'Call in gay' aimed at public awareness

By John C. Ensslin, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published December 9, 2008 at 7:50 p.m.

Text size

Photo by Dennis Schroeder © The Rocky

Greg Montoya, who is the editor of Out Front Colorado, isn't expecting a big reduction in his workforce for "Day Without a Gay Day" since most of his staff is gay.

More Local News

Comments

December 9, 2008

7:59 p.m.

Cowboy63 writes:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 9, 2008

8:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

jfkdem47 writes:

So 3% of society will take the day off. Wonder if anyone will notice.
December 9, 2008

8:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Uno writes:

How bout a Year Without a Gay? I don't think only one day will drive the point home with these homophobes.
December 9, 2008

8:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

birddog writes:

When this protest fails. Will they blame their latest failure on the LDS Church?
December 9, 2008

8:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

MileHighPatriot writes:

so in the past, gays have lived in the shadows... not wanting to be noticed, and today, it's quite the opposite.... look at me, look at me! not only are the people who organized this and support this gay, but they're childish too.
December 9, 2008

9:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

History writes:

Why is this a story? I am straight and don't give a hoot what one person does with another, why don't gay people just go about their lives like everyone else... wait they can't, they do not enjoy equal rights or protections... oh OK, have a nice day off!
December 9, 2008

9:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

History writes:

Milehigh - you think highly of yourself, why? You seem quick to pass judgement on others, yet you also seemed threatened, why is that?
December 9, 2008

9:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

WakeUpDenver writes:

I wonder what they will be at home doing?
December 9, 2008

9:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hope writes:

WOW....MileHigh has issues!! I bet "they" don't want to copy you at all.....who in their right mind would? As for marriage and letting "them" have children..it is already happening...just not here....YET! (ps---FYI, NO, I am not gay...but my best friend is)
December 9, 2008

9:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

sldfkd writes:

Uno, I'm just sick of all the discriminating comments posted on here about homophobes. Most people seem to think that homophobia is something you develop in childhood, say, from bigoted parents. But the fact is, homophobics are born that way! They can't deny who they are, can they? Stop thinking everyone should be exactly the same as you, and show some toleration! Sheesh!
December 9, 2008

10:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Gonzopozo writes:

So I can't get a haircut tomorrow?

I guess I'm missing the point of this.

I really don't care about anyone's sexual preference, sorry. Do what you have to do and leave me out of it.
December 9, 2008

11:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Colorado127 writes:

It is logical that the respondents on here have no idea what its like to be a minority as gay people are. They have never had to fear for their job, their safety, their security, their rights, or even their life. The are lucky they never have to experience what it is like to feel as if you are going to have the *%$# beat out of you when walking down the street. Then they want to give gay people advice like 'go back in the closet' or to tell us that we are 'attention grabbing'. It is obvious that you are ignorant about the issues facing gay people and sad that you have no empathy for other human beings.
December 9, 2008

11:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

happymike44 writes:

Wow what a bunch of open minded individuals we have here.
What Gays are striving for is equal protection under the laws and constituition of the United States.
Wonder how many of you face descrimination in the work place or the not so subtle words or snickers in the workplace.
The boss who treats you with zero respect or fails to acknowledge your work ethic.
So why deny or treat people as less then human.
My family has fought in every war since the war of independance from Britain.
This war was fought so we all can speak and live free with diginty and respect.
So why is it so hard for so many bigots to understand this.
If you don't like what I think.
Remember I am allowed to speak and vote anyway I want.
Also I have been treated in some respect being hearing impaired as less then a person.
So remember treat every person as you would want someone to treat your mother,father,brother,sisters or anyone else you hold near and dear to your heart.
Love means accepting everyone for who they are good or bad.
December 9, 2008

11:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

Really writes:

I thought the point of the Latino protest was to show the impact their absence would have on society. I cannot imagine there are jobs that ONLY gays do (well one maybe). I am sure this feeble protest will open our eyes to their many contributions to society.

Day(s) without a gay?? Ok!
December 10, 2008

12:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

angryman1n writes:

Anyone else wonder what gays think of the transgendered???? I bet they are still treated like second class citizens, freaks. Only supported due to a psuedo-social obligation.

************
Anyway, why does Denver have a paper dedicated to gay issues? Something tells me it is screamingly biased.
December 10, 2008

12:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

angryman1n writes:

Cowboy63... Russia beat us to it. Go home and "rejoice."

Kinda like the post blizzard baby boom of '07.
December 10, 2008

12:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

NyAxter writes:

Oscar Wilde once called homosexuality "the love that dare not speak its name". Now it just won't shut up.
December 10, 2008

4:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

I think it would have less economic impact than if all the workers called in straight for a week; that might slap the economy into a real tailspin, and Gays won't have to worry about calling in.
December 10, 2008

5:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

mcge8715 writes:

Yippy no gays at work today. Gay, gay, gay I love the liberal media always willing to put the gay agenda out on the front page. I wonder it there will be a Rocky Mountain News if all the gays call in today. Who will there be to write the stories and run the presses if all the gays call in???
December 10, 2008

5:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

One of my friends, he's gay, said a man who feels he is a total women can use the women's facilities legally in Denver. If that's true, I think I could wear a dress and be Louise for a day. So ladies if you see a 6'6", 310 lbs., ugly woman with a 5 o'clock shadow, a machine gun tattoo and a cigar, with hairy legs hanging out from under his dress in the lockeroom at the city gym, remember I'm very sensitive to the issues concerning my "womanhood". Sorry if I stare a bit...
December 10, 2008

5:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Oh, and if you do see me in the womens lockeroom, I am a lesbian trapped inside a man's body, waitting to get "out" as well...
December 10, 2008

5:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

ham writes:

A lesbian called the Caplis and Silverman yesterday afternoon and described the terrible discrimination she suffers as a lesbian in a relationship: They get funny looks in restaurants, and the person seating her and her partners asks "where are your husbands?" Seriously. That was her complaint.
My goodness, how awful!
Wake up, gay and lesbian folks: It's called life, and EVERYBODY gets funny looks and bad treatment from time to time. Even the beautiful people. Real discrimination isn't funny looks.
Life is tough for everybody, you whiners.
Try going through life fat and ugly. Then you will know real discrimination.
December 10, 2008

5:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

JimmyTheSaint writes:

Well, this is gonna be a different point of view, but I'm gay, and frankly I find the whole thing to be moronic. That's a tiny part of who I am as a person (and frankly, if I wasn't open when someone asks about a 'wife', no one would know, no one would guess.).

But this is just stupid. Let me see: the way to get accepted in society is to bail out on your job is some half-whacked "protest"?

Not buying it. Nor am I skipping work today.
December 10, 2008

6:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sixtysixdeuce writes:

Such protests will do a whole lot more harm than good to the gay community. The way to achieve acceptance is not by shoving an alternative lifestyle down everyone's throat.

If someone is gay and wants my friendship, they will find it by being a good person and acting as a friend should. Immediately announcing that they are homosexual and that I'd better accept it will come across as an (unnecessary) ultimatum and a friendship will never exist.

The mexicans tried the not showing up for work bit, and all it did was piss off the rest of the population. The gay community should learn from their mistake. Go to work and behave as a normal human being.
December 10, 2008

6:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

What gays don't understand, is that straight people have a right to feel the way they do. Since when is it wrong to not like something? The gay life style is one that offends a lot of people. So, Milehighguy, don't worry about it. What the gay community does not get, is that we have a right to judge what is right and what is wrong, and what we believe. Gays are judging straight people by saying that we are somehow prejudiced against them. "A day without a gay" should be having a day where everyone acts normal.
December 10, 2008

6:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

happymike:
"Love means accepting everyone for who they are good or bad". By that reasoning, you love pedophiles, child abusers, rapists, murderers, and the rest of the scum of the earth? I rather doubt it.
December 10, 2008

6:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Lets stop beating around the bush, (no pun intended), how much sen/xual and sensitory pleasures should we legalize? I'm there, let me hear the offers that are available, give me the menu; I'll go study God's law and contract, then I'll get back to you. Maybe God made a mistake and I am LOUISE, maybe He cheated me to destiny in His image. Two choices have/are apparent to me; One walks with me always, no matter how dark and narrow my road in life be, I can call out His name pennyless to the world; the other brings me great pleasure but for a brief moment in a life governed by human frailties of my own divinity of reason. I for one hope He never turns His back upon me...
December 10, 2008

6:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

06concept writes:

Gay's stay home and don't come back! Shut up about your life style and keep your crap to yourself.
December 10, 2008

7:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

JimmyTheSaint writes:

Oh please. You're using a book written by Bronze Age cavemen living in deerskin tents to justify your actions? C'mon. Those are fables, Loui(s)e. Talking snakes? Talking bushes? Guys swallowed by fish? Oceans parting? Other than the truth--which is there is ZERO scientific to back up any of the so-called 'miracles' in the bible, it's also completely true that the first gospels contained exactly NO REFERENCES to the 'resurrection'. That was added 300 years to put a little 'pop' into the story. I don't mind if you don't like gays for a reason, but using that phony text to guide your life is like using astrology.
December 10, 2008

7:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

jd writes:

to jimmythesaint. There actually has been lots of proof but of course the left leaning media doesn't want to talk about it. The city of Jericho has been found and they determined that the walls of the city were actually destroyed as they bible says. They have also found writings in Egypt that describe the plagues of Moses, but of course the Muslims don't want that spoken of except the Egyptians did try to take the Jews to court for taking all the gold that was given them at the time of Moses. The Egyptians wanted the money back. There are other writings around the world as well. There is supposed to be a depository in Syria that they will not let anyone in to see because the first few tablets they deciphered confirmed items from the bible so they sealed the tablets away. There's more but you wouldn't believe anyway.
December 10, 2008

7:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

LoneTreeLady75 writes:

Okay, I'm all for equal rights, but this is getting a little out of hand now.
December 10, 2008

7:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hedz writes:

When my 2 year old threw a tantrum like this, I did what any normal sane parent would do: I IGNORED THEM......
December 10, 2008

7:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

JimmyTheSaint writes:

I'm not doubting that the bible poached a lot of it's stories on events that really happened. But the socalled 'miracles' aren't anywhere near being proven. And I guarantee you I'm 1000% more well-read in Christian theology/mythology than you (3 years Moody Bible Institute, an assistant pastorship, and I've read everything from Watchman Nee and Oswald Sanders (who I respect) to the modern-day charlatans like Josh McDowell and Oral Roberts.)

But believe what you like. I do. But if that little book were actually true, I'd be dead. Half dozen places in the OT talk about the penalty for mocking god to be death.

Mock, mock, mock.

Still here. Fables.

Wanna read something good? Try "The Power of Myth" by Joseph Campbell, in case you ever want to know where nearly all the bible stories are stolen from (virgin birth--not a bible story. 3-day resurrection? Not an original. Great floods? Not original. The 10 plagues? Not original. Parting the seas? Not original. All poached from other sources that pre-date the bible.
December 10, 2008

7:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

I was wondering why Sen. Larry Craig was in today....
December 10, 2008

7:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Beergut writes:

So if I was gay I would leave my customer high and dry today? Wouldn't that teach my customers they can't count on a gay person to fulfill their contractual obligations? I understand the point; but I don't need to loose some of my co-workers to come to that understanding. And the point is going pass over the bigots heads.

Where is the Denver LGBT center? Be glad to donate some food and money, even I don't support this odd event.
December 10, 2008

8:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

WhadUsay writes:

Colorado127 please don't pass judgment.

You write: "They have never had to fear for their job, their safety, their security, their rights, or even their life."

You've got a lot of nerve. There are many people who fear for their job, their safety and security and their rights who are not gay or lesbian, bi-sexual or transgender.

Can you tell a Jew or a Black person (sorry, not meant to offend anyone) that they have never had any of these fears? We all have fears, we all have hardships.

Protest peacefully, work for equality, be politically active, run for office to change the laws, be mindful of others, be respectful. If everyone practiced these things this world would be a much better place.
December 10, 2008

8:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

nativegirl writes:

I support any protest that keeps people off the roads.

