Drawing the line on gay marriages - Coeur d'Alene Press: Local News

Drawing the line on gay marriages

Opinions mixed on what benefits Idaho couples would receive by marrying in Washington

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Sunday, December 16, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 12:53 am, Sun Dec 16, 2012.

The state of Washington has been abuzz with celebrations since Dec. 6, when its now-voter-approved gay marriage law went into effect.

Same-sex couples have lined up at Washington courthouses to not only officialize their plans to grow old together, but to also gain the legal benefits of a wedding license like hospital visitation rights and tax breaks.

"This is now a normal part of business in the state of Washington," said Spokane County Auditor Vicky Dalton.

Her office saw 23 same-sex couples sign marriage licenses on the first day, she added.

"That's a decent day in June, for us," Dalton said. "We expected more, but same-gender couples can now come in any time they want. They don't have to rush. I think there's a lot of couples waiting until they can have the ceremony that they really want, which is in the summer and with family being able to attend."

That's not just for Washington residents, either.

Gay couples from Idaho, and anywhere else in the world, are also now legally allowed to marry in Washington, Dalton said. Marriage licenses for a gay couple can be obtained in all 39 Washington counties, with the same requirements for gay and different gender couples.

There is one caveat, though.

What happens when out-of-state gay couples take their Washington marriage license home?

"The issue is, is that recognized, in that other jurisdiction?" Dalton said. "Unfortunately, same-gender marriage (law) is inconsistent. It's dependent on that other jurisdiction."

That's why Washington's new law won't necessarily make a big difference for gay Idaho residents. Unless they're planning to become Washington residents.

If gay Idaho couples obtain a Washington marriage license, the marriage won't be recognized for tax purposes back in the Gem State, confirmed Liz Rodosovich, spokeswoman for the Idaho State Tax Commission.

"Idaho does not recognize gay marriage from another state," Rodosovich said. "The state constitution and state statute prohibit us from doing that."

Similarly, the Idaho Department of Insurance would consider a gay couple wed out of state as being in a domestic partnership, said agency spokeswoman Tricia Carney.

"Even though they're married in another state, if the policy is written in Idaho they're considered a domestic partnership," Carney said.

Neither the state nor any municipality in Idaho provides specific rights to domestic partners, according to Findlaw.com.

Other legal issues are a bit murkier, surrounding a gay marriage license in Idaho.

This much is clear - in 2006, state voters approved the Marriage Amendment for the state constitution, defining a man and woman as the only valid or recognized domestic legal union.

The amendment also banned legal recognition of any relationships that "approximate marriage," like domestic partnerships or civil unions.

Idaho statute Title 32-209 further states that all foreign or out-of-state same-sex marriages will not be recognized in the state.

Bob Cooper, spokesman for the Idaho Attorney General's Office, declined to interpret what other legal benefits gay couples wed in Washington may or may not be denied in Idaho.

"The state is bound by the constitution," Cooper said.

To discuss the matter further would be giving legal advice, he said, which the attorney general's office can't provide to non-state entities or individuals.

Staff at Kootenai Medical Center couldn't supply an answer of whether hospital visitation rights would be granted for a gay couple married in Washington.

That would require legal counsel, a spokesperson said.

Jack Miller, law professor at the University of Idaho, said that while Idaho does not recognize out-of-state gay marriages, that doesn't mean same-sex partners will necessarily be denied all the benefits of other married couples.

"You'd have to look at things on an item-by-item basis, in some cases," Miller said.

For instance, a state university might accord health benefits to an employee's same-sex partner, he said.

"That might be a recognition of that partnership in some respects, but it's not necessarily recognition of it as a marriage," Miller said.

This entire issue in Idaho could be settled for good in upcoming months, Miller added, when the U.S. Supreme Court makes a decision on whether states can ban gay marriage.

The court has recently agreed to review challenges to the federal Defense of Marriage Act and California's Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriages.

Depending how the justices vote, Idaho could be required to recognize out-of-state gay marriages, Miller said. Idaho's marriage amendment could also be struck down.

"That decision could be construed to overrule that provision," Miller said.

Jon Downing, a gay Coeur d'Alene resident who holds seminars on LGBT awareness at North Idaho College, said he is thrilled to see voters uphold gay marriage in Washington.

"I'm happy to see all my friends in Washington getting married. It seems like a flurry of marriages going on," Downing said. "There's so many I can't attend them all."

He is confident Idaho gay couples will cross the border to marry, too, he said. He already knows a Kootenai County couple making plans.

Idaho might not recognize their license here, he said, but at least they will enjoy more rights in the neighboring state.

"If you were to get in an accident right across the state line, or chosen to be flown to Spokane instead of KMC, then you'd have visitation rights that's not allowed here in North Idaho," he pointed out.

While marriage isn't on Downing's own immediate agenda, he hopes the voter support in Washington will prompt Idaho citizens to give gay marriage another chance, he said.

"To show that much voter support is amazing," Downing said. "Hopefully it's giving that kind of awareness."

More about

More about

More about

  • Discuss

Welcome to the discussion.

143 comments:

  • babydriver posted at 10:05 am on Mon, Dec 24, 2012.

    babydriver Posts: 1393

    POor misunderstood perverts, Boo Hoo...............

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 10:43 am on Fri, Dec 21, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    Mahiun, you are just gross.

     
  • Mahiun posted at 3:57 pm on Thu, Dec 20, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    Oh, Joey...... I would think that, eventually,<?i> you'd just run out of ammunition to keep shooting yourself in the foot. But, you never seem to....

    There is NO DOUBT that the homosexual population, in men, is FAR more promiscuous than any other group.
    Au contraire, mon ami --- there's a lot of doubt, so it has actually been surveyed and studied. The result? A whopping ONE PERCENT difference between straight men and gay men. 99% of straight men reported having 20 or fewer sexual partners, it was only 98% for gay men. Sorry to disappoint, Joey, but the sex lives of most gays are just as dreary as the sex lives of most straights....

    And as long as you're not one of them, why do you care how many sexual partners gay men have, or who they are?! Is it perhaps that you're (not so) secretly disappointed that you're not one of them? It's not too late, Joe; lose a few pounds, get a decent haircut, learn how to dress and you can probably still catch the eye of some guy with "redneck" fetish.

     
  • E Kim Skumsky posted at 2:56 pm on Thu, Dec 20, 2012.

    E Kim Skumsky Posts: 445

    The bottom line to me: homosexuals wanting to be married; a personal decision between two consenting adults. Not my (or Denials) business. Wanting to ban homsexuals from getting married; imposing your views, beliefs. morals on others. It seems so obvious, stay out of other CONSENTING ADULTS affairs, it's none off your business. As far as your religous beliefs, they are YOUR religous beliefs, I don't want to hear about them. I'm so sick of a bunch of deluded people whining about not having thier delusions respected. How respectful are you when you say "you don't believe in Gawd??!!! You're of the devil, you're going to he77 when you die". But some one does something YOU believe is wrong (not them, not me, not most people) and it's an assult on YOUR rights? I also think the government has no business in the marriage business. Everyone (hetrosexual or homosexual couples) should get a domestic partnership from the State conferring all the legal rights now granted by the Marriage License. If you want to get MARRIED, you go to a church you choose (and a church that chooses to marry you) and you get married, they grant a pretty, ornate, Marriage Certificate. There, if your loving, Christian Church wants to discriminate, that's fine, there is no doubt another cult like yours nearby who won't. All solved (every can enjoy the option of marriage, many will get to go through the torture of divorce). All equal. The one stickler is polygamy among consent adults.... but hey, Milts grandpa was a polygamist and it worked out for Milt.

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 2:13 pm on Thu, Dec 20, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    "There is NO DOUBT that the homosexual population, in men, is FAR more promiscuous than any other group"

    Joe, think your observation says more about gender than it does orientation.

    Male heterosexuals tend to be pretty promiscuous too. I know many male heterosexuals who would be quite a bit more promiscuous if they could find willing females.


     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 1:44 pm on Thu, Dec 20, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    There is NO DOUBT that the homosexual population, in men, is FAR more promiscuous than any other group. That being said, their consistent ability to contract HIV is no surprise, sad, of course, but not unexpected.

    As to Paul Cameron, he was correct, and was runout of the Psychology profession precisely becasue he told the TRUTH, about many things, and liberal (98% of all psychologists are avowed liberals) psychologists didn't want him in their midst.

    The numbers on child molestation/s by gays are close to what the numbers are for HIV.
    Truth...is truth.

     
  • Mahiun posted at 9:22 am on Thu, Dec 20, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    Paul Cameron??! Seriously??!!? THAT'S your trump card??!!? The single most debunked, disowned, discredited, disgraced person in the entire history of American psychology??!

    [*] He was forced out of the American Psychological Association 29 years ago, on 2 DEC 1983. Cameron had been the subject of an ethics investigation for some time beforehand.

    [*] 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. In other words, he was engaging in unethical practices, was investigated, was found guilty, and was forced out of the APA because of it.

    [*] Cameron claims that he "resigned" prior to being dropped from membership --- which makes him a liar, as well as unethical. Like most organizations, the APA does not permit members to resign while they are under investigation.

    [*] Even were Cameron's claims accepted as true, it would still be remarkable that a professional association went to such extraordinary 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."

    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." The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of "critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron."

    [*] At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee's report and passed a resolution "...officially and publicly stat[ing] that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemn[ing] 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."

    [*] 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).

    (Sources upon request.)

    The statistical fact is that the vast majority of child molestation is perpetrated by men who identify as heterosexual (or asexual, in their adult relationships), and who are either family members or a well known to their victims, who are predominantly female.

    You'll have to do much, much better than "Paul Cameron", if you want to advance an argument and have it taken seriously....

     
  • Humanist posted at 7:54 am on Thu, Dec 20, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    That "study" has been thoroughly rebutted and Dr. Camerons credibility is zero to none. It is fear mongering based on lies that make bigoted hate groups such as the "Family" Research Institute so scary. It is sad that people like DrThorne continue to propagate these lies. See what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about him and his hate groups. http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/winter/the-fabulist

    I encourage everyone to read this article from Dr. Herek at UC Davis that discusses this particular topic objectively and in depth.

