Homosexuality is an anomaly

[sharkman]

He's not asking for special status, he is taking issue with ScottSA's insistance that he is abnormal.

You misunderstand, I clearly said gay agenda.

[gc1765]

Again, marriage is not a "right".

If it's not a right, then let's ban heterosexual marriage.

[Liam]

With respect, the bone of contention I have with the gay agenda is it's insistance (and can be read quite plainly in your post) that it be given special status, as if one is better than another simply because of sexual orientation. This is no better than the homophobes who think the same.

There has always been hatred at others, be they gay, Jewish, Arabic, Black, White or whatever. Big deal. It doesn't make you better than anyone.

Special status?? Where in my post did I say that being gay earns me special status?

Being gay doesn't make me better than anyone. But it doesn't make me worse than anyone, either. Particularly when you consider that gay people fund their governments in equal amounts as their straight brethren, yet most of them get nothing but inequality in return.

Thankfully, I live in Massachusetts which has full equality, but 95% of gay Americans live in states where they pay as much in taxes as straight people but get nothing in return. Is that fair? That is THE gay agrenda. I couldn't give two sh*ts if you like me, love me, hate me or want to see me hoisted on a pike in the town square. But my agenda, THE gay agenda, is not to be forced to treated like a dog turd on the street. Why should I pay taxes into a system which continues to marginalize me as a person and give me fewer rights than someone who did nothing to earn better status? I've paid into systems that hates me long enough.

You have the luxury of being oblivious to it. Society caters to you, whether you know it or not. For me, if I lived anywhere else than where I do, I'd have to incur thousands of dollars in legal fees for will drafting, health care proxies, and the like. And regardless of where I live and regardless fo the rights I have here in Massachusetts, I still wouldn't get the same protection at the federal level than Britney Spears gets when she decides to have a 30 hour marriage with her latest co-dependent at the Betty Ford Clinic.

So spare me that "gay agenda" cr^p. It seems to me that straights are the ones with the real agenda and it's to keep anyone unlike them at a disadvantage.

[ScottSA]

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

Excuse me, but I have a life, not a "lifestyle". I work, I pay taxes, I shop at the grocery store, I support local charities, and volunteer my efforts on national political issues. I send my kids off to school each morning after making breakfast and picking out shirts and pants and jumpers. I fold laundry while I watch "Desperate Housewives". I've buried both a parent and a spouse. I worry about inflation and the economy, I wonder if I should get four yards of mulch delivered this summer or five yards. I have to fix one of the downspouts from my gutters. I arrange play dates and sleep overs and birthday parties for my kids. I worry about their future. I'm concerned about Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder if I'm saving enought for retirement. I have a dozen projects to finish at the office before my kids and I go on vacation next week. I have a car battery to jump this weekend and about four or five things to pick up at Home Depot tomorrow afternoon. I have to aerate and fertilize my lawn. I've soccer practice this weekend. And my kids have sewing lessons. I absolutely have to take my recyclables to the town dump this weekend. I make an effort every day to be a good role model for my kids. If you did half the things I do each day as a single parent, I would be impressed. But you probably have a wife at home who handles 70% of this stuff while you drink beer and slovenly moan against gays and how their "fag" agenda is demeaning your existence. Cripes. Have some honor. Gain some self respect. Develop a sense of self worth on your own time, I've got enough on my plate to do it for you.

Yes, I've got a fag agenda. It's called getting through each day. It's called just being seen as a person and being treated no different by the government I fund than someone who did nothing to earn a a place in life where he can call me "abnormal". Just who in the h*ll do you think you are? What have you done to earn your special status as "normal"? Being born straight? Spare me - there are more abnormal freaks who are straight than you'd ever find in a gay bar on sake and karoake night.

I think it's pretty clear that I'm the normal one. If anything, I think it's up to you to show you're even equal to someone like me.

Thrilling and heart tugging post, and I'm sure you're quite normal. Your sexual appetites are not, however. Which is as it may be, and I really don't care as long as you don't show up in my kid's school preaching to them that your sexual appetites are just peachy and "normal". I'm sure you won't, so there is nothing more we need to discuss. I don't walk around all puffed out about being hetero, and if you choose to publicize your homosexuality, prepare to be challenged on it by me at least.