Can tomorrow be "slow drivers in the left lane" protest day??? Please?????
December 10, 2008

8:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

fencergal writes:

Will the "Ellen" show be on today?
December 10, 2008

8:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Hey, mxRider, I really am SICK today. No really, it's a virus, I'm not 'calling in gay'!
December 10, 2008

8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

toocool writes:

"Much Ado About Nothing"
December 10, 2008

8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

Well then IF you can call in GAY or call in Straight I want to call in MEXICAN. I'm going to Bar-B-QUE my beans and roast my chile.
December 10, 2008

8:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

CrazyDogOwner writes:

Go ahead and call in.....

Just be sure to think of your fellow co-workers and friends who are suffering because they lost their jobs because of this economy.

If you have any decency, you will be checking on those who are suffering without a job - see the part of the story regarding community service.

Keep waving your banner and setting those golden examples for society, will ya ?
December 10, 2008

8:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies, me too! I forgot about the significance of calling in today. Maybe I need to drag my butt in to work. I don't appreciate the gays putting this hardship on me.
December 10, 2008

9:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

Crazy Dog, down boy! down boy! its just a joke.
December 10, 2008

9:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

mrwiizrd writes:

"WhadUsay writes:

Protest peacefully, work for equality, be politically active, run for office to change the laws, be mindful of others, be respectful. If everyone practiced these things this world would be a much better place."

Very well said.
December 10, 2008

9:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

fishtanksamurai writes:

Here is an idea...call in "curious", then sleep in and go in to work at noon.
December 10, 2008

9:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

All of you people who are anti-gay are absolutely no different than the people that were against integration and mixed marriages. Time has shown that you bigots were wrong about blacks and the same will happen with gays. A few years from now it will be a non-issue.
December 10, 2008

9:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

JimmyTheSaint writes: "But if that little book were actually true, I'd be dead. Half dozen places in the OT talk about the penalty for mocking god to be death. Mock, mock, mock. Still here. Fables."

JimmyTheSaint (funny, for a guy who pisses on the beliefs of many people here - chooses to use "TheSaint" in his handle) -

Ever consider that maybe God loves you enough to spare your life to reconsider? He does the same for everyone, and God works on His time, not yours. I'm surprised you never came across the passage about how God "desires that none be lost" in your 1000% superiority over everyone else.
December 10, 2008

9:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

That's good to know Heidi; if you were to call in gay there would be many broken hearts.

Actually I am really at work, and by coincidence there are only four of us in the office out of the usual nine. One person has already inquired as to where everyone is, and I just matter-of-factly replied that it was National Call In Gay Day. Heh heh. I'll bet you have equally kind and considerate co-workers ;-)
December 10, 2008

9:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

CrazyDogOwner writes:

Steph,

Who cares with whom anyone sleeps with - it's your body ... it's your consequences regardless of orientation.

I have a serious hangup with this protest in light of seeing 20-year colleagues being axed because of downsizing.

This is not the time to make a political statement in this fashion. I moved here from Atlanta, and trust me ... I have seen the real protests in Piedmont Park.

For those of you who lay out of work for something this petty, then I hope you lose your job.
December 10, 2008

9:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies,
There may also be many new hopefuls! I may have to call my boss back and tell him there is no hidden agenda.
December 10, 2008

9:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

SnowChuck writes:

Tis the season for packing fudge. I'm sure the homos will enjoy the day off!
December 10, 2008

9:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

SlouchingTowardBoulder writes:

How about heteros going a year without going to any theatrical productions. Think gays would notice?

(15 Broadway Shows to get Ax) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...
December 10, 2008

9:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

timpatico writes:

Man these people bother the hell out of me. Nonstop, on your face, "IM GAY, ACCEPT ME". Why don't all of you Gays shut your meat hole, and watch the magic happen?
December 10, 2008

9:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

mxRider, I may have to. I don't appreciate this one bit!
December 10, 2008

9:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

Hey this kind of reminds of the movie "A Day Without a Mexican".
December 10, 2008

9:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
"All of you people who are anti-gay are absolutely no different than the people that were against integration and mixed marriages. Time has shown that you bigots were wrong about blacks and the same will happen with gays. A few years from now it will be a non-issue".
You are wrong. There is a big difference between integration and mixed marriages and gays. That is like comparing apples and oranges and you know it. And no, us straights don't have to accept your lifestyle. I can respect you as a person, but not as a gay.
December 10, 2008

9:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Geez, CrazyDogOwner. It's not petty to the people that are protesting. However, I personally don't agree with this "call in gay" protest as I don't think it's going to help.

I just hope you would take a moment and think about how you would feel if every magazine, tv show, movie, commercial, etc. was gay and that you were in a hetero minority from the day you were born. It's much more open in the media now when it was when I was growing up in the 70s, and that's a good thing but we still have a way to go.

Either way, gay children have a harder time because even though they know they are "different," they are not old enough to figure it out and accept themselves as a good person instead of a freak that's bound for Hell. Believe me, it can take years to repair this low self-esteem (if, in fact, in can be fixed - many times we are working this problem out through our adult lives).

BTW, how would you treat a child of yours that was born gay?

Like everyone else, there are good and bad gay people, as there are good and bad Christians, African Americans, Caucasians, etc. Please don't focus on just the bad ones.

Again, I think this protest is not well-thought out and I hope that others will think the above facts out before they protest like you and some of the others on these comments.

I'm aware that I probably won't change anybody's mind with my comments but maybe someone will stop and think for a second. That's all I ask.
December 10, 2008

9:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

"You are wrong. There is a big difference between integration and mixed marriages and gays. That is like comparing apples and oranges and you know it."

Elkman, what exactly is the big difference? Would be interested to know.
December 10, 2008

9:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
Duh. Lets see, might have something to do with one man and one woman vs two men or two women? Integrated marriage is totally different than gay marriage as it involves one man and one woman. The difference is night and day.
December 10, 2008

9:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

"All of you people who are anti-gay are absolutely no different than the people that were against integration and mixed marriages. Time has shown that you bigots were wrong about blacks and the same will happen with gays. A few years from now it will be a non-issue".

Here we go again, if you are not onboard the homo agenda you are a BIGOT. There is no comparison to interracial marriage and being gay. A black person cannot hide their color, gays can shut up and quit rubbing it in everyones faces.

Good humor on here this morning.
December 10, 2008

10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Love is not different between two men or a man and a woman. The same feelings are there: the desire to meet someone, pledge to spend their life together, maybe start a family, attend PTA meetings, find joy in your child's face when you take him/her to Disneyland, make a great christmas for your children, etc.

Of course, this also includes the not-great parts of marriage: having to deal with in-laws, marital squabbles, fighting over finances, being there for your partner when sickness or death occur.

Guess what? It's the exact same as Hetero marriage. Just because the sexes are the same doesn't mean the feelings are any different. We are all human beings.
December 10, 2008

10:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

It's a great idea. We also need National Call-In:
Pro-choice Day;
Pro-Life Day;
Pro-Diversity Day;
Anti-Affirmative Action Day;
Anti-Animal Cruelty Day;
Anti-Animal Rights Day;
Carnivore Day;
Vegetarian Day;
Change Your Bulbs to Compact Fluorescents and Key Somebody's SUV Day, and well, you get the idea.

Then there would be my particular call-in-day: National Call-In to Demand That Employers Give Paid Time Off to Attend Blues Festivals Day. There's a kind of a synergy there you see, taking a day off to demand more time off ;-)
December 10, 2008

10:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
Way to avoid the question, which, by the way you asked. I gave my answer, where is yours? No, again you are wrong. Gay marriage is not the same as hetro marriage. You can wish it all you want, but it just ain't so Joe. Quit pi-sing down everyone's back and tell us that its raining. We know the difference.
December 10, 2008

10:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Sheepherder. If you hate a group of people because of who they are, then you are bigoted against that group.

No one should have to hide who they naturally are and I hope you never have any gay children.
December 10, 2008

10:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Elkman, what question did I not answer for you?
December 10, 2008

10:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

"Gay marriage is not the same as hetro marriage. You can wish it all you want, but it just ain't so Joe."

Why exactly isn't it? Can you answer that question for me with facts that aren't connected to your personal feelings?
December 10, 2008

10:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

SnowChuck writes:

Bla bla bla. Yeah i'm sure they do care for each other. My problem is when people argue that people are born gay. Human beings are animals; animals' instinct is to mate with the other sex. You don't see two gay pronghorn trying to procreate. It's unnatural, and since humans have social choices, they sometimes stray the other way for some reason. Wow, and the thought of having two gay dads just seems ridiculous and unfair to a child.
December 10, 2008

10:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
"Elkman, what exactly is the big difference?"
Remember now?
Again, people are not against you, just what you practice. That would be homesexual behavior. You are asking people to accept that behavior. You are asking people to approve it. Quit crying like a little girl and act like an adult. Maybe more people would tolerate you.
December 10, 2008

10:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

tjpatriot writes:

My wife didn't feel too good this morning (no, REALLY, chills and headache). If she would have called in sick today, she never would have been able to live it down at her work.

That would have been hilarious...
December 10, 2008

10:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
Duh once again. The answer to your silly question is that gays cannot procreate. that is a fact. Now, give me one FACT that gay marriage is the same as hetro marriage. This should be interesting, but do not base it on "personal feelings".
December 10, 2008

10:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Tell me SnowChuck. When did you make the choice to be hetero? When did you DECIDE to feel attraction to a person of the opposite sex? Could ANYTHING (maybe millions of dollars, for example) be able to convert you into feeling attraction to other men? Probably not. Neither would that work for gay people.

You do know, don't you, that most people's personality (including sexual orientation) are pretty well set by the age of 3. If you were to meet a gay child, you would see this.
December 10, 2008

10:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

Fine. I wasn't going to buy new drapes that day anyway. So if an employee of mine calls in gay, can I fire him? How about "Call in straight" day? I bet I could fire him without repercussions.
December 10, 2008

10:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

jd writes:

jimmythesaint - Well, you are not as well read as you think you are and one reason is that you already believe a falsehood and all you do is try to continue to prove that falsehood, just like the Pharisees.
December 10, 2008

10:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Steph,

I hate pedophiles and criminals too, does that make me a bigot? I'm sure NAMBLA and the ACLU would say so, but I'm good with that.

I'm not against gays, just to set you straight (no pun intended). I just cant stand it when people try to force their agenda on the American public, then call you a name if you don't agree.

And by the way, most pedophiles now claim "they were born that way" too.
December 10, 2008

10:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

And before I get jumped on, I am not comparing gays to pedophiles...just making a point.
December 10, 2008

10:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

I already answered your question elkman. Those statements I made are true. But if I have to reiterate: the feelings of gay people in love are the same as two heteros in love.

According to you, if a man and a woman decide to get married but not have children (procreate), then they are unnatural as well. Correct? What about two married gay people who adopt children that others won't take and raise them as their own? Give the child a home, 3 meals, education, and love that others don't want to give to some of these children.

It's very sad that there are people on here that are so full of hate and, yes, fear over gay people.

That's all I'm going to say on this subject. We have already actually won the social war we're fighting (gay marriage will be acceptable to most people over the next few years) and the younger generations that are now growing up will have much less trouble dealing with it.

And the best thing? When this does happen, and it will, you will remember what I said.

Thanks folks.
December 10, 2008

10:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

sheepherder:
"I just cant stand it when people try to force their agenda on the American public, then call you a name if you don't agree."
Here, here! You could not be more correct!
December 10, 2008

10:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

It's really not necessary to debate homosexual rights or marriage here; just whether or not it is appropriate to call in sick as a method of raising awareness regarding one's identity.