    "One individual has claimed to have data that prove homosexuals to be child molesters at a higher rate than heterosexuals. That person is Paul Cameron. As detailed elsewhere on this site, Cameron's survey data are subject to so many methodological flaws as to be virtually meaningless. Even so, his assertions are sometimes quoted by antigay organizations in their attempts to link homosexuality with child sexual abuse." and

    "CONCLUSION: The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so. And, as explained above, many child molesters cannot be characterized as having an adult sexual orientation at all; they are fixated on children. "

    http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

     
  • DrThorne posted at 6:27 am on Thu, Dec 20, 2012.

    DrThorne Posts: 12

    A majority of accepted clinical studies reveal that homosexuals perform at least 30% of all child molestations while making up only 3% of the population. Rates of drug abuse, domestic abuse, STDs and suicide are all significantly higher among homosexuals than heterosexuals.

    From a Family Research Institute report entitled "Child Molestation and Homosexuality" by Paul Cameron, Ph.D. - "Not only is the gay rights movement upfront in its desire to legitimize sex with children, but whether indexed by population reports of molestation, pedophile convictions, or teacher-pupil assaults, there is a strong, disproportionate association between child molestation and homosexuality." Homosexuality requires therapy, not legitimacy.

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 2:37 pm on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    Not sure what you mean, but I might be just like you for all you know. Less the somewhat bizarre assumptions of coarse.

     
  • Humanist posted at 1:49 pm on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    @yourbigotedneighbor: If I had an idea which particular UFO urban acronym you are referring to, I might be able to answer your question.

     
  • yourneighbor posted at 1:30 pm on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    yourneighbor Posts: 234

    Humanpig are you and GM? Well you know.... So UFO.

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 12:42 pm on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    No interest in following your instructions, but pretty sure I got involved for the same reason you did chilada01.

     
  • Humanist posted at 12:25 pm on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    As if the comment was intended to be a private sub-thread only for Joe......

     
  • chilada01 posted at 12:05 pm on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    chilada01 Posts: 159

    GM is your name Joe? If it's not for the sake of argument why but into what yourneighbor said? Go back and read the whole thread and I would like you to point out " the religious folks who believe that they know everything"...

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 11:49 am on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    Probably more than the religious folks who believe that they know everything.

     
  • yourneighbor posted at 11:21 am on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    yourneighbor Posts: 234

    Joe, Atheists certainly have a lot to say about the nothing they believe in... Don't ya think?

     
  • Humanist posted at 10:09 am on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Birds of a feather.........

     
  • Mike S posted at 4:56 am on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Funny.. when you said sexual perverts it made me think of all of the straight people with kinky private lives. And speaking of people who have an agenda. The religious right and conservatives don't care a lick about marriage. When divorce rates and adultery were skyrocketing through the 50's up till today, where have they been? Did they donate tons of money to fight it? No. Did they try to get legislation passed to fight it? No. did they have large rallies to influence the public to vote against divorce and adultery? No.

    It would have been easy to institute laws against divorce and adultery. Our country and many others have had laws in the past limiting it. But where was the gnashing of teeth when millions of people were BREAKING their marriages apart and leaving MILLIONS of kids in broken homes?

    If it is a group of lying hypocrites you are searching for, the LGBT audience is the wrong crowd.

     
  • Mike S posted at 4:50 am on Wed, Dec 19, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Joe: there were seven reported offenses (not necessarily convictions) of hate crimes about sexual orientation in Idaho last year. Seven. It doesn't happen every day. I doubt any of them involved a bar.

    And your grasp of "special" rights is so farfetched I'm not sure you can ever understand it. But let's just remind you: Hate crimes apply to EVERYONE. There were 16 reported anti-HETEROSEXUAL crimes in the U.S. last year. The law DOES NOT provide any SPECIAL rights to gays, straights or anyone else.

    As for "special" churches, many of them have been around for centuries. ELCA? Roots in the Reformation. Episcopals? 16th Century. And it is most definitely not your place to be telling churches who is right in the eyes of God. You are teetering on blasphemy there.

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 8:04 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    As if you won't do whatever you need to do to make your point Joe?

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 7:25 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    Pretty low life of you to bring that group into any conversation, flash, but leave it to a lib....

     
  • Flash Gordon posted at 6:25 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Flash Gordon Posts: 1225

    The Westboro Baptist Church , which is planning to protest their anti gay agenda at the funerals of some of the victims of Sandy Hook, had member names, phone numbers, and social security numbers hacked by "Anonymous" and published on youtube.

    The church also plans to protest a vigil for the victims of Sandy Hook scheduled this Sunday. Westboro apparently has gone too far for the likes of anonymous and has made it their mission to bring this hate group down. Best of luck.

    It's not surprising that those homophobes in here have raised not a single objection to Westboro at Newtown.

     
  • Humanist posted at 6:18 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    @max power: For the "institution of marriage" does that require marriage in house of worship with God? If so, what do you think of my LEGAL marriage to my wife in a courthouse? Oh, by the way, we're both atheists. Does our marriage count? The weird thing is that we got married because we love each other and wanted to profess our bond to one another. Not because of some arbitrary religious "institution of marriage".

    And that's all LGBT want to. To be able to legally marry for love. As it should be.

     
  • Humanist posted at 6:12 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    You are SO grasping at straws, JoeIdaho. It's pretty tough to justify bigotry so your rationalizations have pretty much fallen apart here.

    A hate crime is a hate crime if it can be proven that hate based on that persons sexuality was an element. If a gay person is involved in a fight, it is not automatically a hate crime. That's a fact.

    A church is a church is a church. Just because you don't like churches that welcome gay people into their flock does not mean that those churches are providing "special" privileges. Everybody has the right to religion no matter their sexuality.

    There is no affirmative action for LGBT people. Equal hiring treatment regardless of sexual orientation IS NOT affirmative action. And there are no federal laws for non-discrimination of hiring based on sexuality but there are in about half the states. Idaho is not one of them. Which is directly opposite of what you said. Hopefully all of this will change with the passage of ENDA someday so that LGBT will be treated EQUALLY when it comes to hiring.

    LGBT do not want special or minority status. They only want EQUAL status. And, yes, society and government owes them that.

    Keep on grasping.........

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 5:40 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    And how do gays want/need "special treatment"...?
    Well, let's talk "hate crime". So; gay guy walks into a bar, gets in a fight, loses, then says to the cops that "he hit me because I was gay".
    Now; TELL ME that it doesn't happen. Every day. Now.

    And then we have...special churches, ones that go away from the teachings of God AND Jesus, in order to PANDER to the "special needs" of the gay population's supposed NEED to marry.

    Then, we have affirmative action, and quotas. Government has them, it's looked on as a "good thing" by you libs to ENSURE that companies hire ON THE BASIS of a person's sexuality in order to be considered a "progressive" company. (Which is AS stupid as Affirmative Action).

    The simple truth is that gay people want just what liberals have given to EVERY group that they have "helped" before, they want "minority" status; which is code for "I am SPECIAL, and as such; society, and government owes me; just like they do ANY minority".

     
  • max power posted at 4:44 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    max power Posts: 559

    The solution is simple. Sexual perverts should be fighting to make sure that "Civil Unions" have the same rights and benefits of marriage instead of trying to redefine the institution of marriage. But then again the gay agenda has never been about "marriage rights and benefits" per se',... It is about wanting to normalize their sick perverted lifestyle by hijacking the term marriage . If any rock was called a diamond, any diamond would be a rock and ultimately have no value.

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:49 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    give us a link to the groups pushing to have bestiality and pedophilia de-listed as disorders.

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:43 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    You are mixing up your conservative/fox news/right wing talking points again. The War on Christmas is in another internet board.

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:39 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Joe, did you just confuse your internet boards? Or do you regularly mix up your right-wing talking points? Gays and liberals - don't forget the communists and socialists.

    Do you know what I really disdain? When extremists use gay people as a pawn in their little political fantasies. Get a grip and grow up.

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:31 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Your imaginary conversation isn't too bad... except the child probably wouldn't say "that's wierd" if the parent just said to respect them. Of course you finish your diatribe by saying a Normal person would find someone of the opposite sex.

    And by the way, billions of people raise children. You aren't suddenly the child expert because you have had a conversation with your child.

    And where do you get 96%? There are nine states with same sex marriage (18%). Three of those states voted to allow gay marriage (6%). And 96% of the populace didn't vote to disallow gay marriage.

    Do you really believe that America is getting MORE anti-gay marriage?

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:25 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    COG777: So someones life style created an STD called aids? Wow, scientists have been looking in the wrong place for the source of AIDS! It was created spontaneously when two gay guys got it on. Your poor children.

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:22 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Hey Joe. I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn and I'll even pay for a MAJORITY of it for you! Sheesh, take a math class.

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:18 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    JoeIdaho: where in the world are you getting your statistics? If you are going to accuse others of make stuff up, you should at least not do it yourself. 1 in 4? That is BS.

    At the end of 2009 there were about 785,000 people living with HIV/AIDS in the U.S. (latest numbers). Around 1/2 of those were gay or MSM. If the U.S. has around 10,000,000 gay people (or 3% of population) how in the world do you think 25% of gay people contract HIV?

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:10 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Agree 100%. But most bigoted people need an "other" to rant against to make themselves feel alive and to avoid their own problems.

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:09 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    So lesbians getting married are fine with you since they are very low risk of AIDS? And, I assume, you are equally intolerant of giving rights to AIDS victims who are not MSM? Which would account for about 1/4 of HIV/AIDS victims (see below). Or are you just vomiting out random statistics in an effort to assure your self that you really aren't a bigot?


    from the CDC http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/us.htm: Heterosexuals accounted for 27% of estimated new HIV infections in 2009 and 28% of people living with HIV infection in 2008.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 3:03 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    ........... they frightened me, so I moved. Now stay away.

     
  • Mike S posted at 3:01 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Are you really so out of touch that you don't know what the answer to your ignorant post is? A child could dispose of your arguments.