[sharkman]

With respect, the bone of contention I have with the gay agenda is it's insistance (and can be read quite plainly in your post) that it be given special status, as if one is better than another simply because of sexual orientation. This is no better than the homophobes who think the same.

There has always been hatred at others, be they gay, Jewish, Arabic, Black, White or whatever. Big deal. It doesn't make you better than anyone.

Special status?? Where in my post did I say that being gay earns me special status?

Being gay doesn't make me better than anyone. But it doesn't make me worse than anyone, either. Particularly when you consider that gay people fund their governments in equal amounts as their straight brethren, yet most of them get nothing but inequality in return.

Thankfully, I live in Massachusetts which has full equality, but 95% of gay Americans live in states where they pay as much in taxes as straight people but get nothing in return. Is that fair? That is THE gay agrenda. I couldn't give two sh*ts if you like me, love me, hate me or want to see me hoisted on a pike in the town square. But my agenda, THE gay agenda, is not to be forced to treated like a dog turd on the street. Why should I pay taxes into a system which continues to marginalize me as a person and give me fewer rights than someone who did nothing to earn better status? I've paid into systems that hates me long enough.

You have the luxury of being oblivious to it. Society caters to you, whether you know it or not. For me, if I lived anywhere else than where I do, I'd have to incur thousands of dollars in legal fees for will drafting, health care proxies, and the like. And regardless of where I live and regardless fo the rights I have here in Massachusetts, I still wouldn't get the same protection at the federal level than Britney Spears gets when she decides to have a 30 hour marriage with her latest co-dependent at the Betty Ford Clinic.

So spare me that "gay agenda" cr^p. It seems to me that straights are the ones with the real agenda and it's to keep anyone unlike them at a disadvantage.

You must be a little stressed out about something, I made no comments to rile you up.

Nowhere in your post did you claim 'special status', and I never claimed you said that. I was referring to the gay agenda or culture war, in which the strategy is to have everything gay enshrined in legislation.

Your point about gays paying taxes to governments and getting nothing for it is quite silly. Do these gays get to send children to the local school? Play at the local playground? Do these gays get to drive on the local highways? Of course they get all the benefits that the different levels of governments offer, and your attempt to say otherwise shows a mindset out of touch with reality. I hope it's not the typical gay mind set.

Your comment about Britney Spears begs the question, what regular person gets the same protection as a Britney Spears gets? And why the hell do you think you deserve such protection just because you are gay? The wealthy get more than everyone else, it has always been the way of things, even at the federal level.

Life should not be handed to you on a silver platter just because you are gay, straight or whatever. It appears that you are racist against straight people.

[Liam]

You must be a little stressed out about something, I made no comments to rile you up.

Nowhere in your post did you claim 'special status', and I never claimed you said that. I was referring to the gay agenda or culture war, in which the strategy is to have everything gay enshrined in legislation.

Your point about gays paying taxes to governments and getting nothing for it is quite silly. Do these gays get to send children to the local school? Play at the local playground? Do these gays get to drive on the local highways? Of course they get all the benefits that the different levels of governments offer, and your attempt to say otherwise shows a mindset out of touch with reality. I hope it's not the typical gay mind set.

Your comment about Britney Spears begs the question, what regular person gets the same protection as a Britney Spears gets? And why the hell do you think you deserve such protection just because you are gay? The wealthy get more than everyone else, it has always been the way of things, even at the federal level.

Life should not be handed to you on a silver platter just because you are gay, straight or whatever. It appears that you are racist against straight people.

First, straight people are not a race, so one cannot be racist against them. I'm not even biased against straight people -- that's ludicrous. I simply want my government to put me on equal footing and to treat me the same way and to give me (and my partner) equal opportunity.