I say no. I can see calling in sick if it is a form of protest against one's employer, but not just to raise awareness about your own identity. If this is your objective just tell your co-workers, without cheating or inconveniencing your employer!
December 10, 2008

10:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

SnowChuck writes:

Well, I might drop the soap for a million dollars. All I'm saying is that I just can't accept that humans are born gay. With the scientific complexities of life and the interaction between all the physiological systems within the human body, it is just too out-of-place that human beings are the only animals that want to hook up with the same sex.
December 10, 2008

10:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

RUKidding writes:

Wow, all the haters are out in full force today. Hey, did you see Obama want's to improve our image with the Muslims? Can't wait to read your comments on that thread when you are all done gay bashing over here.
December 10, 2008

10:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
"According to you, if a man and a woman decide to get married but not have children (procreate), then they are unnatural as well. Correct?"
Do not even attempt to make that comparrison. It is in no way unnatural if herto people choose not to have children. If they decide not to have children, that is their concern. The problem with you is that you want to twist everything to fit your own agenda. For the record, men and women are on this planet to procreate. Some can, some cannot. Gays cannot, period. End of conversation. You still don't get it, do you? The more you try to force your agenda down peoples' throats, the more trouble you will have. I don not hate you, just your behavior. How many times do you need to be told?
December 10, 2008

10:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

RUKidding
So, if you don't agree with the gay issue, you are gay bashing? Get a life. Just because I don't agree with their behavior, I am a basher? You don't even have a clue, do you?
December 10, 2008

10:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

Oddly, all the people here who are complaining that gay people are forcing their agendas onto a disinterested public voluntarily opened this article, read it, and then took the time to comment on it. If you don't want to hear from gay people, why did you read an article about them?! Are all of you closeted?
December 10, 2008

10:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

What is odd about reading the news? I opened it because I wanted to see what the article said. Then, the gay community came out if force trying to vindicate their behavior. Thats all.
December 10, 2008

10:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

sldfkd writes:

more than anything else, this reminds me of South Park's episode where the Canadians go on strike and no one notices. I bet that's whats going to happen here.
December 10, 2008

10:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

davies: can we have National Lowrider Day and National Picking in the Field Day added to your list?
December 10, 2008

10:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Steph,

I've been watching your debate and you've done a very creditable job, but I do want to call you on one thing. You argue that gays should be treated equally, but you use an example that implies gays are superior in their compassion and/or benevolence.You said:

"What about two married gay people who adopt children that others won't take and raise them as their own? Give the child a home, 3 meals, education, and love that others don't want to give to some of these children."

Now truth be told, you must admit that you want EQUAL child adoption rights for gay couples, right? Virtually all advocates of gay adoption would not be satisfied if gays were only allowed to adopt kids that other couples have rejected, so don't use this to spin your argument in the best possible light. Truthfully, it does not seem logical to assume that gays are going to be any more inclined to adopt developmentally disabled or unhealthy or oppositional behavior kids, than hetero couples. Not if the gay couples have the equal adoption rights that you presumably support.
December 10, 2008

11:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

MileHighPatriot writes:

Some gay people think they are their own ethnicity... however, they are not. They're just people who like to live differently, yet demand extra rights, and unlimited attention. They are beyond childish. Like I said, "some" gay people are like this. The ones I know don't act like this. They just want to be left alone and "do" whoever they want to... which is A reason people turn to that type of lifestyle in the first place.
December 10, 2008

11:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies @ 10:36....very well said!
December 10, 2008

11:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

tjpatriot writes:

Let's face it, the most tread upon and discriminated people on earth are those who are Stupid.

So, when is "National Call In Stupid" day?
December 10, 2008

11:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

SlouchingTowardBoulder writes:

Gender orientation is not the same as race; it is not a "protected class" under the U.S. Constitution, 14th amendment or how either of those has been interpreted by constitutional law.
December 10, 2008

11:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Elkman-- "elkman writes: What is odd about reading the news? I opened it because I wanted to see what the article said. Then, the gay community came out if force trying to vindicate their behavior. Thats all."

I just think it's odd you telling one group of people to mind their own business, and you do it by getting into their business. Who cares if gay people take a sick day today. Does it affect you? Is anyone forcing you to be gay? Why does reading a small article about a small group of people that affects you in no way whatsoever piss you off so much?

Again.... just seems kind of strange. Most straight people, including me, just read the article because the headline was funny, find the whole concept of "Call in Gay" Day kind of over the top, and then go "well, whatever makes them happy". What I'm curious about is all of the supposedly straight people commenting here who have had their days ruined by this. It's pretty funny. Maybe they should re-name it "Piss Off Elkman For No Reason Day".
December 10, 2008

11:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

we're still seeing some confusion from the far religious right about the fact that being born gay is no different than being born black or female.

at this point, considering all the time spent debunking this myth, one would have to conclude that anyone still spouting such crap is willful ignorance personified, no?
December 10, 2008

11:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

FCCG writes:

Steph,

Unfortunately, I don't think elkman is being helpful. I will try. From a legal standpoint, interracial and same sex marriage are different insofar as race and gender are different. The law has always agreed that there are differences between male and female and a certain amount of "discrimination" (to use just one word) is appropriate when considering the two groups. For instance it is probably in everyone's best interest to say that it is legal for there to be a requirement that a men's room attendant be a man, and so on. Race simply does not work the same way.

From a philosophical standpoint, I might agree that the distinction gets harder, but I would ask you to consider the following: In perhaps the most homosexual-friendly society ever, ancient Sparta (where homosexuality was required of a large portion of the population) marriage was still recognized as a heterosexual arraignment as society sees it today. This is true of all other homosexual-friendly societies (that I'm aware of) throughout history. Also, I remember not more than ten years ago, the predominant opinion within the gay community seemed to have been that marriage was a hetero-normative idea that should be avoided, so what happened? To me, it seems that in the space of less than a decade against the entirety of western history( and probably eastern history too, although I don't know much of that) there has been an effort to manufacture a this idea of gay marriage, which does not have a very good philosophical basis in my opinion.
December 10, 2008

11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

FYI for Steph
Here is some interesting FACTS, by Paul Cameron, Ph. D. who is the chairman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs.
Just the facts mam
1. No researcher has found provable biological or genitic differences between hererosexuals and homosexuals that werent' caused by behavior.
2. People tend to believe that their sexual desires and behaviors are learned.
3. Older homosexuals often approach the young
4. Early homosexual experiences influence adult patterns of behavior.
5. Sexual conduct is influenced by cultural factors
6. Many change their sexual preferences
7. There are many ex-homosexuals
Enough facts? Especially number 3.
Dr. Cameron also states: "Homosexual behavior can be changed. He also states: Associations are all-important. Anyone who wants to abstain from homosexual behavior should avoid the company of practicint homosexuals.
Those are just some of the facts, mam.
December 10, 2008

11:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

RUKidding writes:

Elkman-My bad, there is no bashing going on, sorry about that. I do not have a clue. Thanks to people like you who are better than everyone else to keep Society in line. Keep up the good work!

"Bashing is a harsh, gratuitous, predjudicial attack on a person, group or subject. Literally, bashing is a term meaning to hit or, colloquially, to assault but when it is used as a suffix, or in conjunction with a noun indicating the subject being attacked, it is normally used to imply a sense of uncompromising vehemence and bigotry about the assailant."
December 10, 2008

11:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Davies, I apologize if that 's how my comments sounded. I was just trying to state that most gay couples who have been able to adopt have better chances adopting children that others don't want to adopt. It's kind of like, "well, I guess it might be better to put them in a gay home than out on the street." It's quite the opposite of what I was trying to say. I think they believe that sending the child to gay parents is the last resort with a belief that "well, we can't do anything with the child and no hetero couple will have them so let's dump the child into a gay family, it's only marginally better that throwing them out on the street."

I hope this answered your concerns. Let me know if it didn't.

Most adoption agencies are more likely to let a hetero couple adopt a child because they think it will be a healthier family unit.
December 10, 2008

11:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Want a laugh? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCUJ1n... , I couldn't stop laughing!
December 10, 2008

11:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Sorry hhtp:www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCUJ1nTIFE
December 10, 2008

11:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

One more try http://youtube.com/watch?v=uCUJ1nTIFE
December 10, 2008

11:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

and no, elkman, et al...fundies aren't a good source of information on the genetic basis for homosexuality.

garbage in, garbage out.

we always get to the same place on this issue folks....those who refuse to acknowledge inconvenient facts and those who embrace them.

as always....your beliefs in the supernatural are NEVER justification for discrimination.

for the record....i would no more support discrimination against those of who hold such beliefs as i would discrimination against any other group.
December 10, 2008

11:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Elkman, your "facts" are from a very rigid right-wing christian doctor. That's hardly supports your side. Do you really think this Dr. went into his studies with a completely unbiased mind, and if he did, why would he be working at the Family Research Institute? Do you honestly believe that this "study" would be supported by that Church if it showed that they were wrong?

Your argument is no different than me trying to pursuade you to listen to facts that come from a multi-million gay corporation that needs to keep believers so they can keep making money.

If you do some easy internet search and find info that's not connected to a church, then I'd like to read it.
December 10, 2008

11:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

Elkman.... please cite a better source.

Facts about Dr. Cameron:

On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists" by the APA Board of Directors.5 Cameron has posted an elaborate argument about his expulsion from APA on his website, claiming that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership. Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron's claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States (and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such lengths to disassociate itself from one individual.

At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it "formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality."6

In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism" and noted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research."7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of "critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron."
December 10, 2008

11:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

Dr. Cameron, cont'd.

"
At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee's report and passed the following resolution:

The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, "The Paul Cameron Case," is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron's frequent lecture and media appearances."8

In August, 1996, the Canadian Psychological Association adopted the following policy statement:
The Canadian Psychological Association takes the position that Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism and thus, it formally disassociates itself from the representation and interpretations of scientific literature in his writings and public statements on sexuality.

Cameron's credibility was also questioned outside of academia. In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade (1985), Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dallas referred to "Cameron's sworn statement that 'homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,'" and concluded that "Dr. Paul Cameron...has himself made misrepresentations to this Court" and that "There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron" (p.536).9
December 10, 2008

11:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Thanks Steph.

You're a fighter without being condescending or demeaning, and I respect what you have to say.
December 10, 2008

11:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

ColoradanReadingFromNY writes:

What page of the history books will you find yourself on in the future?
After enough time has passed, Civil Rights struggles will all be part of a large section in history books. Will you be on the page with the fire hoses and the German Shepards? Or will you be on the page with the SNCC advocates and those who marched along side MLK?
This is the civil rights struggle of our generation, and I am thankful to be part of the growing youth population who detests the hatred espoused by many of our elders. I look forward to a future of true equality, when all minorities are truly represented and protected by our government.
December 10, 2008

11:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

PaleoConservative writes:

I tried to find an interior decorator today, but my search was fruitless.
December 10, 2008

11:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

B300 writes:

There sure seems to be a lot of talk about this issue. Typically people don't harp on a subject like this, the angles of discussion are incredible. Its too bad gay people cant just get help for their disorder and know and understand there is something wrong with the way they think. I'm not perfect, but it seems obvious to me. These guy's are like little kids that don't get their way. It is kind of pathetic. Stop crying and get help! DANG!!!
December 10, 2008

11:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

mxRider. Clearly she was born bi-sexual unless you think changing someone's attraction to their own sex is easy and done on a whim.

BTW, there are a lot of gay or bisexual men who have married women and raised families in the hope that the hetero lifestyle will "change" them. It doesn't and unfortunately the spouse and children can suffer although I personally know a man who did this and he's the greatest father you'll ever meet. He teaches his son and daughter to be tolerant and that they're loved and special.

Thanks Davies. I used to be much more incendiary but figured that wasn't helping. Doubt if being nice is going to help much either, but...
December 10, 2008

11:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

"Its too bad gay people cant just get help for their disorder and know and understand there is something wrong with the way they think"

Maybe you should shine the mirror on yourself first.
December 10, 2008

12:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

mxRider. I feel bad for your exwife and her childhood. I, personally, don't know how abuse affects a person's sexual orientation so I don't know what to say, except I hope life is better for her now.

It would be interesting to know when she first recognized bisexual feelings within herself but that's her business and yours.

Best of luck to her.
December 10, 2008

12:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

mxRider: I think it's not as black/white hetero/homo as many people usually make it out to be.

Think of a scale from 1 to 10, with the majority being hetero and 1s or 2s on the scale. Then there's a minority who are homosexual/9s or 10s. But there are also some like your ex-wife (and mine!), who maybe are a 4 or 5 and are able to live an entire life straight, but who can also develop a sexual relationship with someone of their own sex if moved to do so.

Then there are the 'closet gays' who maybe are 6s or 7s who can function in a hetero marriage for a long while, but finally bust out and go the other way later in life. They are the ones who 'discover' they are gay.