    As far as "the victim is of slow low of moral and mental capacity often they are unaware they are being injured, and have been convinced it is love they are felling."

    Really? You don't come across as the sharpest tool in the shed, Jeffrey. Speaking of people who are unaware and of slow, low mental capacity....

     
  • Mike S posted at 2:57 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    So, now you believe there is a gay gene? Awesome!

     
  • Mike S posted at 2:56 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Your ridiculous assertion about gays being part of the curriculum is just another scare tactic that right-wing folks are using because they know they are losing the battle. So now you use a new twist on the old "they will get to our children" myth. The right wing can't come right out and call GLBT "perverts" or "demonic" or "pedophile" any more because then the average Joe wouldn't take them serious. Well, here is a news flash for you DeNiles: the average Joe in most places aren't taking the right wing homophobes serious anymore, especially people under the age of 50. You have already lost in most of the U.S. and you will lose in Idaho, too.

     
  • Humanist posted at 2:53 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Apparently NIC Student said the wrong thing.......... :)

     
  • Mike S posted at 2:50 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    Jeff, I understand you need to keep telling yourself that gay is an action (gay sex). but it is not. Why do you feel the need to keep lying to yourself about the meaning of sexual orientation? Do you advocate that redheads should not being having sex (since they too are a genetic mutation)?

     
  • Mike S posted at 2:48 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    And by "truth", you must mean, "my strongly (and often grammatically incorrect) opinions which go against the mounting evidence and opinions of all major medical organizations". At least that is what you are clearly saying to me.

     
  • Mike S posted at 2:39 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mike S Posts: 17

    chilada01: your comments on what is normal are incredibly short sighted. The "normal" human being then is not American, white or Christian (relative to the rest of the world). Are you any of these? Then you too are abnormal! Along with unnatural things like plastics, pacemakers, airplanes and polyesters.

     
  • stanJames posted at 2:28 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    stanJames Posts: 1

    Sso Iadaho has a constittuional amendment against gays marrying. the same sort of BS that they had until - yes - 1959 re prohibiting inter-racial couples from marrying

    Which btw was their idea of protecting the sanctity of the white race.

    this will change, its just a shame and a stain on America that either of these horrific things happened

    But not surprising because America is the most religious nation in the western world and was the second to last to end slavery in the west.. Which was then followed by segregation as per the bible.

    Nice bible you have - a god of hatred of minorities

     
  • Mahiun posted at 12:15 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    Like I said before, GET USED to the idea that if you are abnormal, you CAN still get married; but in (2) States only, Idaho being NOT one of them.

    Yes, you did say it before. And it's still not true.

    It's actually NINE states: all of New England, except Rhode Island (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts), New York, Maryland, Iowa, and Washington. Roughly 1/10 of the total national population. If California joins the list, it will be approximately 1/5 (20%) of the total national population.

    And depending on how the SCOTUS rules on Perry v. Scharzenegger (the "Prop 8" case), Idaho could also join the list, as would every other state in the union.

    But if you're this far off, this ill-informed, this "pulling it out of thin air" with one of your supposedly central points, it does raise quite some degree of doubt as how much anything else that you write can be trusted to be correct....

    RadR ----- errrr, sorry, "NIC Student". What *IS* your nom du jour, anyway?!
    Why should I be forced to fund what I consider acts that offend my Lord?
    I find war to be deeply offensive to my core beliefs. Why should I be forced to fund it? I find subsidies to churches, in the form of tax exemption, offensive in the extreme. Why should I be forced to fund it? We all end up funding, accepting, living with things we do not personally agree with. That's what it means to live in a society.

    Mahiun readily admits that gays envision communities that are fully supportive of the entire gay lifestyle....
    No, Mahiun does not! What is this "gay lifestyle" that you keep referring to but refuse to define? If your posts are to be believe at face value, there is evidently only ONE "gay lifestyle", we're all completely interchangeable and we all live exactly the same way --- so why are you so unable to define this "gay lifestyle"? After all, I live exactly the same way as my gay friends in San Francisco who have a 4-year-old daughter, and they live exactly the same way as my gay buddies who are childless and who both work an oil field in Alberta, and they live exactly the same way as my gay friends in Berlin who work at the Bundestag, and they live exactly the same way as the gay 20-somethings I know who like to club every night, and...... Do you truly not see how ridiculous this whole "gay lifestyle" shtick is?!

    And no, I do not envision "supportive" communities. I envision communities where it is simply a non-issue. Where one's sexual orientation is no more germane, relevant, or interesting than one's car, or one's eye colour. Big deal, who cares --- pass the salt and pepper, please. Communities where 'support" isn't even necessary, because the community is well integrated enough that sexual orientation doesn't require "support" to make it through a sea of bigotry, bias, and discrimination.

    ...education which glorifies gays and homosexual relationships.
    No, not "glorifies". Just refrains from demonizing or ignoring.

    It comes with businesses and neighborhoods that cater to a gay customer base.
    Have you ever actually been to The Castro, Niles? The definitive, quintessential "gayborhood"? These "businesses that cater to a gay customer base" are made predominantly of......Subway, Pottery Barn, a Levi's store, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, Starbucks, and enough restaurants to feed a small army. There are a couple of stores that sell "marital aids", but even there, the window display are pretty tame ,and they cater to a clientele of both gay and straight. There is nothing "sleazy" or "salacious", and you'd have to actually enter the store to see anything that might offend your delicate sensibilities ---- you could either have your smelling salts and Swoonin' Fan ready before entering, or (here's a thought!) simply...........not go in. You might encounter the occasional drag queen or weatherman, but even that is pretty much limited to the dates of some "event", and while they may ask for a donation to a charity (often Make-a-Wish or Toys for Tots), they are not going to manhandle you or force you to go into a bar and have a drink with them. if one takes the stick out of one's posterior and just learns to live with a bit of sense of fun, one finds that one can peacefully co-exist with all kinds of people who may be quite different from oneself.

    I say accept none of them and they are the bigots for not allowing us the choice to decline their peculiar perversions.
    Niles, you are making your own life, and evetyone else's, so much more complicated than they need be.
    [*] If gay establishments disgust you, don't go in them!
    [*] If gay neighborhoods frighten you, don't live there!
    [*] If same-sex marriages offend you, don't have one!
    [*] If GLBT displays of affection cause you distress, don't look at them!

    There now, that wasn't so difficult or complicated, was it? This may be a news flash for you, but it's NOT all about you and your likes and dislikes!

     
  • DJ posted at 12:02 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    DJ Posts: 148

    Yes..to everything you just said...

     
  • DJ posted at 12:01 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    DJ Posts: 148

    Exactly...Very well put..

     
  • Humanist posted at 12:00 pm on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Since the comment by the user "Justin Cotrell" was removed, let me put my response into context.

    Justin stated that he is doing everything that he can to make CdA as uncomfortable as possible for LGBT people.

     
  • Humanist posted at 11:56 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Yeah, cuz gays aren't a part of society like everyone else. They're encroachers. Sheesh........ Go live in Saudi Arabia DeNiles. It sounds like it would be a utopia for you.

     
  • Humanist posted at 11:55 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Let me clarify: two men loving each other and two women loving each other are as normal as a man and woman loving each other. And it has been since the dawn of man. Somewhere along the way, humans interjected some false abnormality into this and homosexual bigotry was born. You're right. We shouldn't be having this debate and all what with your false abnormality and all.

     
  • DJ posted at 11:53 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    DJ Posts: 148

    Exactly...

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 11:51 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    "Why should I be forced to fund what I consider acts that offend my Lord?"

    Not sure why funds that go to your Lord's businesses are tax free.

     
  • Mahiun posted at 10:36 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    But here's the thing, Joey: you're not arguing against "special rights" for ME, you're arguing for "special rights" for YOU. You're arguing (or attempting to, anyway) simply for retaining heterosexual privilege, without advancing any rational argument for why we should retain heterosexual privilege. To coin an analogy, you're behaving just like the seagulls in Finding Nemo: "Mine! Mine! Mine! Mine! Mine!"

    And the whole premise rests on the assumption that sexual orientation --- at least, any sexual orientation other than strict heterosexuality, for some reason --- is chosen and mutable, an assertion that cannot be proven one way or the other. It also doesn't explain why we must accommodate special privileges for religion, which is clearly and undeniably chosen and mutable, but must not accommodate sexual orientation, which increasing amounts of evidence indicate to be unchosen and immutable. So if the argument is that we cannot grant rights to GLBT because their orientation is chosen, then that same argument would deny anti-discrimination protections to religious believers.

    It is a profound insult to tell people that their desire to enjoy the same basic rights as other Americans is really a desire to have “special” rights unavailable to others.

    So I stand by the earlier remark, Joe: you have put forth several arguments against marriage equality, you just haven't offered any rational arguments. Because there aren't any. Your arguments to date have all been very thinly veiled variations on, "Eeeeeeeeew!!!", and that just isn't enough, any more....

     
  • DeNiles posted at 9:22 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    ............cuz we can see where the gays have already encroached.

     
  • chilada01 posted at 9:19 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    chilada01 Posts: 159

    "That is a gross exaggeration. It certainly doesn't glorify it, it simply says that homosexual relationships are normal" NORMAL? To who? If it was NORMAL there wouldnt be this debate... NORMAL:adjective
    1. conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural....

     
  • Humanist posted at 8:55 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    "That lifestyle comes complete with education which glorifies gays and homosexual relationships."

    That is a gross exaggeration. It certainly doesn't glorify it, it simply says that homosexual relationships are normal.

    " It comes with businesses and neighborhoods that cater to a gay customer base. "

    So what? Do those neighborhoods and business come with a higher crime rate or something? No.

    "But most importantly gays insist that Judeo-Christian traditions and cultures be gutted, rewritten or eliminated"

    False. The Judeo-Christian traditions and cultures are what they are and folks that want to participate them are certainly free to do so. It just cannot be used as the basis for governance of the people.

    You guys are so paranoid and delusional that it's scary. The gays are coming! The gays are coming!


