mom and a dad and a dad. There are different types of families, but they are all just like ours… they love and take care of each other like I take care of you.” More than likely your kid will just say, “Okay, Daddy” and when your child grows up they will know by instinct: All people are different, but I don’t treat them differently than others.

Well said, Matt.

My point is that i dont want to ,nor do I feel like I should have to explain any of this to a 4 year old.

Matt said;
“Children will get it. They will get other people. As far as “explaining it”… Children understand what it is to have a crush or a love or a boyfriend or a girlfriend, even if it is very limited. Just simply say to them, “These people love each other and they love each other deeply and they take care of each other like I take care of your mother.” Or if it is in response to a friend who has gay parents: “Some people have one daddy or one mommy. Some people have a mom and a dad. And some people have a mom and a mom and a dad and a dad. There are different types of families, but they are all just like ours… they love and take care of each other like I take care of you.

Matt said;
” More than likely your kid will just say, “Okay, Daddy”…

Taking chances with your own kids is up to you.
“More than likely” are not good enough odds for me.

I am not saying a gay family is bad, I’m just saying that a hetero family is better.
I dont seee how I’m a biggot just because those are my feelings.

Let me preface this once again with my sincere and deep feeling that you, Micky, are truly trying to be a good father. For that you shouldn’t be faulted, but yes, some of your thinking is, well maybe “bigoted” isn’t the word for it, but definitely exclusionary and prejudiced.

Micky said:

I am not saying a gay family is bad, I’m just saying that a hetero family is better.
I dont seee how I’m a biggot just because those are my feelings.

Okay… Take “gay” and “hetero” out of that sentence and replace it with any other minority…

“I am not saying a black family is bad, I’m just saying that a white family is better.”

“I am not saying a Jewish family is bad, I’m just saying that a Christian family is better.”

“I am not saying a Palestinian family is bad, I’m just saying that an Israeli family is better.”

You see where this is going?

Again, I fully believe that you are trying to be a good dad. My father wasn’t the best of fathers, so I greatly appreciate it when I see other fathers truly trying to do what is best for their own children; I know that those children are being taken care of.

In some way, perhaps, your thinking of hetero “better” than gay… that could translate over to your kids. Maybe. Maybe not. I don’t know.

What if one of your kids grows up to be gay? I sincerely hope that you will accept him or her. But I can probably say that they are going to feel so lonely… so alone and so lost, because all they have ever seen from you is “hetero, hetero, hetero.”

But let me end on this… I don’t really know what your family is like and I’m making assumptions. I could be completely wrong about it all. Know that I don’t mean you any offense and I think you’ve made more than plenty arguments that you believe being gay is not bad… I’m just concerned about the fact you still think being straight is better.

While I would love to change your mind, micky, I’m more concerned about law. You are free to have whatever feelings on this issue you want, and you are free to raise your children how you see fit.

However, where the law comes into it, that’s where things get more cut and dried. I believe the burden of proof would be on you because you are the one advocating for the abridgement of civil rights. Do you not agree that all citizens in America have the right to marry the one they love? Do you not agree that all citizens have the right to raise children? If you do, then you need some really good reasons to take away those rights.

Now, you may feel that you shouldn’t need to explain to your children about homosexuals. Again, fine, you are free to feel that way. However, I don’t think you should take away a person’s right to marry and raise children just because you don’t want to explain things. That’s a fairly selfish argument if I take it at face value.

So again, you are free to feel how you feel, but where the law enters into it, I would hope you come out on the side of equal rights for all citizens.

Black, jewish, palestinian doesnr have anything to do with a sexual preference or lifestyle.
with all do respect, that was a piss poor analogy or comparison.
I want my kid to be raised in a heterosexual family, doesnt mean anything that you would like to believe.
And who the hell do you think you are to tell me what morals I carry because of the way I feel children should be raised.
Who on this thread has children, tell me please !
You can study children all you want and be a big old fancy shmancy author on the subject, but if you dont have any kids of your owm , you should really bow out.
.

If my wife and I died tommorow and I stipulated in my will that I want my boy to be raised in a household with a mother and father, that makes me bigot ?

You are more cruel than the accusations you put on me, for discrimating against my right to see that my child is raised the way I see fit.
You are discriminating against me for envoking my parental rights and duties.
You should be ashamed of yourself for using the word ‘BIGOT” so loosely just to get your point across.

Who the hell are any of you to cast judgement on me ?

Once again, I dont see any reason why I have to prove my point to anyone.
I’m not the one looking for something. Its the gay community that is asking for certain things, not me.
So they must prove to us the validity in their claims.
And I have seen more proof to back up a hetero family, than a gay one. I will raise my kid by the example of the most proof out there, like it or not.

If I am going to be referd to as bigot just because you dont see it my way, I most definatly will not be posting here any more.

Micky, I’ve been very careful to chose my words wisely and I believe that I have done more than enough to make clear to you that I mean no offense and that I truly and sincerely believe that you are doing what is best for your children.

You say my analogy to other minorities is wrong because of my “sexual preference” and “lifestyle.” My sexual orientation was neither chosen by me nor voluntarily entered into by me. It is a part of who I am, just as a person who is black, white, red, Jewish, whatever, whatever.

Micky, you are showing more and more that some of your thoughts may very well be based in larger prejudices and ignorances. You believe I am living a “lifestyle” I have chosen and had “preference” for. That kind of thinking usually goes hand-in-hand with “hetero is better than gay.”

I’ve been very kind so far Micky, but now I must go ahead and just blurt it out: YES you are being bigoted. To say that any group of people are better than another is bigotry. It is this kind of thinking that underlines the hate and bigotry of racism, sexism and anti-semitism.

“Whites are better than blacks” = Slavery, KKK, Jim Crow and Institutionalized segregation

“The Aryan race is better than the Jews” = Holocaust

“Sane people are better than crazy people” = Cruel Asylums, labotamies, eugenics

“Hetero is better than gay” = Institutionalized segregation and discrimination, crimes committed for the sole purpose of killing “fags,” “God Hates Fags,” “Ex-Gay ” ministries that prey on youth telling them being dead is better than being gay and so on and so on.

_____ person/people is/are better than _____ person/people is ALWAYS a bigoted argument, if that argument is based simply upon who people are, as they were born.