For me, this also explains why a preacher can condemn homosexuality as morally wrong and say it is just giving in to temptation, which I find hard to understand when I have experienced no such temptation myself. The preacher may be somewhere in the middle where he is tempted by the same sex but he resists, and he assumes that others are like him, when many or most of us actually feel no such temptation.
December 10, 2008

12:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Good post, Davies.
December 10, 2008

12:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Why should a person forsake a belief in God? If I choose to honor His law it is my choice. If the majority choose not to recognize homosexuality when voting, it is their choice. So instead it's okay and acceptable to make mockery of my belief, and call names. Yet if I mock you, call you names, it's wrong and laws are evolving to punish. So when this doesn't work convincing the majority, we start getting told it's a matter of civil rights. Yet in California, the minority communities that sought civil rights, soundly rejected the homosexual lifestyle. Could it be they also fear God, or do they just not approve or find it desirable? Some years ago, Mt Olivet was desecrated by gay activists, My church was splattered in red dye. It was a great lesson I learned about tolerance for acts the majority do not approve of regardless of race, religion, or political affiliation. I guess the church is perhaps a biggest visable target, but many people that have no religious beliefs reject homosexuality. I know many who supported civil rights, who have no religious affiliation, who don't approve of homosexuality. Surely the Bible isn't the sole reason for homosexuality being taboo, many governments have existed that not only persecuted the Bible's many believers, but cast homosexuals in right along with the Christian's as being undesirable. Why then is there this overriding nature in humanity to view homosexuality as undesirable throughout the majority of civilizations? I am not trying to prove a point as much as I want to know why most of the civilizations except a few, regardless of religious beliefs, found homosexuality to be undesirable? What made it taboo for centuries since the recorded history of mankind? I never could figure that out. I don't know if the gay community can turn the majority of votes in America by attacking the church alone; I think the taboo goes much deeper than religion.
December 10, 2008

12:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

Did any one else find it amusing that the advertising banner at the top of this story was for "The Nutcracker"?
December 10, 2008

12:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Thanks Steph.

Sorry to be tacky now, but I notice someone asked for the first post to be removed, but what about the 9:29 by SnowChuck? Do I have to explain it to you peeps? Hint: it has to do with an@l sex.
December 10, 2008

12:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Well, as usual, facts get ignored. Where are all your facts, people? Disregard my source and not provide one site or fact to dispute mine. Way to go. And Steph: "Clearly she was born bi-sexual unless you think changing someone's attraction to their own sex is easy and done on a whim". You can really say that without knowing anything more about her? You really are amazing. And jay: not worth the keystroke again. Just because a gay says something does not make it the truth.
December 10, 2008

12:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

"..but many people that have no religious beliefs reject homosexuality"

Yes, and EVEN MORE people that have no religious beliefs support it.

BTW, it wasn't taboo for centuries; remember the Greeks and Romans. You are right, however, whether you intended to or not, to state that homosexuality has been around for centuries.

My belief regarding the "undiserability" of homosexualty came about (and is still coming about) from the history of religion. From the beginning of time (read the History of God, if you're interested) religion has always been a patriarchal concept: Men do the deciding and women support them in a lesser role. Naturally, it would be a threat to their set-up if there were men who showed feminine traits who were not able or interested to fit the traditional male role and I think that's where the "undesireability" comes from.

The role of religion these days is not so very different, except we don't burn heretics or undesireables as much as some of you would probably support that.

As a side point, how many heterosexual men get off on female/female action in their porn?
December 10, 2008

12:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Zim
I am not telling other people what there business is. If you assumed that, you are wrong. I am simply stating my opinions. Got a problem, get a tissue. No where have I told you or any one else what they should do. If you don't like opinions, don't read the blogs.
December 10, 2008

12:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

zim
Where are your facts? Do you have a web site that contradicts what I posted? Seem to be long on words and short on facts. I am waiting, so I can completely discredit your source.
December 10, 2008

12:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

"Clearly she was born bi-sexual unless you think changing someone's attraction to their own sex is easy and done on a whim". You can really say that without knowing anything more about her?

If you read the rest of my post you would see that I said I don't know a lot about how childhood abuse affects sexual orientation and that it was between her and her ex-husband.

well, let's see. She was married to a man and then had a relationship with a women. She's bisexual. What part do you not understand?
December 10, 2008

12:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

"Clearly she was born bi-sexual unless you think changing someone's attraction to their own sex is easy and done on a whim".
That part.
December 10, 2008

12:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

B300 writes:

Steph, like I said before, I may not be perfect, but I think I know right from wrong! It doesn't make sense to be like that. No logic, with people like that soon the human race would fall into extinction! DUH! But you are more than welcome to feel how you choose, right or wrong!
December 10, 2008

12:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

elkman, can you tell us at what age you chose to be heterosexual?
December 10, 2008

12:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
so, which one of these facts can you disprove?
1. No researcher has found provable biological or genitic differences between hererosexuals and homosexuals that werent' caused by behavior.
2. People tend to believe that their sexual desires and behaviors are learned.
3. Older homosexuals often approach the young
4. Early homosexual experiences influence adult patterns of behavior.
5. Sexual conduct is influenced by cultural factors
6. Many change their sexual preferences
7. There are many ex-homosexuals
December 10, 2008

12:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

No Steph, when I look at native peoples, with no Biblical beliefs, I find very little homosexuality. American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, African Tribes, I don't see a homosexuality being abundantly practiced in their history prior to biblical exposure. Roman, Greeks, yes, they are exceptions. Yet again, the majority of civilizations regardless of whether Biblical believers or not, do not have a history of engaging in this belief. Why?
December 10, 2008

12:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

I can certaintly tell you at what age that I decided not to be homosexual! Would that help?
December 10, 2008

12:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

B300. You're worrying about nothing. What are the chances that gays are going to take over the world and because of their inability to reproduce cause the "human race to fall into extinction?" As a matter of fact, the world is getting so overpopulated, maybe gays exist nowadays to curb the population growth.

None of us are perfect, B300, but "right and wrong" are subjective. Just read all the different viewpoints in these comments.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion as we all are. I'm on here to defend myself as a gay person. Why are you and elkman still on here?
December 10, 2008

12:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

jay
Can you tell me at what age you decided not to be a hetrosexual?
December 10, 2008

12:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"Why should a person forsake a belief in God? If I choose to honor His law it is my choice"

and no one is asking you to do differently, louie. what you don't have the right to do, however, is discriminate against other americans.

this isn't a hard concept folks.

elkman, stop running. i'm a heterosexual male, happily married and about to have a child.

nice try though.

you going to answer the question, huckleberry?
December 10, 2008

12:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

Elkman: For starters, you can go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Cam...

Also, all of your facts have been disproven by the American Psychological Association. In fact, the APA itself stopped classifying it as a disorder as long ago as 1974. Any clinical psychologist will dispute your facts-- go through the phone book and call one and ask.

RE: Elkman-- "I am not telling other people what there business is. If you assumed that, you are wrong. I am simply stating my opinions. Got a problem, get a tissue. No where have I told you or any one else what they should do. If you don't like opinions, don't read the blogs."

I don't mind opinions that are educated. Yours are abysmally ignorant and damaging (such as "Older homosexuals often approach the young". As a matter of fact, pedophiles are overwhelming classified as heterosexual.)

Do you have any other supporting references to your facts other than Dr. Paul Cameron, who has already been disreputed by mainstream psychology?
December 10, 2008

12:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
Did not know that this was a "homosexual blog site only". I am here to view my opinions. Obviously you have a problem with anyone who disagrees with you. All your posts prove one thing to me. You have a gay agenda and want to validate your belief to others. Fine. You have every right. And I have every right to disagree with you. I know many gay people. The majority of them do not wear it on the sleeves on their shirt like a trophy. It is people such as your self that I have a problem with. Specifically because you chose to be different and want the rest of the world to approve. Count me out.
December 10, 2008

12:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"I have every right to disagree with you."

of course you do, huckleberry, but what you don't have the right to do is discriminate against fellow americans because of gender, race or sexual orientation.

i'm just not sure how equal rights for gays affects you in any way.

can you share that with us?
December 10, 2008

12:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

JWDen writes:

Hey, Elkman - I really don't think I, or any other gay man or woman, wants/needs/requires/requests your approval. What I want is equal rights. Period. And I'll get them through the courts just like other minorities have had to do. Whether or not you approve is immaterial.
December 10, 2008

1 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

So what you're telling me JAY, is the majority doesn't have a right to vote and choose the laws that govern the nation. All people, all faiths, all colors, all genders, don't have a right to define marriage is what you're saying JAY? I think I should be able to allow my belief to be a part of my choice, especially when voting.
December 10, 2008

1:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

wikipedia?
Great source. You mean the source where anyone and everyone can go and change anything that they want to? Very believable. "Also, all of your facts have been disproven by the American Psychological Association." Not true and you know it. Environment has no bearing on sexuality. Show me just one source that says that is doesn't.
It is truly interesting that when people cannot prove their case, they begin to call other people ignorant. Much like young children, calling others names.
December 10, 2008

1:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

LOUIE writes:

No Steph, when I look at native peoples, with no Biblical beliefs, I find very little homosexuality. American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, African Tribes, I don't see a homosexuality being abundantly practiced in their history prior to biblical exposure

Louie, how much (maybe a percentage) homosexuality did you find and how did you research this?

"No researcher has found provable biological or genitic differences between hererosexuals and homosexuals that werent' caused by behavior."

You must not have read that back in the early 70s the American Psychiatric Association took "homosexuality" off of its list of disorders when they determined it was wired in the genes since birth.

2. People tend to believe that their sexual desires and behaviors are learned.

Who are these people, how many of them are there, and where did they get the information that made them "tend to believe?"

3. Older homosexuals often approach the young.

A very small percentage of gays are pedophiles. The overwhelming majority of pedophiles are hetero. Look it up and you'll be surprised.

4. Early homosexual experiences influence adult patterns of behavior.

This can be very true. If a gay child experiments with homosexuality in his youth and it feels correct and right to him (not to mention the fact that he/she actually "got off" with someone of the same sex, then they can get a sense of who they are.

If some straight child was approached and maybe even fiddled with by a gay child, I really don't think the straight child is going to "become gay." He may beat the kid up and call him names or he may just not be interested. Hopefully he won't become a bully name-caller when he grows up.

5. Sexual conduct is influenced by cultural factors

Sure, gay children seeing positive role models on tv and the media will help that child think better of himself. The same child watching some preacher screaming at him that he is less than human and going to hell will influence the child as well by, probably, shoving him into the closet of shame.

6. Many change their sexual preferences

There is absolutely no proof of this outside of religious studies. When science can prove this, I'll listen.

7. There are many ex-homosexuals

See answer to 6 above.
December 10, 2008

1:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

JWDen writes:

Louie writes:

No Steph, when I look at native peoples, with no Biblical beliefs, I find very little homosexuality. American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, African Tribes, I don't see a homosexuality being abundantly practiced in their history prior to biblical exposure.

Mmmmm - try googling "berdache" or "two-spirit," Louie. You'll find American Indians not only revered the gay members of their tribe, but they found them to be healers and keepers of the shamanistic tradition.
December 10, 2008

1:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

One other though Jay, just because you married, have a kid on the way doesn't mean squat concerning your sexuality, ask Ted Haggard. It took a 30 day miracle cure to get him over being gay! LOL!
December 10, 2008

1:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

Elkman: "Great source. You mean the source where anyone and everyone can go and change anything that they want to? Very believable. "

Elkman, I linked there because all the bibliographical references are listed on that link. Use your brain and do a little legwork. We all can't spoon-feed you.

What source, again I must ask, do you have beside one right-wing whack job named Dr. Paul Cameron? Do you have ANY source not funded by religious studies?

RE: " 'Also, all of your facts have been disproven by the American Psychological Association.' Not true and you know it."

Absolutely true. Contact the APA yourself. What source do YOU have that disproves this? The APA does not consider homosexuality is a disorder. Fact. Prove me otherwise.