     
  • DeNiles posted at 8:37 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    Well 'no' it is not JUST about gay marriage. Mahiun readily admits that gays envision communities that are fully supportive of the entire gay lifestyle, not just Ozzie and Ozzie marriages. That lifestyle comes complete with education which glorifies gays and homosexual relationships. It comes with businesses and neighborhoods that cater to a gay customer base. It comes with it own subset of disease and awkward sexual advances on our youth (or worse).

    But most importantly gays insist that Judeo-Christian traditions and cultures be gutted, rewritten or eliminated in order to accommodate gays and their unique lifestyle agenda. Gay marriage is merely a 'toehold' issue. The rest of that iceberg is kept quiet. They seek to dismantle communities and reinvent them, as they define.

    So do not purchase the 'it's is only a marriage' argument. They are asking you to buy the whole enchilada. Keep that camels nose out of the tent. It is not a matter of when they're 'good'..... because they certainly can be 'good' and contributing citizens. It is a matter of when they're bad, they're behaviors can disgusting, repulsive, demanding and they do not care. In fact the more outrageous and obnoxious, the better they like it. And Mahiun and his friends say accept all of us, or you are a bigot. I say accept none of them and they are the bigots for not allowing us the choice to decline their peculiar perversions.

     
  • Humanist posted at 8:16 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    JoeIdaho: so what "special" rights and privileges do LGBT people want? Which ones are BEYOND rights and privileges that YOU already have? If they are only seeking rights that you already have, then that would mean equality. You seem to be using your own special definition of the word special.

     
  • Humanist posted at 8:08 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Oh, you poor persecuted Christian White men. Give me a freaking break. You are more than free and welcome to raise your family in the fear and admonition of the Lord, but that's where it ends, with your family. Don't expect everyone else to share the same hatred and bigotry as you.

    And you can do your part to make CdA as uncomfortable for LGBT folks in CdA as you can. Just don't cross those lines...... And, on the flip-side, there is a whole community of people here who welcome them with open arms.

    As for Christmas, atheists are totally fine and tolerant with you celebrating your holiday. No one has EVER tried to prevent you from doing that.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 7:43 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    It's not about "equality", Mahiun, it's about "special". That's what ALL of the "minority" groups are about.

    You're all victims in America, everybody EXCEPT white men.

    Like I said before, GET USED to the idea that if you are abnormal, you CAN still get married; but in (2) States only, Idaho being NOT one of them.

    It'd be SO different in terms of attitudes IF the rainbow crowd didn't INSIST on forcing THEIR views down everyone's throat. Since I don't want my kids taught that having Jeannie as a Mommy & Joan as a Daddy; that makes me a "bigot". I'm not alone in knowing that the thoguth processes involved are miles past stupid.

     
  • Mahiun posted at 7:31 am on Tue, Dec 18, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    "I don't care who anybody sleeps with. If a couple has been together all that time -- and there are gay relationships that are more solid than some heterosexual ones -- I think it's fine if they want to get married. I don't know how people can get so anti-something. ....Mind your own business, take care of your affairs, and don't worry about other people so much."
    --Betty White

    "Indeed, Miss Manners has come to believe that the basic political division in this country is not between liberals and conservatives but between those who believe that they should have a say in the love lives of strangers and those who do not."
    --Miss Manners (Judith Martin), Miss Manners Rescues Civilization

    Pretty much says it all. The reason you haven't read a rational argument against marriage equality in here is that there aren't any. It's that simple.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 10:08 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    The atheists are SO tolerant that they can't tolerate anything that has to do with a Christian holiday.

    "Christ's true message" wasn't about denying the existence of any God, cauis. How dumb.

     
  • CaiusCosades posted at 6:03 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    CaiusCosades Posts: 380

    The atheists commenting are sending messages of tolerance and compassion while the christians only write comments of hate and intolerance.

    I find it ironic that the atheists are more in line with Christ's true message than the christians are.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 4:28 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    Mahiun.... I did not expect you to accept or adopt perspectives or truths other than those you aver or wish to believe. And, no doubt, the feeling is mutual.

     
  • Humanist posted at 4:22 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    LTRTLR: My Daddy and Mommy told me about the birds and bees and how babies are made. They also taught me to love my fellow humans regardless of their sexuality and that they are just as "normal" as heterosexuals.

    Apparently the 100's of animal species that exhibit homosexual behavior didn't get the memo from god as to what your definition of "normal" is............

     
  • Ziggy posted at 4:15 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    Ziggy Posts: 1107

    We're off the subject which was gay marriage. I don't see why marriage at all should be discussed in school except to say maybe Abraham was married to Mary Lincoln. I don't remember anyone defining, discussing or instructing us about marriage at all.
    As to saying 48 states disagree with Washington. I don't believe 48 states have voted. A couple have, the rest have not so to say 48 states are against gay marriage is incorrect.

     
  • greyhound2 posted at 3:57 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    greyhound2 Posts: 735

    The gay rights thing is all about money. If you work for the State government, or a major corporation, you can collect spousal support, burial assistance and other benefits on an injured or deceased spouse.

    Now, if you are in Washington, you can marry your boyfriend or girlfriend at the courthouse and then go smoke a couple of joints to celebrate without fear, But if you cross the State lines 5 miles east into Idaho, you will be arrested and put in jail with a criminal record and never be able to get another job after your release, and your boyfriend.or girlfriend will benefit nothing. Now that makes sense. If you smoke MJ in Montana for mediclal purpouses, or in Washington for fun, it is no problem,but in Idaho expect to end up in a private for-profit jail making license plates about killing moose or other vermin, or plates about great french-fry potatoes for McDonalds. Who said anything was fair!

    It's not. So just have fun with whoever you are with whatever you have, as it doesn't matter in the end as all arrive and leave with nothing anyway.

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 3:24 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    "The difference being most Heterosexual people chose to either hide or not do things that would loss those things"

    Really, have you ever heard of the internet? There are some pretty funky straight people out there doing their thing for everybody to see. Many even charge others to watch.

    Not sure if there is any group who doesn't have its freaky members.

     
  • Mahiun posted at 2:57 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    So, you have no problem with gay people, as long as they hide?! Gosh, what a swell guy...!

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 2:51 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    Humanist: You need to ask your Daddy and Mommy about the birds and bees. They will tell you what is normal.

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 2:23 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    JW - Sexual orientation describes an enduring pattern of attraction... emotional, romantic, sexual, or some combination of these to persons of the opposite sex, the same sex, or to both sexes, as well as the genders that accompany them.

    Perhaps one can choose not to act, but one cannot choose to be

    I am a heterosexual, it's odd to suggest that I can choose to be gay. It's just a strange to suggest that Gay persons can choose themselves straight. Not sure where they teach people to think like that.

    Also not sure where they teach people to think that straight people are superior to gay people. Not only is that wrong, it would be impossible to prove otherwise without using subjective bias.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 2:02 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    Ziggy......... I did not indicate that homosexuality was to be taught as a negative mutation, just a mutation. And you are correct. Just about any genetic expression can be considered to be a mutation. There are redheads, like yourself, albinos, homosexuals, blonds, blue eyes, etc. Which of these mutations need to be taught to, and understood by, our children? Well homosexuals feel that they have to be included in the curriculum. So they get included, as they are, a genetic mutation - a topic to be discoursed when genes and mutations are instructed.

     
  • Mahiun posted at 1:55 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    They don't call them 'bathhouses' any longer and does that matter?
    No, it doesn't matter, because regardless of what they are called, they do not exist exist in the city and county of San Francisco. By law --- they are illegal in San Francisco. And have been, for nearly 30 years. Private sex rooms of any kind including saunas, spas, massage parlours, bars, or clubs --- any public establishment --- are illegal in San Francisco.

    They are, however, legal and licensed and very very carefully regulated by the State of California. Why? Because these places strictly monitor and prohibit the activity that goes on inside, barring known prostitutes (who are one of the demographics most likely to be carrying STDs) from entering, requiring patrons to sign pledges that they will engage in safe sex only (and monitoring the premises to ensure that this is the case), and providing extensive educational and informational materials on preventing STD transmission, as well.

    Even so, they are rare, even in California. There is one, for example, in San Jose --- with a population roughly equivalent to all of Idaho. There is actually very little call for saunas or bathhouses any more; they are a dying breed and seen as a relic of the past. GLBT people "hook up" the same way straight people do: via the Internet. Were you planning on banning that, as well?

    Odd how you insist on inserting a racial component.
    I did not "insert" a racial component. There IS a strong racial component, one which you conveniently omitted. That racial component is also strongly correlated to income level, age (Which, oddly, you also failed to acknowledge --- why didn't you take me to task for "picking on the young"? Could it have been because you didn't think you could make hay with that charge, but you could get some mileage out of the "racist" b.s.?) and population density.

    Statistically, HIV in this country is overwhelmingly a diagnosis of black, poor, inner-city youth. It's just the way it is; I didn't "insert" this, invent it, or make it up.

    Are we in any manner misinforming blacks about HIV?
    Yes --- by not informing them at all, not making the effort to ensure that we are reaching them with accurate information. This leaves them to invent and rely on their own "Information", which is --- incredibly --- even more inaccurate and misleading than the stuff you put out! They are left to depend on word of mouth, on "rumour has it that...." stories, on wildly inaccurate things they've heard on the street. One of the most popular, still, is that you can't catch HIV if you're straight, even if you occasionally have sex with other men --- as long as you still boink women, too, it doesn't matter what else you do or who you do it with. Seriously, this is what they hear and what they actually believe! I have friends and acquaintances who do work in HIV-related health care, and this is what they report.

    Likewise, there's a common street belief that you can't catch HIV your "first time" with anyone. This is the sort of nonsense they're filling their own heads with, because we are not willing to fund education efforts to give them real, accurate, fact-based information. Yes, if that means going door to door, then we go door to door --- because this is a public health issue.