Here's the deal: I pay the same tax rate as someone else with my same income level and, yes, I do get some things for my tax money (roads, defense, an inept government, etc.), but a partner and I (in the US) wouldn't get nearly the same tax breaks as a married (i.e., "straight married") couple. We can't file a joint federal income tax return, courts do not automatically honor each of us as the other's survivor, we cannot receive Social Security benefits should one of us die, even in a court of law I can be forced to testify against my partner (something a straight married couple never has to face because of spousal privilege)... there are thousands of benefits that a straight couple gets simply by saying "I do" in a Vegas wedding chapel, be it Britney Spears or a waitress at a local diner, than a gay couple will ever get. If anything, straight couples are given things on a silver platter. In order to get even some of the basics (inheritance of property, health care proxy, etc.) I can get them but only if I pay a lawyer to draw up the papers. Straight couples *never* have to do this if they're married. Talk about silver platter. Gay couples do not get the silver platter, we get the paper plate -- at least here in the US.

I don't think I deserve better protection than anyone. I just think that if I equally support a government with the same tax dollars as a straight person, I should get an equal amount out of it. You seem to have a problem with that -- I hope you're not representational of the straight agenda.

[Leafless]

" A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive."

Which doesn't describe Canada at all. You're still free to spout your nonsense, same with ScottSA. This is a mockery, and an insult to people who actually live in a police state.

No, sorry.

You are simply to naive to understand what years of Liberal rule did to Canada and all being meticulously planned to accomplish what the French failed to do on the 'Plains of Abraham'.

Unilaterally, meaning totally ignoring the Canadian electorate, via totalitarianism and social control, the Liberals have transformed Canada into a country that harbours the political interest of Quebec.

This includes the spread and acceptance of Canada being a secular state by catering to a tiny percentage of perverts, (homosexuals) to accomplish this, in their quest to destroy the dominating English language and Christianity.

[Drea]

This includes the spread and acceptance of Canada being a secular state by catering to a tiny percentage of perverts, (homosexuals) to accomplish this, in their quest to destroy the dominating English language and Christianity.

Canada IS a secular state. Get over it. Your religious beliefs (or anyone elses) do not belong in parliament.

All people should have the same rights across the board - native, immigrant, gay, straight, male and female all should be equal in the eyes of the law. There should be no special rights for one group apart from another.

I have a right to marry my partner, why should Liam be denied this right? On what realistic (non religious) basis is this right being denied?

Check out this article: Interracial Marriage

It was only 40 years ago—on June 12, 1967—that the U.S. Supreme Court knocked down a Virginia statute barring whites from marrying nonwhites. The decision also overturned similar bans in 15 other states.

HA! Unequivocal PROOF that marriage HAS NOT been the SAME since time began (as the rightwing believes)

Bob Jones University in South Carolina only dropped its ban on interracial dating in 2000; a year later 40 percent of the voters objected when Alabama became the last state to remove a no-longer- enforceable ban on interracial marriages from its constitution.

HA! MORE Unequivocal PROOF that the rightwing is backward... LOL

[ScottSA]

This includes the spread and acceptance of Canada being a secular state by catering to a tiny percentage of perverts, (homosexuals) to accomplish this, in their quest to destroy the dominating English language and Christianity.

Canada IS a secular state. Get over it. Your religious beliefs (or anyone elses) do not belong in parliament.

How arrogant and naive all wrapped into one.

[Figleaf]

This includes the spread and acceptance of Canada being a secular state by catering to a tiny percentage of perverts, (homosexuals) to accomplish this, in their quest to destroy the dominating English language and Christianity.

The year of the seventh slor was the time of Gozer the Great and his deliverance wrought a mighty tale, (truly) worthy of a remark in the tomes of our dominating cultured pearls, Western and bright.

[Drea]

This includes the spread and acceptance of Canada being a secular state by catering to a tiny percentage of perverts, (homosexuals) to accomplish this, in their quest to destroy the dominating English language and Christianity.

Canada IS a secular state. Get over it. Your religious beliefs (or anyone elses) do not belong in parliament.

How arrogant and naive all wrapped into one.

ha ha ha -- naive is believing in an omnipotent (albeit useless and ineffectual) man in the sky.

ha ha ha -- arrogance is believing your FANTASY is truth and forcing others to believe the same.