Information, Elkman..... embrace it.
December 10, 2008

1:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
All of the above are your personal feelings, supported by not one piece of evidence. The problem with all 7 facts that I presented, it that they all hit home.
Jay the jokester
You are just that. The court jester. On the blog to create disturbance, and offer nothing. But then, that is ususal and expected.
December 10, 2008

1:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

MxRider,
Fair enough, as long as you are not spreading misinformation, a la Elkman above. If you disagree, then I agree with you there is no problem saying so. I myself will never partake in a homosexual act, but conversely, I could care less if there are people who do. I'm only curious why there are so many out there who consider gay people so damn threatening.

Individuals like Elkman, who for example insinuate that homosexuals are more likely to assault children sexually, need to be disputed.
December 10, 2008

1:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"So what you're telling me JAY, is the majority doesn't have a right to vote and choose the laws that govern the nation."

completely inaccurate, louie, nice try.

what i'm telling you, louie, is that the majority in america never has the right to take away rights from the minority.

you seem like a fairly intelligent person...i'm surprised you're having difficulty understanding that.

"Louie is not discriminating and neither are most of the posters on here, they are simply disagreeing with the lifestyle. How is this discrimination? You may not agree with a religious persons lifestyle, is that considered discrimination?"

mxrider, you're apparently still confused about a major fact surrounding this issue. we're not talking about a "lifestyle". being gay isn't any more of a "lifestyle" than being a woman or black is a "lifestyle".

i don't support discrimination against anyone...including those who hold beliefs in the supernatural.

why...did you see anyone on this board advocating against equal rights for christians?

didn't think so...put down the dogma and THINK, people.
December 10, 2008

1:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

MBR693 writes:

JimmyTheSaint writes:

"But believe what you like. I do. But if that little book were actually true, I'd be dead. Half dozen places in the OT talk about the penalty for mocking god to be death."

I guess Moody failed you then. Otherwise you would have been taught that we are under Grace, and that while the Law is good in that it shows us our sins, we are not longer subject to the punishments required by the Leviticus Law.
December 10, 2008

1:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

gallegoi writes:

So with all the gays not being at work today, they are all here on this post. Why don't you all turn this into an everyday thing and stay home--which is where you all should be anyway.
December 10, 2008

1:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Elkman -- "Steph
All of the above are your personal feelings, supported by not one piece of evidence. The problem with all 7 facts that I presented, it that they all hit home."

Elkman, you keep disputing everyone else's facts (that, incidentally, have had bibliographical references to them), yet you yourself have not presented any sources except for one disreputed psychologist.

You haven't hit anything home, Elkman. In fact, outside of a foul ball, you haven't hit anything.
December 10, 2008

1:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

JWDen
Thats just it in a nutshell. You are seeking approval of the majority of people to approve of your behavior. I just happen to be in the majority. If you are not seeking approval, why the fuss?
December 10, 2008

1:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

elkman, can you tell us how you equate equal rights with the "approval of the majority"?
December 10, 2008

1:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

JWDen writes:

Because, Elkman, there is a difference between raising awareness and seeking approval. I guess the subtlety escapes you, huh? Not surprising.
December 10, 2008

1:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

jay
Can you tell me how you got out of grade school? Why are these two words used together almost all the time? homosexual, behavior
Could it be that behavior can be changed? Time for some truth. How many of you bloggers out there really believe that homosexuality is something that you are born with? If that is a fact, then no one can ever change the fact. Is that correct? I have read of many cases that tell a different story.
December 10, 2008

1:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

JWDen
You were not talking about raising awareness in you previous post. Just seeking approval. Rules changing?
December 10, 2008

1:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

Elkman,
From the APA's own website:

"Being Gay Is Just as Healthy as Being Straight

Evelyn Hooker's pioneering research debunked the popular myth that homosexuals are inherently less mentally healthy than heterosexuals, leading to significant changes in how psychology views and treats people who are gay.

Findings

In the 1950's, Dr. Evelyn Hooker studied 30 homosexual males and 30 heterosexual males recruited through community organizations. The two groups were matched for age, IQ, and education. None of the men were in therapy at the time of the study. Dr. Hooker administered three projective tests, which measure people's patterns of thoughts, attitudes, and emotions--the Rorschach, in which people describe what they see in abstract ink blots, the Thematic Apperception Test [TAT] and the Make-A-Picture-Story [MAPS] Test), in which people tell stories about different pictures. Unaware of each subject's sexual orientation, two independent Rorschach experts evaluated the men's overall adjustment using a 5-point scale. They classified two-thirds of the heterosexuals and two-thirds of the homosexuals in the three highest categories of adjustment. When asked to identify which Rorschach protocols were obtained from homosexuals, the experts could not distinguish respondents' sexual orientation at a level better than chance. A third expert used the TAT and MAPS protocols to evaluate the psychological adjustment of the men. As with the Rorschach responses, the adjustment ratings of the homosexual and heterosexuals did not differ significantly." Based on these findings, Dr. Hooker tentatively suggested that homosexuals were as psychologically normal as heterosexuals.

Significance

Hooker's work was the first to empirically test the assumption that gay men were mentally unhealthy and maladjusted. The fact that no differences were found between gay and straight participants sparked more research in this area and began to dismantle the myth that homosexual men and women are inherently unhealthy.

cont'd...
December 10, 2008

1:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

APA, cont'd...

Practical Application

In conjunction with other empirical results, this work led the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the DSM in 1973 (it had been listed as a sociopathic personality disorder). In 1975, the American Psychological Association publicly supported this move, stating that "homosexuality per se implies no impairment in judgment, reliability or general social and vocational capabilities…(and mental health professionals should) take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness long associated with homosexual orientation." Although prejudice and stigma still exist in society, this research has helped millions of gay men and women gain acceptance in the mental health community.

Cited Research

Hooker, E. (1957). The adjustment of the male overt homosexual. Journal of Projective Techniques, 21, 18-31.

Additional Sources

Bohan, J. S. (1996). Psychology and sexual orientation: Coming to terms. New York: Routledge.

American Psychological Association, May 28, 2003"
December 10, 2008

1:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Well Steph, I have yet in the course of all the many books I've read concerning civilizations to find it a pronounced part of their culture. Romans, Greeks and selected other civilizations yes. But historically I more often found it to be taboo regardless of religious beliefs. Some points you make are valid, Because a person is gay, doesn't make them a pedophile. I have gay friends of both genders that I have no problem leaving my children with, but they also have the honor to respect my beliefs. If you choose to teach your child about gay lifestyle, it is your choice, should I not respect your wish and treat your child accordingly? But let me firmly state, that doesn't mean I agree, nor that I will vote for gay marriage. It means I respect your choice. I don't expect you to vote for laws abolishing Sunday booze sales, I favor them. I don't think you'd desire my belief in God taught in a classroom, but I must also put up with evolution being the begining of creation although I disagree. But until the majority decides differently, I again respect their right to govern the will of the people. Will I still believe God created the universe, regardless of the majority casting my belief aside in public education? Yes. Would I like equal billing? Sure, but until the majority choose this, I must honor their vote. Should I attack and vandalize the school as the gays have done my church? No, I don't think so. Is it right for a christian to harass an abortion doctor? No, and I do not care for abortion. I respect the law, whether I agree or not. My knee will always bow to God and His law. In many ways I am not in the majority anymore with my belief, that's okay too. The schools are teaching my child things I don't approve of; they have no more clue to how we were created than the ones they accuse of being wrong. As far as research, all I ever had as a basis of my opinion has been books.
December 10, 2008

1:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Marshdale writes:

elkman; What was your choice day to be hetero? Did you wake up and decide on your 10th birthday that you liked girls? I know of no gay person who would choose a life of ridicule that people like you spew. Who would choose that? That is why the majority of gay people are born that way. It's not a choice. It is what it is. People like you who are so venemous must have closet issues of your own.
December 10, 2008

1:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Jay, if I follow your reasoning that the majority doesn't have the right to take away rights of the minority; why then isn't my belief in God getting equal billing as to the beginning of creation in public schools, since science has yet to answer this and offers up an equally unfounded belief?
December 10, 2008

1:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Show me one site that says that homosexual behavior is "normal". I want to see the word homosexual and normal together.
ZIM
"Evelyn Hooker's pioneering research debunked the popular myth that homosexuals are inherently less mentally healthy than heterosexuals, leading to significant changes in how psychology views and treats people who are gay"
Who said anything about "mental health". Who cares? This conversation has been about gays and their acceptance. Now you bring in mental health. Well, lets bring in physical health. Care to tell me how many gay men vs straight men are infected with aids? And before you answer. I want a percentage of straiht men with aids vs straighout without. Then I want a percentage of gay men with aids vs gay men without. Maybe you should not have brought up the health issue.
December 10, 2008

1:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: LOUIE-- "Jay, if I follow your reasoning that the majority doesn't have the right to take away rights of the minority; why then isn't my belief in God getting equal billing as to the beginning of creation in public schools, since science has yet to answer this and offers up an equally unfounded belief?"

Agreed, Louie. But which version of Creation do we go with? Christian, buddhist, muslim, Greek? Also, how does one test these beliefs of creation scientifically (i.e. purpose, hypothesis, data, conclusion)? Should schools teach things, like Creationism, that haven't been vigorously tested in scientific theory? As of now, the only theory that has withstood scientific testing is the Big Bang, and in many regards evolution.

I can't agree with Creationism being taught in a science class. I could agree to seeing it taught outside of a scientific curriculum. My two cents.
December 10, 2008

1:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

JWDen writes:

Elkman whined:

JWDen
You were not talking about raising awareness in you previous post. Just seeking approval. Rules changing?

Ummmm, not since the headline, Elkman. Scroll up to the very top, and look at the words in bold type (those are the letters bigger and darker than the others). 'Call in gay aimed at public awareness'. Public awareness. Not Elkman's approval.
December 10, 2008

2:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

BIG BANG survived scientific tests? I don't think so. It's being offered as a substitute for the unknown; just like the story of creation is offered for what science is most unable to prove. One thing is fact, we are an amazingly intelligent creation! I believe it more to be in His image, than the BIG BANG that has yet to prove the origin or creation of the elements necessary for the enviroment to facilitate the BIG BANG for it to occur. Man knows niether his begining nor his end, with God He says He's the alpha the omega; with science we come in with a bang, and most likely because of our self-destructive nature will go out with a bigger bang, is either provable or do both rely on faith?
December 10, 2008

2:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"why then isn't my belief in God getting equal billing as to the beginning of creation in public schools"

this is an easy question to answer, louie. your superstitions don't have a place in science class because they have nothing to do with science.

i'm all for including the study of cultural belief systems in our schools.

i think it's fascinating that the majority of icelanders believe in goblins and elves...just as i find it interesting that the majority of americans believe in a skydaddy now but used to believe that the stars were holes in the bowl that covered the earth at night.

i say have at it...but not in science class....unless you want science class to include something besides science...

elkman, stop running and please stop hiding behind your willful ignorance...can you tell us how you equate equal rights with the "approval of the majority" or not?
December 10, 2008

2:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

mxrider, you're still confused apparently

this should be easy to clear up...as long as you won't run from the question.

do you believe there's any difference between discriminating against someone who was born black and someone who was born gay?
December 10, 2008

2:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

Here's your stats, Elkman....

HIV infections in 2007 by incidence, according to CDC:
51% by male-to-male sexual contact
34% by high-risk heterosexual behavior
12% by drug use
negligible% by female-to-female contact

So what do we glean from these stats? Basically, that women should stay away from men.
December 10, 2008

2:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

I have to go for now; thanks for a most civil discussion of a extremely intense subject. I enjoyed these comments very much. Thanks and have a great day!
December 10, 2008

2:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

FCCG writes:

To Steph and Louie,
It is difficult to consider the beliefs of ancients on gays using the modern definition of sexuality. Homo-sexuality (and for that matter hetero-sexuality) are fairly recent concepts. One might say that homosexuality was a large part of Roman and Greek society, but rather it was that homosexual activity was more tolerated and more socially acceptable that in other places and times. All the great historical "homosexuals" (Socrates, Alexander the Great) almost always had wives and children. That trend existed for a long while. The 14th Century English King, Edward II, most likely had male lovers, but he was not really considered homosexual at the time, he was just a man "who spent too much time with male company" or some such thing. The take home point is that society has changed such that sexuality is less fluid, and people are are in a way forced to make hard decisions about sexuality, which they might not otherwise make. Things to keep in mind.
December 10, 2008

2:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

LOUIE,
Yes, the Big Bang survived scientific testing. What this means is that, through scientific method, no one has been able to disprove it. The same cannot be said for Creationism. It has not survived scientific testing.