    HIV is no mystery to anyone.
    Not true. See above. HIV is a complete mystery to many of these kids, because they've never been given factual information, and they fill the gaps with whatever they can make up. And they've come to believe that, even if they do catch HIV, it's "no big deal" and they can just manage it like you'd manage asthma or allergies: take a few pills and that's that. They have no idea how expensive it is, how debilitating it can be, or what's actually involved --- because no one has ever given them the information. HIV is no mystery to anyone in your world, but you do not inhabit their world.

    What should we teach our youth about homosexuality? The facts. In science they should be educated that there is a distinct population of genetically mutated peoples whose sexual orientation is reversed.
    This is not fact-based; this is speculation. We cannot say that it is the result of a "mutated" genetic makeup when we do not yet know exactly what that genetic makeup is. (And the most up-to-date research available indicates that it may be more a matter of epigenetic markers, anyway...)

    What we can say is:
    [*] Homosexuality has existed throughout human history, at a remarkably steady percentage of the population, throughout vastly different cultures and periods of history.
    [*] Homosexuality, up to and including lifelong bonded couples, exists in hundreds of species; it is not a human invention.
    [*] There are mountains of data strongly indicating that homosexuality has a strong genetic component, although the precise mechanism is not yet fully understood.
    [*] Homosexuality is not a choice and cannot be changed. Same-sex attraction is not the same as behaviour; the behaviour can be suppressed but the attraction cannot be eliminated or changed.
    [*] GLBT persons are just as deserving of respect, courtesy, and dignity as heterosexual persons.

    Now, are you going to address any of the other points, issues, and questions that I raised, or simply continue to ignore them?

     
  • Humanist posted at 1:13 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Quote JW: "Same gender sex is Abominably wrong"

    According to what logic? Oh yeah, it's wrong cuz the bible sez so. Ridiculous in this day and age that people are still using that ancient and antiquated book of man as the basis for determining who is more human than the next guy or gal. Pitiful, really.

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 1:07 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    "I no more want an unrepentant murderer living next to me, than I do an unrepentant Homosexual, both are a choice and avoidable"

    Confused about this choice stuff and sexual orientation. Are you saying that right now you have homosexual tendencies but are "choosing" to be straight. If that's the case, pretty sure you're not straight. You're gay living lie.

     
  • Ziggy posted at 12:27 pm on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    Ziggy Posts: 1107

    De Niles, if indeed this is a mutation, then why an prejudice? Am I a genetic mutation--having been born a redhead? It is indeed a minority.
    If homosexuality is a genetic mutation, then why would you call it an aberrant lifestyle? I must stay out of the sun because I have very light skin--is that an aberrant lifestyle also?
    What about a genetic mutation that makes one a bigot? Is that an aberrant lifestyle? Gifted musicians--aberrant because they live in a world full of music?
    This is where prejudice leads us. Is this a path we should be on? Does this even make any sense?

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 11:52 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    "The facts. In science they should be educated that there is a distinct population of genetically mutated peoples whose sexual orientation is reversed"

    Sounds like something out of some sort of Gay XMen comic book. Many kids will like this and want to replicate.

    Don't know how you come up with this stuff, but it is highly imaginative.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 11:18 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    Ooops..... They don't call them 'bathhouses' any longer and does that matter? Now they are called spas, parlors and health resorts. They're there and you know they are there.

    I did not introduce HIV to this thread. I illuminated facts on the subject. The link between the disease and MSM is well understood and documented. Odd how you insist on inserting a racial component. Do you agree with the radical assertion that whites invented HIV to rid the country of blacks? Are we in any manner misinforming blacks about HIV? Do we keep HIV education out of poor schools? Do we go have to go door-to-door and warn these people? HIV is no mystery to anyone. That is what is so outrageous about MSM behavior and any reckless lifestyles that blithely accept the peril. But for some such living makes for good stage drama.

    What should we teach our youth about homosexuality? The facts. In science they should be educated that there is a distinct population of genetically mutated peoples whose sexual orientation is reversed. Just be aware that they exist and that they can be quite pleasant folks.

     
  • Mahiun posted at 10:39 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    Again with the misinformation, Niles?! Well, I guess it is kinda your thing, it is just what you do, I suppose.....

    Your stats are correct, but incomplete. You are ignoring entire demographics that heavily influence HIV diagnoses and statistics:

    [*] First, the stat for MSM transmission vector is true only in this country, not worldwide. Which calls the question of what things would be different in America that would account for this.

    [*] HIV transmission, in this country, is overwhelmingly a phenomenon of inner-city, black youth --- a tremendously underserved demographic. They are not reached by education efforts because they are not targeted by education efforts; they are largely considered disposable and not worth the time, effort, or money for prevention and outreach efforts.

    And, they are hampered by exactly the same kind of attitudes that are so common in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho: the stigma attached to being gay. It is, if anything, even stronger among many black communities: the message that "it is not okay to be gay, and for gawd's sake, don't let anybody know --- or even think! --- that you are!" Consequently, these kids (and it is mostly kids and very young adults, 14-24) do not and will not even make use of the very limited resources that are available to them; doing so and being seen doing so would brand them as "f****t", and they'd be marked men and targeted for persecution or worse. For the same reason, they feel forced into clandestine and "on the down low", surreptitious sexual encounters --- the most dangerous kind --- so "no one finds out". It's a perfect storm of the worst possible factors for transmitting not just HIV, but other STDs as well.

    [*] The numbers are somewhat skewed, because this same population --- poor, inner-city, young, racial minority --- also tends toward higher IV drug use. But if the populations overlap, the sexual practices are counted and the IV drug use is often not. The transmission vector is assumed to be sexual, even when it may well have been use of shared needles.

    [*] These stats are for HIV diagnoses, not necessarily new infections. Because of the lag time for symptoms to appear --- up to 7-10 years --- what we are actually seeing, at any given time, is a snapshot of the past, not the present. And what were we dewing with, 7-10 years ago? Oh, yeah: an administration that, despite laudable HIV-prevention efforts in other countries, implemented a domestic policy that slashed funding for education and outreach programs to the most vulnerable populations here at home.

    [*] It's difficult to understand this irrational fear of HIV, anyway. Yes, of course we need to be doing more to reduce or eliminate new infections. But in this country, HIV is a long-term chronic but manageable condition, and it is not an infectious disease. Unless you are planning on having unprotected sex with an HIV+ person, you have nothing to worry about, personally. You may already encounter several HIV+ persons in your daily life, and never even know it.

    So, bring this back to the central issue of the article: same-sex marriage. In what possible way does HIV relate to the issue of same-sex marriage, either in Washington state or in Idaho? Are you attempting to say that HIV+ couples should not be allowed into Idaho? And if so, are you going to apply the same standard to straight married couples entering Idaho, as well? How do you plan to tell whether couples are HIV+ or not? And unless you're planning on being PART OF those marriages, how does the HIV status of either of the marriage's spouses affect or pertain to you? This line of argument is the reddest of red herrings --- which I suppose is only apropos for the reddest of red states....

    Gay men still frequent private Gay Bathhouse businesses in San Francisco.
    So Niles, is it that you cannot read, or will not read? No, gay men do not "still frequent private Gay Bathhouse businesses in San Francisco" (why the capitalization, by the way?) because THERE ARE NONE! And there have been none for nearly 30 years! Why this preoccupation with the baths?! They do not exist in places like Coeur d'Alene, Idaho and even in the cities where they used to exist, they never existed in residential neighbourhoods. You seem positively obsessed with bath houses, which is rather like being deathly afraid of albino tigers roaming Kootenai County streets --- what are the odds you're ever going to encounter either one?!

    Mahiun will staunchly defend their right to be sexually reckless and he would warmly welcome this behavior into your neighborhoods.
    What Mahiun will do is to thank you for kindly permitting him to speak for himself!

    No, you will not hear me defend sexual irresponsibility or reckless endangerment of others. That is a public health issue. But is has NOTHING to do with sexual orientation! You will not hear me defend "happy ending" massage parlours, either --- although they seem to abound, with an overwhelmingly straight clientele, a mere 25 miles away. Sexual irresponsibility is not exclusive to either gender or sexual orientation.

    But this would seem to undermine your entire argument against same-sex marriage. You are against reckless and wanton sexual escapades, yet you are against affording GLBT the stabilizing influence of committed marriages, which would actively discourage and mitigate such sexually libertine activity? This is illogical; if you are concerned about sexual promiscuity, one would think that you would actually want to actively encourage institutions that actively discourage and reduce such promiscuity. Instead, you work tirelessly to prohibit such institutions, thereby encouraging the very behaviour you ostensibly deplore. You lambaste GLBT for not being in stable, committed relationships and then you do everything in your power to discourage them from entering stable, committed relationships. And this makes sense, because........??!

     
  • The Golden Mean posted at 10:35 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    The Golden Mean Posts: 4213

    "A world without boundaries is a world without order or merit"

    Need boundaries to limit the influence which religion can have on society.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 10:11 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    carol........ Let each state decide. Then let the populations decide where they choose to live.

     
  • carol posted at 8:32 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    carol Posts: 411

    According to stats, MOST people in the US are OK with gay marriage, its the Tea Party Republican legislatures that have put forth laws against. The same legislatures that want to rape women before having legal abortions.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 7:59 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    DCinidaho, you know what's great?

    YOU "see no logic in the argument against gay mariage".....BUT the voters in 48 STATES, including this one, do.
    So; keep on seeing no problem with it, and we'll keep voting it down.

    DeNiles, your argument was spot on. 100% correct, thank you.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 7:19 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    Regarding HIV/AIDS - MSM remains the leading cause of its transmission. Each year San Francisco sees more new cases of HIV/AIDS among its homosexual males than all of Idaho - ever. And those cases that were diagnosed in Idaho - most were MSM transmitted - gay males.

    HIV/AIDS is not exclusive to homosexual males but it certainly is predominant among that population. Worse is that MSM still leads new diagnosis of this disease even though we fully understand the disease and its vectors (to put it clinically). Translated - homosexual men still seem unable to reign in their loose lifestyle despite understanding its dangers. They still infect each other and they keep the world supplied with a constant source of this deadly disease. Gay men still frequent private Gay Bathhouse businesses in San Francisco. They still spread AIDS in these establishments.

    But Mahiun will staunchly defend their right to be sexually reckless and he would warmly welcome this behavior into your neighborhoods.

     
  • wheels1 posted at 7:00 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    wheels1 Posts: 389

    The ignorant are always prejudiced and not worth wasting time on.You Can't teach an old dog new tricks.

     
  • DCIDAHO posted at 6:57 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    DCIDAHO Posts: 2065

    Reading this thread from front to back, I can find no logic presented against gay marriage. Lots of senseless rants, no logic. Really, it's just sex. I mean...who cares what a person does with his/her junk? Love is to be cherished regardless of the gender of the lover and lovee. I'd rather see people who love each other get married than witness the issues that hiding that love generates. This won't harm children, communities etc. In all likelihood, community strength will result. Let em be.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 6:27 am on Mon, Dec 17, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    You're right, Randy, the "majority" of peopel who have AIDS are hetero; of course that's a tiny percentage of people next to gay people, who have the OVERWHELMING numbers of AIDS cases by group.
    In other words, as a Hetero, you have a 2.5% chance of contracitng it; BUT if you're gay, it's 25%, or 1 in 4.

    So; PLEASE go on thinking that mostly Heteros are the ones thata have AIDS. You'll have plenty of company, there's at least 3 or 4 other people in the country that see AIDS as a hetero disease.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 9:57 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    Randy.....(Sheesh.)
    Let me help you comprehend this:
    Let's talk percentages for a minute-
    11 PERCENT of the population has 48 PERCENT of the HIV cases.
    That means, Randy; that 89 PERCENT has the remaining 52 PECENT.

    So; come along with me now, and we'll do a little math together:
    Let's say that there's 10,000 people in society as a whole.
    Out of them, 5% have contracted AIDS.
    So, that's 500 people that have HIV, total.

    Now, 48% of the HIV victims at 5%= 240
    So; 240 of the total victims are homosexual.

    52% of them are hetero=260 hetero victims

    Now, if 11% of the 10,000 total are gay, that means that (in this scenario) 1100 of the 10,000 are gay.
    Out of the 1100 gay people, just under 25 PERCENT of them have HIV.

    Of the 9500 heteros that have HIV, there's what; 260, right? Or something like 2.5 PERCENT.

    Way to undersand math there, genius.

    Heteros do NOT have AIDS in a more prevalent manner; gay people do, especially men, by a minimum 10 to 1 margin, on a percentile basis.

    But hey; if you want, you can call 25% less than 2.5%, it wouldn't surprise me.

     
  • cdanative33 posted at 8:39 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    cdanative33 Posts: 354

    Joe... why do you care?

     
  • max power posted at 6:58 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    max power Posts: 559

    *** What's Next With The Anything Goes Libtard Crowd ***

    If a group of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals have their way pedophiles themselves could play a major role in removing pedophilia from the American Psychiatric Association's bible of mental illnesses - The Diagnostic and Statisical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). The DSM is set to undergo significant revisions in 2013 at a conference scheduled to take place in Frisco - of all places!

    Critics warn that their success could lead to the decriminalization of pedophilia. Yes, you heard that right! This group of left leaning libtard healthcare professionals wants to "NORMALIZE" pedophilia and keep pedophiles out of prison. AFTER ALL THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY. Sounds like NAMBLA on steroids.

    At a recent satellite conference being sponsored by B4U-ACT, a group of pro-pedophilia mental health professionals and sympathetic activists proposed just that. According to the conference brochure, the event promised to examine ways in which "minor attracted persons" (pedophiles) can be involved in the DMS revision process and how popular perceptions of pedophiles can be reframed to encourage 'TOLERANCE".

    So-called "Child Advocate" Dr Judith Reisman, a visiting professor from Liberty University's School of Law, said the conference is part of a strategy to condition people into accepting pedophiles.

    "There's already a great way to get pedophiles out of prison. Quit putting them in special housing units and put them in with the general prison population. Removal is fast, permanent and provided free by the inmates. While they're at it maybe they should put the libtard pro-pedophile psychiatrists in with them." - Jack Hammer

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 6:44 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    Comedic, when you Libs run out of gas, or legitimate conversation on ANYTHING that has to do with homosexuality; your tired old LAST gasp is always the same:
    "Hmmm...must be in the closet, latent homosexuality etc..."

    Now, for REALITY:
    Ziggy, you said that AIDS is more "prevalent in the hetero community".
    WHAT a laugh.
    According to statistics, 48% of the people in America who have AIDS are homosexuals, and probably contacted it through their perverse activities.
    At MOST, 11% of Americans consdier themselves "gay", and half of THOSE are female. The females rarely contract AIDS, so that leaves "reltively) 5.5% of Americans who have 48% of ALL of the diagnosed cases.

    From Avert.org, a website FOR teaching people about the dangers of HIV:
    "In the USA, the UK, and a number of other European countries, HIV and AIDS have affected young gay men more than any other group of people. In the UK and USA especially, the percentage of young gay men who have been infected with HIV and the percentage with AIDS is much higher than other groups such as heterosexual people or children.

    In the USA, it is estimated that nearly 255,000 men who have sex with men were living with HIV/AIDS in 2007, and nearly 5,400 had died. Around 48% of all people diagnosed with AIDS in America in 2007 were probably exposed to HIV through male-to-male sexual contact.1 In the UK, by the end of June 2009, around 45,947 diagnoses of HIV had been in men who had probably become infected through sex with another man. 53% of these men were aged below 35.2

    There are also other parts of the world where men who have sex with men, many of whom do not identify themselves as gay, are affected by HIV. For example, the primary HIV transmission route in Latin America is sex between men. In Brazil, men who have sex with men accounted for 40% of all AIDS diagnoses among males between 2000 and 2005.3 In some cities in Colombia, estimates of HIV prevalence among men who have sex with men range from 10% to 25%.4"

     
  • CaiusCosades posted at 6:25 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    CaiusCosades Posts: 380

    Homosexual urges, when repressed out of shame or fear, can be expressed as homophobia. Freud famously called this process a “reaction formation” — the angry battle against the outward symbol of feelings that are inwardly being stifled.

     
  • Ziggy posted at 6:12 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Ziggy Posts: 1107

    I believe aids is more prevalent in the hetero community. Being gay is like being a redhead. I was born a redhead, big deal. My friend was born gay. Big deal. He is a dear sweet loving friend.
    No one "chooses" to be a natural redhead. No one chooses to be straight or gay or to be short or to be musically gifted. It happens. I am often amazed at what bigots choose to target. Why not trombone players? They are different, that's for sure.

     
  • mister d posted at 6:09 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    mister d Posts: 1531

    I feel sorry for the children of many of these posters. I wonder how many of them are closeted gays because they are afraid to come out to parents who would condemn them for who they are. I have seen it several times in my profession and with friends who could not accept their children for who they are. Seems like more native Idahoans are more accepting than the transplants who have moved in and changed our state.

     
  • NIC GSA Member posted at 6:07 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    NIC GSA Member Posts: 7

    Cite your source.
    Last time i checked, being gay didnt cause aids.
    I do know what helped spread AIDS. Disinformation like it being a "Gay" disorder. The governments unwillingness to educate and help prevent the spread for more than 20 years. And the churches stance on gays, shunning them from communities that could have helped, or at least eased the pain.
    I dont think you spew hate speech, i just think you are ignorant.

     
  • COG777 posted at 5:51 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    COG777 Posts: 338

    What about a conversasion such as

    "Mommy what happened to your cousin David ?"

    "Well sweetheart he chose a live style that created a STD called aids and died at young age'.

    I guess that would be called hate speech by some delusional people that believe truth is evil.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 5:32 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    And the pure GENIUS of vandalguy chimes in with his "addicted to marijuana" spiel....who espouses homosexual marriage and prohibition.
    What PLANET do you come from, "Vandal"?

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 5:01 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    What is it, 96% of the States have decided that marriage is for men & women, but you libs have decided that if I'm not FOR gay marriage than I'm a bigot?

    Get it right, Ladies.
    I didn't EVER say that I'd teach my kids that they should disrespect ANYONE. I did say that it IS my right to teach them whatever I want to. See; that's a big problem for you big government/someone needs to hold my hand & tell me how it's done crowd. In YOUR opinion, YOU know what my kids should be taught, and you're on drugs. The gay "lifestyle" is sick, and perverted, and that's my RIGHT to think it, anytime I want to.

    Mahiun sshowed how a conversation wiht a child would go; according to him, witht he kid asking for a cookie as a finish, he's wrong, I've HAD these conversations. Here is how it REALLY goes when your kid is old enough to think for themselves:
    A conversation with a 4- or 5-year-old about their gay relative typically goes much like this:
    CHILD: "Mommy, why do Uncle Tim and Larry go everywhere together and do everything with each other?"
    MOM: "Because they love each other very much, just like Mommy and Daddy do."
    CHILD: OK, I don't get it; is one of them, like, the girl, and the other one the man?
    MOM: I'm not sure, but we need to respect them regardless. I know they're different, but they're nice people, and it's their choice how they want to live.
    CHILD: That's weird.

    DUH.
    But you BETTER not say it out loud; or tell someone that it IS strange, cuz then you're a big bad bigot.

    As to how "times are changing; accept it" nonsense, AGAIN, 96 PERCENT of America is against gay marriage. Get used to it, you wanna get married, find someone of the OPPOSITE SEX like any normal person would.

     
  • cdanative33 posted at 4:59 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    cdanative33 Posts: 354

    Why does anyone care who someone else chooses to marry? I will never understand why people get so upset about this issue. If it doesn't effect you than why do you care? Even if you think it's weird, some people are in love with someone else of the same sex...and that's how it's been throughout history in many different cultures. So what?....who cares?

     
  • Humanist posted at 4:16 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Nobody is forcing the gay on your children. They won't turn gay by someone telling them to treat gay people equally. Your children are either gay or they're not already.

    Question for you: do you enjoy girl on girl porn?

     
  • Humanist posted at 4:01 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    You seem to be highly confused about the definition of hypocrisy. I'm not the one hating here. I have not attacked religion here. I'm a loving person and am embracing of gay people who love one another - they're no different than you or I.