Just for the record-- I'm agnostic. I believe that something, somewhere created us. In effect, I agree with your sentiment on the subject. However, I have no opinion as to who or what that is. My opinion, is that science classes should only teach subjects that have survived scientific method. The Big Bang and Evolution have-- that is why they are classified as "Theories". This is different from what science classifies as "law", such as the Law of Gravity. They are not proven, but they have not been disproven.
December 10, 2008

2:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

TimeLord writes:

"Wow, and the thought of having two gay dads just seems ridiculous and unfair to a child."

No more than having one gay dad and one straight dad.

Besides, I look on here and see how many kids have stupid and hate-filled dads, and I feel a lot more sorry for those kids than the ones in gay households.
December 10, 2008

2:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

I think an important consideration is that religion is CHOSEN but sexual orientation is not. Moreover, the Bible's mention of man lying down with a man is in Leveticus which also calls for not eating any shellfish, touching pork on Sundays and other thankfully outdated rules.

Is there somewhere else in the bible that mentions homosexuality?
December 10, 2008

2:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Real quick, Zim, maybe it's wiser for schools not to teach what they don't know. When the unknown is being taught as fact, that's not acceptable either. BIG BANG is as much an unknown as God is to many people, yet one is being taught contrary to the other. Two wrongs don't make one right.
December 10, 2008

2:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Zim: I think your stats may indicate that NO ONE should have sex with men :-(
December 10, 2008

2:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

"do you believe there's any difference between discriminating against someone who was born black and someone who was born gay?"

First, one would have to believe that someone was born gay...I do not.

Trying to equate the gay struggle with the black struggle is fallacy! Ask an older black person if they think your struggle is anywhere near what they went through, you would probably get laughed out of the room!
December 10, 2008

2:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Sheepherder. Why do you not believe people are born gay?
December 10, 2008

2:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"Homo-sexuality (and for that matter hetero-sexuality) are fairly recent concepts."

yikes...just when i thought the rationalizations couldn't get any more outlandish.

"Yes there is a difference, you cannot put race and sexual preference in the same category!"

there's your problem, mxrider...you still think homosexuality is a "preference".

there's little to be done with willful ignorance. that's something you're going to have to work out on your own.

good luck with that...i imagine it's hard letting go of your dogma and embracing facts.
December 10, 2008

2:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Mostly from speaking with the two gay peopel in my family beleive it or not. In reality, I can't say I think it's been proven either way...I could probably argue both sides on that one. By the way, nice arguments Steph, you are a good debator.
December 10, 2008

2:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Zim
What I gather from the stats is that it is more unhealthy for gays then hetros. Thanks for making my point.
December 10, 2008

2:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

skidenver writes:

When did ignorance become a point of view?

Some of you have spent your entire day judging others and have accomplished what exactly? You've accomplished to waste a lot of time while at work. I can only assume you all called in "gay" but are still in the closet.
December 10, 2008

2:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

jay
How do you KNOW for a fact that people are born gay? If you don't, you are spewing as much as anyone.
December 10, 2008

2:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

unfortunately, sheepherder, willful ignorance (based on dogma, anectodal evidence or whatever) is never justification for discrimination.

i urge you to do some homework and expand your understanding of the issue before taking a stand.
December 10, 2008

2:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Thanks sheepherder. You showed that you have some brains and I'm sure you treat your gay family members well. That's a very commendable thing.

A lot of this just has to come down to: you believe what you believe and I'll do the same. It's too bad consensus couldn't be made but dialogue is very important for BOTH sides.
December 10, 2008

2:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

jay
So there is no such thing as sexual preference? Be careful before you answer.
December 10, 2008

2:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

wow writes:

It took me all of three minutes to find this news article, with citations.
Just imagine what I could have found to debunk the myth that homosexuality is a behavioral choice if I had really tried.
And all elkman can come up with was Dobson's lapdog?
Please.
Debate over.
------------------
"It turns out that sniffing a chemical from testosterone, the male sex hormone, causes a response in the sexual area of gay men's brains, just as it does in the brains of straight women, but not in the brains of straight men.

"It is one more piece of evidence ... that is showing that sexual orientation is not all learned," said Sandra Witelson, an expert on brain anatomy and sexual orientation at the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada. "
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/0...
-----------------------
I debated with jay over the right of gay or hetero dating service providers to be exclusive in their clientele, and I still believe they should be permitted to the extent that it is a function of their business. (My unfortunate use of the word "lifestyle" was used in reference to web dating gays v/s homosexuals, and their incombatibilities on a web site tailored for one or the other. "Lifestyle" as it applies in daily use, doesn't apply to how gays as a group live. Singles, families, partiers all have a "lifestyle". Gays and heteros fall into those groups with those lifestyles. Hope that clears me up with Jay.)
This is about raising awareness and striving for equal legal rights of gay people. The raising awareness part, is unfortunetly brought to a standstill by the ignorance of people who refuse to learn better.
It really isn't a matter of choice. And unlike the crime of pedophilia, it doesn't victimize any one.
So what's the fear coming from? Just offer one reason, with a reliable source other than the bible, why gays should have any legal restrictions that heteros don't have.
December 10, 2008

2:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

LOUIE: "Real quick, Zim, maybe it's wiser for schools not to teach what they don't know. When the unknown is being taught as fact, that's not acceptable either. BIG BANG is as much an unknown as God is to many people, yet one is being taught contrary to the other. Two wrongs don't make one right."

Good point. However, I prefer presenting all of these different viewpoints to kids, and letting them figure it out for themselves. Like I said, I have no problem with Creationism being taught, as long as it's not exclusive to one creationist belief, and that it's explained that Creationism has not survived Scientific Method. Outside of that, I think it would be beneficial to their critical thinking skills to delve into it some.
December 10, 2008

2:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Prove to me sexual orientation is born, genetic, or inherited and not learned or a choice; again another unprovable statement being rendered a fact. If I have a position, I can always find support studies that support opposite sides of the unprovable. Neither being fact, just circumstantial and unverifiable.
December 10, 2008

2:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

wow
"It is one more piece of evidence ... that is showing that sexual orientation is not all learned," said Sandra Witelson," In other words, this gal is saying that some of it is learned. Thanks for the support wow.
December 10, 2008

2:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

FCCG writes:

Jay says:
blah blah blah willful ignorance, blah blah blah superstition, blah blah blah willful ignorance, blah blah blah nice try, blah blah blah willful ignorance, etc. etc. etc.
December 10, 2008

2:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE-- Elkman: "Zim
What I gather from the stats is that it is more unhealthy for gays then hetros. Thanks for making my point."

No. It only makes half your point. According to those stats, the lesbian lifestyle in fact is healthier than the hetero one.

Also, according to the CDC, black males are three times as likely as any other ethnicity to contract AIDS. According to your logic, is being black inherently unhealthier than being any other ethnicity? Should black people refrain from sex?
December 10, 2008

2:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

I wanted to call in "gay", be a great day to spend with my family! Having a day off makes me a gay man anyway you look at it!
December 10, 2008

2:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

SFCPAUL writes:

What a monumental waste of time. If you called in queer, gay or whatever in my business, I'd fire you.
Go peddle you unnatural behavior elsewhere!!
December 10, 2008

2:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Steph, it's good to converse without all the name calling, it gets a little crazy on here sometimes. And yes, I love my gay family members...super nice people.

Jay, I may bemistaken, but I don't think you would be happy with any amount of research i did if it didn't agree with your position. And just to further this discussion, I could care less if gays marry, cohabitate, or do any of the things that make hetros miserable:)
December 10, 2008

2:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Louie
It is a "convenient excuse" for the gay community. I was born that way. That way, no personal responsibility for their behavior. The "inconvenient truth" is that they cannot prove their excuse.
December 10, 2008

2:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

tazrob writes:

Wow...

As I read through the long list of posts I have to tell you, it's a bit disturbing. Steph.. You put up a GREAT fight and you stick to the facts and your convictions. You should be admired for just that. I have to give you a round of applause!

As a gay man, I find this whole "call in gay" thing a bit rediculous. This in no way advances the cause/plight of the GLBT community. In fact, I think it makes many look like fools. As someone else posted, this tantrum is nothing more than a way for the rest of society to ignore us.

With that said, I'd like to chime in on a couple things that keep gnawing at me that I feel need to be shared. First, I think it is not fair to compare the Civil Rights movement to the GLBT Rights movement. While there are simmilarities, I feel ther are some major differences. I'm quite sure if Dr. King were alive today, he would be on standing beside us protesting the way gays are treated. If you don't think so, ask his children, ask Representative John Lewis, one of his closest advisors. They will all tell you it's wrong!

YES we do live in fear from the biggoted shallow and insecure people of the world. Do I need to remind some posters of a young man by the name of Matthew Sheppard? The one so bruttally killed near Laramie WY in 1998? His attackers are serving consecutive LIFE sentances without parole. I hope the 2 boys that did that to them get what they deserve in prison.

As for the marriage discussion, Frankly, I could care LESS what you call it. Call it a UNION, call it widget, call it nothing, but just give me the same rights that you, as married people have.

Give me inheritance rights, tax benefits, insurance benefits, give me rights to make medical decisions on my partner's behalf when he cannot. BUT since our leagle language stipulates"Marriage" when determinitng those things, that leaves me out. That reason folks is the reason so many of us are angry. That is why we keep putting it back in your face. YOU have something that we don't.
December 10, 2008

2:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Louie-- "Prove to me sexual orientation is born, genetic, or inherited and not learned or a choice; again another unprovable statement being rendered a fact. If I have a position, I can always find support studies that support opposite sides of the unprovable. Neither being fact, just circumstantial and unverifiable."

Since this fits our discussion on scientific method.... as of now, nothing has been proven OR disproven either way, though many recent studies have pointed toward biological origin, influenced somewhat by environmental. Excuse me for not taking the time to pinpoint exact studies.
December 10, 2008

2:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

nope...like i said, mxrider...you can choose to be ignorant on the facts surrounding this issue, but it's not going to do your credibility any favors on this blog.

as far as the majority never being justified taking away (or refusing to grant) equal rights to the minority...are you sure you wouldn't be more comfortable in a theocracy like iran? this concept isn't exactly rocket science.

elkman...i think you're still having the same confusion.

do you understand the difference between sexual orientation and a preference for anything?
December 10, 2008

2:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE" Elkman-- "
It is a "convenient excuse" for the gay community. I was born that way. That way, no personal responsibility for their behavior. The "inconvenient truth" is that they cannot prove their excuse."

So what if they can't? Does the gay community really care about the approval of some insignificant bigot somewhere? You find it distasteful. Again, so what. Society does not revolve around the preferences of Elkman. Gay people are here. They are here to stay. They are your co-workers and (gasp!) relatives. You can either go through life hating people all day long, or you can come to terms with the fact that gay people have NO influence on your life whatsoever, and some day get over it.

Personally, I don't think you're man enough.
December 10, 2008

2:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Elkman, have you checked the statistics regarding AIDS in Africa and how the vast majority of the infected people got it from hetero-sex? Do a google search on "aids africa numbers" or some such thing and you'll see what I'm talking about.

I can also tell you that I was certainly born gay. I can safely, also, tell you that every gay person I've known was born that way. The only choice to be made by a gay person is whether to accept yourself or not.

Just because a truth happens to be "convenient," that doesn't make it any less true. Think about that.
December 10, 2008

2:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Louie-- "I wanted to call in "gay", be a great day to spend with my family! Having a day off makes me a gay man anyway you look at it!"

That's funny! Good one. I think all of us could use a "gay" day, in that respect.
December 10, 2008

2:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

Hi Steph! :)

Is this your community service project for today, raising awareness? It's good to see you're not creating any enimies. At least, not what I could see.
December 10, 2008

2:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

"gay people have NO influence on your life whatsoever, and some day get over it." Zi, excellent point in the middle of your rant.