    YOU are the only one here espousing hate. We cannot tolerate hate. We need to teach ALL children in our public schools that all people are equal regardless of race, gender and sexuality. Love your fellow human. That is the RIGHT thing to do. This is not even debatable using rationality and reason as the basis of thought.

    And despite whether it makes sense or not, you have every right to go ahead and teach your kids your bigotry. Hopefully some of them will get past their fear of you and be smart enough to break the cycle of hate.

     
  • VandalGuy posted at 3:57 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    VandalGuy Posts: 135

    Lets see, its people like IdahoJoe who think they have a falsely assumed right to smoke pot because they think they exist in a magic world where they do not interact with other people.

    Yet two people who love each other and just happen the same parts in their pants can't marry each other because that would ruin all of the world and other retarded nonsense?

    I would rather live in a world with countless of married gays and no pot addicts then the reverse.

     
  • Humanist posted at 3:54 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    The gays are coming! The gays are coming!

     
  • NIC GSA Member posted at 3:22 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    NIC GSA Member Posts: 7

    Cite your source. im tired of you religious crazys spewing out statistics and opinions and calling them facts. i am revoking your man card till you can cite me a study that supports your hypothesis.

     
  • Dan Gookin posted at 3:20 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Dan Gookin Posts: 671

    "Same-sex couples have lined up at Washington courthouses to not only officialize their plans to grow old together, but to also gain the legal benefits of a wedding license like hospital visitation rights and tax breaks."

    Split infinitives, anyone?

     
  • Mahiun posted at 3:19 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Mahiun Posts: 4827

    I vowed to myself that this time, I'd just stay out of the "Duhhhhhhh Derby" and let the mouth-breathers exhaust themselves, without stepping into the middle of it. But I can't just sit by and let misinformation just go completely unchallenged --- or worse, be read and accepted as being true, by people who don't know any better. And Niles, you are putting out even more misinformation than usual.

    They will demand more and more accommodations which actually exceed any definition of civil rights.
    I believe you meant to say that such accommodations would exceed any of your definitions of civil rights. And I'm sure we'd all agree that such an outcome is entirely possible, or even likely. But, you are not exactly known and renowned for your objectivity on the subject......

    In San Francisco the city recently adopted a measure whereby sex change operations will fall under public funding guidelines. Gays need to be surgically altered for their 'well being' and so that somehow warrants an operation paid for by tax dollars.
    Okay, this confuses, conflates, and misrepresents so many issues that it's hard to know where to start, so in no particular order:

    What you're referring to is "Healthy San Francisco", a universal healthcare program provided to the resident of the City and County of San Francisco who cannot otherwise afford or obtain health insurance. The program is funded through a variety of sources: some of it comes from taxes on the hospitality industry (hotel taxes, for example), some from other taxes paid by city residents, some from grants from the federal government, some from patient co-pays on a sliding scale, and some of it from businesses with more than 20 employees, who do not provide any other form of healthcare. It is not accurate to assume or to imply that it is entirely taxpayer-funded. It isn't.

    As for sex reassignment surgery, you're......."sort of" true. Healthy San Francisco, and the city's Board of Supervisors, have chosen to remove gender reassignment surgery from a list of specifically excluded procedures. In other words, Healthy SF is no longer prohibited from paying for such surgery. But that does not mean that the program is going to start paying for such surgeries any time soon. Right now, it's a purely symbolic gesture, as the city does not have the expertise, capacity, or protocols in place to provide this through any of its clinics or public hospital.

    But it goes farther than that, Niles. You're confusing and conflating gender identity with sexual orientation. The two are not the same thing, and exist and function completely independently. I have known several transgendered persons, in every imaginable permutation of sexual orientation: some of them were born as females attracted to men, but identified their own gender identity, their "inner being" as male. So while they may have been viewed by others as a "straight woman", they felt that they occupied the wrong body, and eventually transitioned and are now much more happily living as gay men. I've known others who began as men attracted to men, but who considered themselves women in the wrong body --- after transitioning, they dated and eventually married as straight women.

    Although the two communities sometimes ally for purposes of political organizing, Gender identity and sexual orientation are not the same thing, and being homosexual does not automatically mean that one is longing to be a member of the opposite sex. I'm quite happy being male, thanks, and have absolutely no desire to either be or boink a woman.

    You will have homosexuality incorporated into elementary school readers.
    What does this mean? If you mean that children might learn that gay people exist, that may even know one or two, and that gay people are still people who deserve respect just like any other person, then you're right: that probably will happen --- as it should. Just as we no longer teach little girls that Barbie, Betty Crocker, Hints from Heloise, and the Happy Homemaker are their only routes to fulfillment, we no longer try to pretend that GLBT people simply do not exist, or that they should be feared or shunned.

    But if your fear is that children are somehow going to be taught that they are obligated to be gay themselves, that is pure bullish------ errrrr, bovine excrement. What they are "obligated" to do is to treat GLBT people with dignity, respect, and common courtesy, and to regard them as the individuals they are. That's it.

    They will demand gay bath house licensing.
    In this area?! That's extremely unlikely --- Coeur d'Alene simply isn't enough of a "draw" for there to be enough clientele to keep a place like that going. Where they exist at all (and they're pretty rare, nowadays), they tend to be a very urban phenomenon; that's the only place that can generate enough revenue to keep it running. You also tend to repeatedly (but consistently, I'll give you that) ignore the fact that one of the places they conspicuously do NOT exist is.....San Francisco, California. Haven't been any baths there for more than 30 years, and no one is clamouring to bring them back. Their clientele is steadily shrinking; in the age of the Internet, who's going to bother with a bathhouse??!

    And yet, somehow, for some unspecified reason, tiny and isolated little Coeur d'Alene, Idaho is going to become nothing but wall-to-wall saunas, massage parlors, and bathhouses. Wishful thinking, perhaps, Niles?

    Many have lived where this stuff occurs.
    It would probably be much more accurate to have said, "Many have lived when this stuff occurred" --- meaning "Thirty or more years ago!" Yes, it occurred. I know; I was there, I'm old enough to remember it. But you're living in the past, Niles.

    The era of free-for-all bath houses is sooooooooo last-century, and if the few that still exist posed any real danger to the community, they'd be shut down (as they were, in San Francisco, more than 30 years ago) as a public health hazard. Moreover, they have always had a strict "21 & older" admission rule, so the "Think of the children!" rubric just doesn't hold up. Unless you're actually afraid that you wouldn't personally be able to resist the siren call of a nearby bath house, it's difficult to understand what your real fear is, here....

    Homosexuality is considered abnormal by genetic scientific definitions.
    This is simply not true. It is considered a minority variation whose causation is not entirely known or understood but is widely believed, based on evidence, to be the result of combination of genetics, in utero hormonal influences, epigenetic markers, and other factors that do not include conscious or deliberate choice. But science does not take a "moral" stance on the issue, one way or the other.

    It does not need to be officially distinguished for these unfortunates to get the rights assured to them by the constitution.
    Historically, this too has not been the case, has not been true. It would be lovely to think that we lived in a progressive enough, egalitarian enough, and socially advanced enough society that official protection of minority status were unnecessary to guarantee recognition of constitutional rights. Unfortunately, that utopia does not yet exist. Instead, as recently as this week, we have radio personalities attempting to persuade their audience that GLBT are "not human" and are therefore "not entitled to any of the protections of the United States Constitution".


    ...many peculiar iterations of the gay lifestyle...
    ...which you have steadfastly refused to define. What, precisely, is this "gay lifestyle" --- besides simply a term that you like to throw around with ever defining it?

    These are the people who want our youngsters to be confronted and confused with same sex relationships.
    They're not confused, unless you choose to make them confused. A conversation with a 4- or 5-year-old about their gay relative typically goes much like this:
    CHILD: "Mommy, why do Uncle Tim and Larry go everywhere together and do everything with each other?"
    MOM: "Because they love each other very much, just like Mommy and Daddy do."
    CHILD: "Oh. Can I have a cookie?"

    They do not want to allow you to raise your own children.
    Au contraire. I don't care what you tell or teach your children, as long as I don't have to be around them, and as long as I don't have to deal with the aftermath of however you chose to &*($%^# up their little minds. I would prefer to simply avoid them, but seeing as how I am forced to deal with other people's progeny in public places, so long as they and their parents treat me with civility, respect, and courtesy, we'll all get along just fine. Now, was that really so difficult?!

     
  • NIC GSA Member posted at 3:12 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    NIC GSA Member Posts: 7

    The fact that the bible says you can sell your daughter for 2 sheep and wheel of cheese is far more insulting than 2 men sharing hospital visitation rights or not having to pay estate taxs when their partner dies. Go sit on your porch and yell at kids that play in your yard grandpa, youre to old for this game and will just get trampled by the disenfranchised youth that can so easily see through your bigotry and hate for what it really is. An inability to accept change.

     
  • NIC GSA Member posted at 3:06 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    NIC GSA Member Posts: 7

    but not by you right? because that would go against what jesus ACTUALLY SAID. So if you really want to judge, by all means go ahead, but dont try to hide behind your lie factory.... err "bible" when it tells you in specific terms not to judge.

     
  • NIC GSA Member posted at 3:04 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    NIC GSA Member Posts: 7

    im so glad you have found an invisible friend who accepts you for you. But i refuse to allow you to use your one book to bash your way into my life. Im not gay but darn if i dont just love them. Know what i have never seen, a gay bigot. you never hear of gay supremacy, or a straight guy getting beat up outside of a straight bar for being a breeder. how about you crawl back into your hate filled little hole and let the rest of us fix this world without you and yours actively trying to screw it back up.

     
  • NIC GSA Member posted at 2:59 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    NIC GSA Member Posts: 7

    Then work harder to keep your crazy religion out of my childs science classroom. maybe then we can talk about equality.

     
  • NIC GSA Member posted at 2:59 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    NIC GSA Member Posts: 7

    so your mom will finally have someone to love her?