People just need to respect each other...period. If it's not illegal, immoral, or unethical..butt out.
December 10, 2008

3:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Drake writes:

Most homophobes are closet cases.
December 10, 2008

3:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

God bless us, everyone. Just don't phone in sick to work unless you're really sick.
December 10, 2008

3:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Sheepherder-- "gay people have NO influence on your life whatsoever, and some day get over it." Zi, excellent point in the middle of your rant."

Yeah,I tend to rant sometimes. Your phrasing was much more succinct.
December 10, 2008

3:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Zim
"Again, so what. Society does not revolve around the preferences of Elkman. Gay people are here."
Oh, so society should revolve around the preferences of gay people? Hypocrisy runs deep in your veins I see.
"Personally, I don't think you're man enough"
Time to unbunch your panties pal. Maybe that is your problem?
December 10, 2008

3:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

What was the old saying, "Live and let live."
December 10, 2008

3:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

jay
Yes.
I do know the difference between you and an idiot. None.
December 10, 2008

3:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies,
I had to call my boss back to make sure he knew that I was sick, and that's why I was calling in.
December 10, 2008

3:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Ah Heidi, we know the truth girl :)
December 10, 2008

3:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Elkman--"Oh, so society should revolve around the preferences of gay people?"

Didn't say that. In fact, how many gay people have you met that have forced you, Elkman, to live the gay lifestyle?

RE: "Time to unbunch your panties pal. Maybe that is your problem?"

I'm not the one threatened by the big gay boogeyman. Or would that be spelled "boogayman"? Whatever.
December 10, 2008

3:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Ah Zim, being an ex-con, I have seen it forced on somebody; different name however than Big Gay Boogeyman, we just called him MaMa Hurt! True individual, MaMa Hurt could lift Cadillacs on barbells, and was always hunting for a husband to make "her" happy. No joke on this one.
December 10, 2008

3:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

C'mon, Louie.... you're comparing all gay men to MaMa Hurt? I would say it's likely MaMa Hurt doesn't represent the whole gay community.

However, trust me-- if I ever saw MaMa Hurt, you'd sure as heck see me running.
December 10, 2008

3:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

sheepherder,
Is that why you have been avoiding me?
December 10, 2008

3:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Zim, I seen men in the Florida State Prison that you'd swear were women, breasts and all. Some of them would talk so fine down a cell block, I had to remind myself I was in a man's prison. MaMa Hurt was sheer ugly, when "her" shadow fell upon you, oh God...
December 10, 2008

3:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Steph: My sexual orientation may have been by choice in the eighth grade. That's when I remember I started to notice Dawn Register every time she wore a miniskirt. I had her in third hour algebra, and I found myself manuevering so I could follow her all the way to the cafeteria after class. Before that, I really can't remember any particular disposition one way or the other.
December 10, 2008

3:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Oh no Heidi, I still love you! And I'm at work today! What does that tell you!
December 10, 2008

3:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies,

So did you ever hook up with Dawn? Or were you too shy and geeky to even talk to her?
December 10, 2008

3:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Heidi: What if your boss says "prove it"?
December 10, 2008

3:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

bloomdog writes:

I have always wondered about the gay's argument that they are discriminated against, at work, walking down the street, fearing for life and limb....how in the world will anyone know your gay, if you don't flaunt it like a new haircut????!!!
come on now, quit being so darn quick to show off your sexual orientations and you wouldn't be discriminated against!!
I certainly don't walk around town with a heterosexual necklace, or a bumper sticker, or a t-shirt or anything else that announces to the world that I am straight, so why in the world to gay's have to?!!?
get over yourselves, who cares where you stick your pole and who you stick it in.....
December 10, 2008

3:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

sheepherder...it tells me that you are screwing off at work ;)
December 10, 2008

3:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Zim
"Didn't say that. In fact, how many gay people have you met that have forced you, Elkman, to live the gay lifestyle?"
But you certainly implied it. Gays can do whatever they want. But don't pi-s down my back and tell me its raining. I don't have to accept it, and I won't. Not Steph or any other gay can convince me that they have no choice. You always have a choice. Look at priests for crying out loud. (the good ones). They have a choice and deny sex completely. Everyone has a choice. That my friend, is a fact.
December 10, 2008

3:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

I'm with you DAVIES, my first was a big beautiful girl a few years older than me, God I was in Heaven. We remained close friends for a lifetime. I sent her an antique diamond ring, after showing it to my wife, a few years ago. I could never get enough of that big beautiful girl, I could never walk away and not love her.
December 10, 2008

3:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies, I will prove it to him, then I will sue my employer, then retire early!
December 10, 2008

3:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Heidi....GUILTY AS CHARGED!
December 10, 2008

3:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Louie,
"Zim, I seen men in the Florida State Prison that you'd swear were women, breasts and all. Some of them would talk so fine down a cell block, I had to remind myself I was in a man's prison. MaMa Hurt was sheer ugly, when "her" shadow fell upon you, oh God..."

You need to write up some "Your MaMa Hurt was so ugly" jokes. ;-)

I'm done here for the day. Good talkin' to ya, Louie. Have a pleasant evening!
December 10, 2008

3:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

sheepherder, I'm sure you are multi-tasking!
December 10, 2008

3:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Too shy and geeky, definitely! That was 8th grade; I didn't hook up with anyone but Rosie Palm until my senior year. It was always Rosie in the meantime though, and never Ben Dover, if you get my meaning ;-)
December 10, 2008

3:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies, did your wife have to compete with Rosie? Is that why she left you?
December 10, 2008

3:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

See ya Zim, hope everyone has a wonderfully "gay" evening, I'm outta here too!
December 10, 2008

4 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Elkman-- "But you certainly implied it. Gays can do whatever they want. But don't pi-s down my back and tell me its raining. I don't have to accept it, and I won't. Not Steph or any other gay can convince me that they have no choice. You always have a choice. Look at priests for crying out loud. (the good ones). They have a choice and deny sex completely. Everyone has a choice. That my friend, is a fact."

Let me ask this again, Elkman. Has any gay individual FORCED YOU to be gay? If not, what's your issue? Just because they might be in your line of sight walking down the street, holding hands, doesn't mean anything to you then you yourself CHOOSING to be offended.

You're right. We all have a choice. You yourself choose to let something that doesn't affect you at all bother you immensely. Oh well. That's your downward spiral, I guess.
December 10, 2008

4:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Davies, exactly. I remember being 8 years old when my sister took me to see Romeo & Juliet and I was very fascinated by Romeo but I never knew why. That's how it happens. I certainly wasn't mature enough to make any kind of decision but I remember that day still.
December 10, 2008

4:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

" You cannot put race and sexual preference in the same category. "

people are born black just as they are born gay.

how is that not the same, mxrider?

you keep running from this and hiding behind willful ignorance. i never said you couldn't feel the way you do...you just don't have the right to deny other americans equal rights under the law.

it's as simple as that.

we'll see how history judges your side of this debate. my thought is that you'll share company with those who once opposed interracial marriage.

any who...do you have anything else to offer on this issue besides your "feelings"?
December 10, 2008

4:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Davies and Louis, do you remember making an actual "choice" to be attracted to those girls? No, you were just normal hetero boys who can remember some of their first "loves."

It's the same for us except more likely than not, we had to hide it and wonder what was wrong with us because "Romeo" turned me on instead of a topless Juliet. The hurt was compounded because at 8 years old, one is not mature enough to look at it in context and figure it out for themselves.
December 10, 2008

4:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Yes, mxrider. I'm male. Guess the Romeo comment kind of gave me away. Ha Ha.
December 10, 2008

4:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Zim
"Let me ask this again, Elkman. Has any gay individual FORCED YOU to be gay?" NO. Nor have I forced any gay to be straight. What is the point? You yourself just stated that we all have a choice. If that is true, then gays are choosing to practice homosexual behavior. It is not the gay, but the behavior. I have stated this many times today.
December 10, 2008

4:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Zim writes:

RE: Elkman-- " If that is true, then gays are choosing to practice homosexual behavior."

Again, so what? How does this affect you?
December 10, 2008

4:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

RE: Elkman-- " If that is true, then gays are choosing to practice homosexual behavior."

Wow, elkman, you'd think that if we've been "practicing homosexual behavior" so much that we'd finally get it right and not have to keep practicing. Don't you think?
December 10, 2008

4:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

mxrider
Trying to argue with jay is like trying to argue chrisianity with a muslim. You cannot get anywhere. He has this "willful ignorance" phrase that he learned in high school, and cannot give it up. If you do not agree with him, you are confused, or an idiot. He fails miserably to see that you and I have an opinion. But here I am again, wasting key strokes on him.
December 10, 2008

4:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Steph
So you finally agree that there are choices to be made?
December 10, 2008

4:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

elkman, the only choice to be made is to accept that part of yourself or not.

What did I say that made you ask that question?
December 10, 2008

4:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

It affects me because I do not believe that marriage should be granted to gay couples. Is this not ultimately where this is going to lead? You dont' have to be a "jay" to see it coming.
December 10, 2008

4:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

I have seen several people today who have admitted that they made a choice. I too made a choice. You also made a choice, like it or not. You chose to live the lifestyle of a gay. As I stated before, even priests have made difficult choices. You say your choice is right. I have a different opinion. I think is is wrong. But by no means am I saying you cannot live the way you want. But, this issue is far from over, and may never be resolved.
December 10, 2008

4:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

elkman, again, what did I say that made you ask me that question about choice?
December 10, 2008

4:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

"It affects me because I do not believe that marriage should be granted to gay couples"

bingo.

bigotry based on "feelings"...just like mxrider.
December 10, 2008

4:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

RUKidding writes:

And others choose to live the lifestyle of straight. You say your choice is right, I have a different opinion. I think it is wrong. But by no means am I saying you cannot live the way you want.
December 10, 2008

5:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

ELKMAN, the two faiths share Abraham. STEPH, I have a beautiful bi-sexual girl who was set to be married. She even explained her sexuality to the man; she was willing to give up all others for him. He agreed because of her beauty to follow through. Later after their baby was born, he changed and became rather shallow. He began telling her how her attraction to other women was not right. He became cold to her, told her to move out. She had remained true to her word, honest and truthful, yet this man was a shallow person. She is so beautiful, she chose this man at his word, gave him her heart, and the man turned cold when he realized he couldn't force her to say she wasn't attracted to other women. Now I'm a married man of over 20 years, I share everything with my wife. I love women, some are so beautiful, but I made a promise to one. Human beings are very complex, if I acted on my desires verses what I know to be against a promise, it would bother me. Thus when I promised the Lord I would walk into His house once a week, and bow my knee, it was not a promise I could go back on. I don't support gay marriage, but never think I don't have compassion or care about them. My decision was based on a promise I made over 20 years ago, like the love I have for my wife, I must honor that promise. Christ also had a choice when led to a mountain top and offered the world...
December 10, 2008

5:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Steph writes:

Louie, you should be proud that you've stuck with your wife as well as your promise to Christ. Most marriages nowadays are not as strong as yours and I've always believed a promise is a promise.

Many gay folks would like to be able to have the opportunity to make that sort of promise to a "partner" as well. As I said earlier, there are good people and bad people, no matter what their orientation is.

Yes, there will be stupid gay people who take their wedding vows and are a crappy couple that don't honor the vows they took.

Then again, there are heteros like Britney Spears who crap on the entire idea of the sanctity of marriage. She legally can get married any time she wants and she has and will.

Does this make sense to you?
December 10, 2008

5:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

i'm not playing any card, mx. i have very rationally and very simply shot holes in the dogma you cling to in order to rationalize your decision to support discrimination against your fellow americans. we've been debunking these same talking points for months. quite frankly, it's not that hard as they're the same talking points used by those who opposed interracial marriage. (see the quotes below)

either your beliefs qualify as a textbook example bigotry or they don't.

it has nothing to do with me.

at least have the intellectual honesty to take some personal responsibility for your own beliefs.

"This type of legal marriage must be forbidden simply because natural instinct revolts at it as wrong.”---republican senator from mn.