     
  • truthful1 posted at 2:49 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    truthful1 Posts: 554

    BTW.....@JoeIdaho - you are a funny little troll. How many jollies have you gotten so far being the bait-master that you are. Not all of us are fooled by you - when you go upstairs, say hi to mom. :D

     
  • truthful1 posted at 2:48 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    truthful1 Posts: 554

    "The problem is that it will not end at just gay marriage. They will demand more and more accommodations which actually exceed any definition of civil rights."

    - Really? What fever dream brought that conclusion to your bigoted lil mind?

     
  • Flash Gordon posted at 2:45 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Flash Gordon Posts: 1225

    God bless ya Joe, and wipe off the foamy bubbles from the sides of your mouth:)

     
  • Ziggy posted at 1:35 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Ziggy Posts: 1107

    Before Richard Butler graced us with his presence, Idaho was not the place for bigots, the ill educated, the extreme, the right wing flat earthers. Rich changed all that. Now we are the nation's nutcase. I say, Richard is gone but he left one heck of a legacy, didn't he?
    It's only fair to ask all those people married in other states to leave. Now. Hurry.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 1:25 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    And yes, I will teach my children what I WANT TO. If that means I believe in blue UFO's on Thursday, that's MY choice, not yours.

    Know what "bigotry" is, Humanist?
    It's when people attack a religion & it's people over their color and beliefs.
    That's what LIBERALS do EVERY DAY.
    H Y P O C R I T E S
    One & all.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 1:21 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    Curious how the pro-gay-agenda types resort to denigration when the facts of science are brought to the table.

    Do you think that the gay marriage political machine will shut down in Washington State now that their issue prevailed? Nah. They'll just move on to the next item on their list. Gay marriage is a Trojan Horse. Wait for it. The floodgates of gay-hood are just getting warmed up in Washington.

    They know I am correct. These are the people who want our youngsters to be confronted and confused with same sex relationships. They do not want to allow you to raise your own children. They want the gov't to decide how sexual orientation is taught, and when.

     
  • Humanist posted at 12:31 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Here you go, Joe. Here's what else the bible has to say about the INSTITUTION of marriage. I think we can all agree that the bible is 100% on all of these, right?

    http://bit.ly/5WaysToBeMarried

     
  • Flash Gordon posted at 12:28 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Flash Gordon Posts: 1225

    Boy howdy....there sure are a lot of insecure sexual identities posting about this particular issue:)

     
  • Humanist posted at 12:26 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    Then home school your kids where you can teach them your particular brand of bigotry instead that all people are equal regardless of race, gender or sexuality. Keep on raising those next generations of haters. Yeah, that's real productive and conducive to a peaceful society........

     
  • Humanist posted at 12:22 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    The gays are coming! The gays are coming!

     
  • Humanist posted at 12:20 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    The key to your response is "obvious to anyone with the capability to think rationally". idahohater and the other bigots here truly lack that ability and are so blinded by their hate and prejudices that there is reasoning with them. DeNiles has been saying the same BS on this topic for years while the Country realizes how logically fallacious denying loving gay people the right to marry is and progresses. And despite this, he has never changed his mindset. The old adage is true: you can't reason with the unreasonable.

     
  • Humanist posted at 12:14 pm on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Humanist Posts: 2997

    I see that all the bigoted haters have emerged from under their rocks.

    Times are changing. Accept it.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 11:13 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    The is not about gay marriage per se. The problem is that it will not end at just gay marriage. They will demand more and more accommodations which actually exceed any definition of civil rights. In San Francisco the city recently adopted a measure whereby sex change operations will fall under public funding guidelines. Gays need to be surgically altered for their 'well being' and so that somehow warrants an operation paid for by tax dollars. You will have homosexuality incorporated into elementary school readers. They will demand gay bath house licensing. They will impose themselves in anyway they feel they want.

    So keep it from starting. Many have lived where this stuff occurs. You do NOT want that here. Homosexuality is considered abnormal by genetic scientific definitions. It does not have to be adopted as normal or taught as normal. It occurs. It does merit civil treatment. It does not need to be officially distinguished for these unfortunates to get the rights assured to them by the constitution. If they desire to live in a community that absolutely adores gays and the many peculiar iterations of the gay lifestyle these places exist. They should seek to move where they can be happiest. If they chose to stay here. Fine. Just obey the laws.

     
  • Ziggy posted at 10:26 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Ziggy Posts: 1107

    Well then, the State of Idaho, in all fairness (which, by the way has never been a characteristic of Idaho state Govt) should also not recognize heterosexual marraiges performed in Washington. Throw those people out! Make them return to Washington to be married but they can't live here. No how no way!
    As usual the right wing and Republicans seek to control every aspect of everyone's life besides their own. And they think they are for "freedom"--they are for theocracy but they should be careful what they ask for. If they want government by religion, just whose religion will win out? Theirs???? Maybe not.
    I say, no one from Washington should stay here. Ditto for that sinful California. Go back, I say, go back. That should fix everything.

     
  • CaiusCosades posted at 10:15 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    CaiusCosades Posts: 380

    Joe, you remind me of my neighbor's dog, always running in circles and always barking.

    BTW "One theory is that homosexual urges, when repressed out of shame or fear, can be expressed as homophobia. Freud famously called this process a “reaction formation” — the angry battle against the outward symbol of feelings that are inwardly being stifled."

    Go and marinate on that for awhile.

     
  • Keven Johnson posted at 10:14 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Keven Johnson Posts: 1263

    I don't know why I'm wasting time replying to this absurd comparison....... but the distinction is more than obvious to anyone the the capability to think rationally. The gay couple who marries harms nobody, while the child molester most certainly does harm another! This is such a basic concept, and is the only basis on which I have any right to judge how another person lives.

     
  • mister d posted at 10:01 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    mister d Posts: 1531

    I hope we can get some more intelligent comments on here so I can make an educated decision.

     
  • idahotater posted at 10:00 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    idahotater Posts: 54

    Its disgusting, perverse and wrong. Equivalent to the child molesters in their lewd sexual behavior. Lump them together and put'em on a deserted Island, let them have at each other. Toss in the crazy "anything goes" Libs as well. The pass it off as "love", ha we know what it is, wink wink. What about polygamy, they don't love? Oh yeah the molesters they "love" too. Its just immoral and it will be judged!

     
  • CaiusCosades posted at 9:54 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    CaiusCosades Posts: 380

    Right wingers are so hypocritical....the message is "Government, stay out of our lives unless you're forcing right wing ideologies on people with laws!"

    Live and let live. These people did nothing to any of you, you just love to hate. Gay marriage should be legal everywhere, what the right wingers do to gay people is no different than what the south did to blacks for years. Discrimination is discrimination no matter how you want to paint it.

     
  • Keven Johnson posted at 9:51 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Keven Johnson Posts: 1263

    Carol, that is far too simple a solution for people who wish to control others!

     
  • Keven Johnson posted at 9:50 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    Keven Johnson Posts: 1263

    Why is this even an issue? Seriously? As Carol suggested below, if you are against same sex marriage, then don't marry someone of the same sex! Pretty simple solution...... except that everyone seems to want to control other people. Unless my neighbor's actions violate my liberty and my right to live my life as I see fit, it's none of my business how he lives, and certainly not who he chooses to marry!

    The fear that some of you have that your kids will become gay if same sex marriage is allowed is ridiculous. You can't turn a straight kid gay any more than you can turn a gay kid straight.

     
  • NoName posted at 9:17 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    NoName Posts: 253

    I prefer the good ol' days..... remember when everyone kept their own business behind closed bedroom doors? If you want to get your freak on with a goat I don't care if you keep it to yourself and you certainly shouldn't get a parade for it....... and while I'm here, why must "you" try to make this place into something its not? If you want a parade and you want to "educate" out kids about your ways please move to the big cities where that's acceptable, because 99% of us living in northern Idaho don't want to hear it and we certainly don't want our children exposed to your ways until they have matured enough to make their own well informed decisions.

     
  • truthful1 posted at 9:13 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    truthful1 Posts: 554

    Don't let the (Joe)Idaho haters take away from human love. It's not up to the "Most Offended Person" to determine the law of the land.

     
  • CHSdad posted at 8:57 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    CHSdad Posts: 364

    Don't take away my freedom to stop your freedom.

     
  • max power posted at 8:48 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    max power Posts: 559

    Mahiun, Humanist & Golden Mean in 5 4 3 2 1...

     
  • will-- posted at 8:37 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    will-- Posts: 885

    Debauchery and sexual deviance, Washington has sunk to a new level of decadence. Maybe next year they'll vote in polygamy.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 8:30 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    The cities with the lowest moral values in America are those who welcome homosexaulity as a "normal" way of life.
    Modern day Sodom & Gomorah.
    I DO NOT want my children taught that homosexuality is normal. It is deviant and wrong. If you want to do it, have at it, but DON'T FORCE your views on my kids.

     
  • carol posted at 8:00 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    carol Posts: 411

    If YOU think gay people coming together in marriage is wrong then I have a suggestion, DON'T DO IT!!

     
  • DCIDAHO posted at 6:35 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    DCIDAHO Posts: 2065

    "It reflects a degradation of morals".
    Morality is a contrived and subjective viewpoint.
    t's about love, not sex.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 6:19 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    Please do not allow the culture of homosexuality to get comfortable in our community. It is not a progressive posture. It is slipping into hedonism. It reflects a degradation of morals. Anything goes, so try everything.

    Soon Mahiun (et al) will comment here. They will beg your acceptance and proclaim how normal the lifestyle is. But........... the same people will also tell you that they support gay bath houses and teaching homosexuality in GRADE school. They fully insist that all forms of homosexual behavior be adopted and openly embraced and warmly welcomed - not just the happy monogamous married gay couple.

     
  • JoeIdaho posted at 3:54 am on Sun, Dec 16, 2012.

    JoeIdaho Posts: 2841

    The INSTITUTION of Marriage is for men & WOmen, not 2 guys.
    Idaho is with the vast majority of states in America, defining marriage, correctly.

     
default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
Not you?||
Logout|My Dashboard

Stocks