"legalizing [interracial marriage] would result in a degraded and ignoble population incapable of moral and intellectual development.”--anti-equal rights organization

“I believe that the tendency to classify all persons who oppose [interracial marriage] as ‘prejudiced’ is in itself a prejudice" (sound familiar?)

"allowing this type of marriage necessarily involves [the] degradation of conventional marriage, an institution that deserves admiration rather than execration”---US rep from ga.

“The next step will be [the demand for] a law allowing them, without restraint, to have free and unrestrained social intercourse with your unmarried sons and daughters"---congressmen from ky

"In denying the appeal of this type of couple that had tried unsuccessfully to marry, a Georgia court wrote that such unions are “not only unnatural, but … always productive of deplorable results such as increased effeminate behavior in the population. They are productive of evil, and evil only, without any corresponding good in accordance with the God of nature.”--ga court

"The ban on this type of marriage is not discriminatory, reasoned a Republican congressman from Illinois, because it applies equally to men and women.”---where's benny-never dem when you need him

interracial marriage should be illegal because it is distasteful to our people and unfit to produce the human race.”---attorneys for the state of tn. it's like looking into a mirror, right shaggy?

"a ban on this type of marriage is necessary to prevent traditional marriage from being contaminated by the recognition of relationships that are physically and mentally inferior and entered into by the dregs of society.” ---ca state attorneys
December 10, 2008

11:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

jfkdem47 writes:

jay:

"for the record....i would no more support discrimination against those of who hold such beliefs as i would discrimination against any other group."

You support polygamy? Or do you support discrimination against them, in direct contradiction to your own statement?
December 11, 2008

3:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Steph, this is where we seperate beliefs. I believe marriage is defined as a man and a woman. Unlike two of the same gender, they are joined as one with the ability to create life. Life can only be created by life; the marriage of a man unto a woman is natures way of creating life. Civil unions, right to share property is the other way society has created legal means that allow many of the rights that gays desired to facillitate their relationship. However, two of the same gender can not create life; they must borrow upon the other gender. They can raise children, one might have a child, but those children are not the biological product of the civil union of two of the same gender. A civil union does not have the same capabilities that exist in a marriage. Thus a civil union can not replicate a marriage. It may very well have the love and commitment, but by itself, regardless of all the love and commitment present can not create life as nature intended the man and woman to be capable of. Now someone will offer up, what if one is sterile, must not be a marriage. There will always be an exception, but I always look at the larger picture, most young people upon marriage are capable. Two of the same gender are never capable by themselves ever. I believe God was the creator and giver of life. He set forth laws upon His creation. Those laws have stood to be incorporated into many areas of our everyday life because the majority found them worthy of incorporation. God created all races, even named His chosen, that is viewed by some as discrimnatory. He commanded all his creation to honor His law. Thus gay preferences are not a civil rights struggle, the minority communities across America have soundly rejected this affiliation, even by their most recent vote in California. Thus the gay seeks to have his union be called a marriage although it doesn't posess all the properties of a marriage; and he falsly identifies his struggle with the struggle for racial equality known as civil rights.I believe the minority people in America are more opposed to homosexuality than the anglos.
December 11, 2008

4:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Steph, as far as those who enter into marriages like Brittany Spears, and many long before her, who trash the institution; I don't use such people as the exemplar of pillars of society anyway. In this regard gays are no different from the rest of society. Their are gays with great honor, and those with none. Whoever on this blog called them all pedophiles was foolishly wrong. Criminals are criminals regardless of sexual preferences; look at me Steph; comes to having once been a criminal, the buck stops right here. I know many gays far better for your children to be with, then someone who is straight but abuses children. Funny however, the only profession never to be convicted of raping children is Mafia Godfathers. Gambino, Columbo, Genovese, Luchase, Bonnano, Capone, Luciano, Anastasia, not one ever was tried for such a crime. Only profession I know of that can say they were never tried for sexual assualt on a child. Every profession, but one. Go figure. Maybe that's another reason most criminals care nothing for the child abusers, most of them were abused as children whether it was beatings or what not.
December 11, 2008

5:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Oh and Steph, gays aren't the church's only outcasts. I have been common law married, supported by a legal affidavit for 20 years. I am catholic, my lady protestant. I was married once before going to prison, my church says no to twice. My lady's church is acceptable to us marrying, mine is not. Thus I live in sin as well. Even I come under the judgements of the church. The priesthood in my church has more than defiled God's house, million dollar judgements are happening everyday for their abuse of our children. So I bow in the outter courts and pray, and I too walk away. My salvation was never assured, I agree with Calvin. It rests upon the mercy of God...
December 11, 2008

6:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

jay
Please do yourself a favor and learn the difference between an opinion and bigotry, and discrimination. Every time and I mean every time you do not agree with someone else's opinion, you bring out the bigotry and discrimination card. Generally the person who practices bigotry and discrimination is the person who brings in up in the first place. Mxrider or myself have never brought up either one. But you sit out there and accuse us of both. You are the willfully ignorant one. Do yourself a favor and get the dictionary out. Or, go back to grade school, and this time, graduate.
December 11, 2008

7:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Maybe instead of God, I should call upon the servants of his lost disciple and once mighty Archangel, the lawyers of humanity. We use our laws, to fight His. How far will humanity rebel against the Creator is a better debate than who we are all sleeping with. Do our laws justify our behavior against the law of God is the overriding equation man has always struggled to answer it seems. I think Clarence Darrow would find the laws of God just, even in his denial of His divinity.
December 11, 2008

7:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Thanks mxRider. Read it and I am not surprised. Like I said before, debating him is useless because he does not have the brain power to debate logically. He jumps on the bandwagon and blows his horn, but he has nothing usefull to say. Much like Dahmers Cookbook used to be. Now that I think about it, maybe Dahmer changed his name? However, I still maintain that opinions do not equal bigotry or discrimenation.
December 11, 2008

8:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Steph: Just to clarify, my comment about "choosing" to be hetero in the 8th grade was intended to be tongue in cheek. It's really just a fond memory of when I started to realize I felt an overt sexual attraction to girls.

Elkman and mxRider: I too gave up on Jay awhile back. He seems intelligent but he's not very interesting because he cannot seem to acknowledge anyone's viewpoint that differs from his own, even hypothetically. So I concluded that trying to debate with him further would constitute "willfull ignorance" on my part ;-)

LOUIE: Nice posts about faith and fidelity!

Heidi: How dare you! Rosie NEVER came between me and my ex-wife. Rosie was simply there to, ahem, fill certain voids in our marital relationship. You should listen to the Neil Diamond song "Shilo". That was his name for Rosie.
December 11, 2008

9:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

MileHighPatriot writes:

hahaha... well that didn't go according to plan!

'Call in Gay' to Work Day Draws Few Participants
December 11, 2008

9:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

MileHighPatriot writes:

haha.. I just read a posting by 'jay'. wow. so everyone who is gay was born that way? how intriguing! I know at least two people who were strait as an arrow and BECAME gay over time. One of them even went back to being straight. I wonder how many others have had a similar experience.

On topic, this whole event was a complete failure... other than getting numerous postings on this article. Even in the queen of gay, SF, nobody 'called in'. I wonder why? Probably because they knew they'd get fired.
December 11, 2008

12:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies, the tried and true Rosie method.

mxRider, were you neglecting your wife as well?
December 11, 2008

12:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

ok
what is the Rosie method?
December 11, 2008

1:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

elkman must be happily married.
December 11, 2008

1:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

elkman writes:

Heidi
I am. To a woman.
December 11, 2008

2:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

how do elkman and mxrider take their condoms off?...

... they fart :/
December 11, 2008

2:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

though personal attacks could be debatable if you called in to work on a day without.
December 11, 2008

3:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Why is heterosexual anal sex ok but gay anal sex is so wrong?
December 11, 2008

3:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Is it wrong and immoral to have sex with the hole in the middle of a picnic table?
December 11, 2008

3:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Is having sex with yourself bad?
December 11, 2008

3:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Is it ok for members of the same sex to love each other if they don't have sex?
December 11, 2008

3:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Maybe all these questions are answered for me in the bible....
December 11, 2008

3:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

or the Koran...
December 11, 2008

3:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

What about a man having sex with a male blow-up doll? Is that considered gay?
December 11, 2008

3:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

mxD*ckRider, Oh dont be so up tight its called a joke but if it hurts that bad, vagisil is cheap in our recession and may help with your weak response, what are you like 50? Besides my self righteous @$$ is on your side, why cant we both gang up on Jay like you did with elkman? picky picky
December 11, 2008

3:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Is being gay wrong?

Scientific answer: Yes, Adam & Steve can't procreate, which is the only reason we even have sex, right?

Religious answer:Yes, sex is only between man & woman, solely for the purpose of procreating. Any deviation from this and you are going to hell.

My answer:I can't imagine sex with another man (well, I can imagine it, but it grosses me out) I'll stick with sex with my wife, sex with myself and the internet, and the imaginary sex with the girl at the stripclub giving me a lap dance. I forgot to mention the Fleshlight....sex with machines is fun.
December 11, 2008

3:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Someone please enlighten me to the proper way to have sex.....
December 11, 2008

3:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Is it ok for me to have anal sex with my wife, as long as I am the one giving, not receiving?

Where does that leave her? I guess that doesn't make her gay, but she did have to take a **** up the ***...

I'm so confused...
December 11, 2008

3:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

c4l2ao,

damn dont get yourself caught up in the confusion of your own rhetorical questions. the more difficult question is if you were straight able to give yourself head would you have been able to call into work on a day without and not get fired?
December 11, 2008

3:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

I guess what I am getting at is that it is none of your F***ing business how I choose to get off, as long as I am not harming anyone else.

I also feel that any two people should be legally allowed to enter into a contractual relationship with the same benefits as marriage.

Mind your own F***ing business!
December 11, 2008

3:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

ahhh....ruckus feels left out! You can gang up on anyone you wish.
December 11, 2008

3:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

It's a bigot who goes to the polls to deny the rights of others.
December 11, 2008

3:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

mxD*ckRider, your responses get removed because they are incongruent with your semi-hetero personality. But thats OK ill stand up for your rights, your opinion is as valid as mine.

we should gang up on elkman next and beat him into our gang then bang with some other gangs and have your wife over for gang bang.
December 11, 2008

3:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

cool Heidi wanna join my gang?
December 11, 2008

3:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

MxD*ckRider, my bad i meant your ex-wife
December 11, 2008

3:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

The Calif. Supreme Court has already decided that this measure was unconstitutional the first time. Why did people insist on trying it again? Oh that's right, it was due to the support of the bigoted Mormon church trying to push their beliefs on the rest of us.

I can't wait for those 2 sorry little boys dressed in their little short sleeved shirts and black ties to come knock on my door to try and convince me of their bigoted Mormon views....
December 11, 2008

3:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

"mxRider writes:

Someone please enlighten me to the proper way to have sex.....

c4l2a0, how about you go f yourself? I have no problem with that"

that was actually pretty f'ing funny.
December 11, 2008

3:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

awesome, glad we could collaborate on such an exhilarating occasion
December 11, 2008

4:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

Looks like Beavis and Butthead changed their names to ruckus and mxRider....
December 11, 2008

4:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

hehe-hehe... fire! fire!
December 11, 2008

4:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

ahhh, those were the days...
December 11, 2008

4:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Well I'm quitting this comments thread! I tried to introduce a little higher culture (Neil Diamond), but some of these comments have been inappropriate, and frankly I resent what you people seem to be inseminating with some of your statements here.
December 11, 2008

4:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

davies,

Very funny! Do you actually think anyone will catch on to you?
December 11, 2008

4:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

ruckus writes:

davies,

youll get over it soon enough. your commenting on RMN not like any of these enlightening comments matter too much.
December 11, 2008

5:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

mxRider, davies is just pulling your leg. Reread his last comment..."inseminating"....
December 12, 2008

9:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

It was pretty clever, huh?
December 12, 2008

10:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

sheepherder writes:

Wow! This one went downhill since the last time I looked at it!
December 12, 2008

2:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Yeah, Heidi does have that effect on many of us ;-)

Home › News › Local News

'Call in gay' aimed at public awareness

By John C. Ensslin, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published December 9, 2008 at 7:50 p.m.

Related Stories

More Local News

Share

Comments

Featured

Columns & Blogs