Anyway Scotty, I was replying to Leafless' post -- I thought you had more intellect than that (of course I could be wrong LOL)

Do you believe we should allow religions to dominate politics? If so, whose religion (fantasy) shall we choose?

[ScottSA]

This includes the spread and acceptance of Canada being a secular state by catering to a tiny percentage of perverts, (homosexuals) to accomplish this, in their quest to destroy the dominating English language and Christianity.

Canada IS a secular state. Get over it. Your religious beliefs (or anyone elses) do not belong in parliament.

How arrogant and naive all wrapped into one.

ha ha ha -- naive is believing in an omnipotent (albeit useless and ineffectual) man in the sky.

ha ha ha -- arrogance is believing your FANTASY is truth and forcing others to believe the same.

Which is precisely what you want to do with the fantasy of atheism.

[BubberMiley]

By having no religious governance in parliament, it does not by any stretch of the imaginiation make it atheistic. That's like saying because most TV sitcoms don't address religious issues, they too are atheistic. Atheism is in itself a tenet that also doesn't belong in parliament. Secularism and atheism are not synonyms.

[Drea]

Fantasy of science... hmmmm.

I can see the turnip truck pulling out of your driveway now...

LOL

Once again Scotty -- Do you believe we should allow religions to dominate politics?

[ScottSA]

Fantasy of science... hmmmm.

I can see the turnip truck pulling out of your driveway now...

LOL

Once again Scotty -- Do you believe we should allow religions to dominate politics?

That's a false question. You're arguing for the abolishment of religion, not against its dominance. Religion hasn't "dominanted" western politics since the enlightenment, so we don't really need to worry about that. If there is a religion I'd favor if there were some danger of "dominance", would be New Testament Christianity, since it doesn't call for stonings and beheadings and such, and because there is a link between the evolution of Christianity and the evolution of western society.

[gc1765]

If there is a religion I'd favor if there were some danger of "dominance", would be New Testament Christianity, since it doesn't call for stonings and beheadings and such, and because there is a link between the evolution of Christianity and the evolution of western society.

So I take it you believe in being soft on criminals? Turn the other cheek? Or giving money to the poor?

[ScottSA]

If there is a religion I'd favor if there were some danger of "dominance", would be New Testament Christianity, since it doesn't call for stonings and beheadings and such, and because there is a link between the evolution of Christianity and the evolution of western society.

So I take it you believe in being soft on criminals?

You're just being silly, but if the choice were between being soft on criminals and stoning or delimbing them, I'd prefer soft.

[M.Dancer]

If there is a religion I'd favor if there were some danger of "dominance", would be New Testament Christianity, since it doesn't call for stonings and beheadings and such, and because there is a link between the evolution of Christianity and the evolution of western society.

So I take it you believe in being soft on criminals? Turn the other cheek? Or giving money to the poor?

Not owning more than one coat, opening up your kitchen to the poor, visiting strangers in prison, the dying in hospital, cleaning the sores of the terminal HiV.........

...all of the above would be noble, but I suspect even if Jains took control, their rule would be just as oppresive as the rule of the roundheads or any theocratic dictatorship...

...............personally, I prefer old testament Christianity, seeing that's where christ got the idea........

[M.Dancer]

Use "ANOMALY" in a sentance.......

Ah Nomaly have sex wit a woman, but sometimes out in the bayeau wit Caude, it get lonely an code at night.....

[Canadian Blue]

No, sorry.

You are simply to naive to understand what years of Liberal rule did to Canada and all being meticulously planned to accomplish what the French failed to do on the 'Plains of Abraham'.

Really, what exactly did the democratically elected Liberal government do that was so terrible. Do you mean making French Canadians feel at home in Canada, I don't quite get what your saying. I haven't been forced to learn the French language yet.

Unilaterally, meaning totally ignoring the Canadian electorate, via totalitarianism and social control, the Liberals have transformed Canada into a country that harbours the political interest of Quebec.

You mean getting majority and minority governments which they recieved from the Canadian electorate. Thats not totalitarianism bud, I think you should take a trip to Myanmar before making such a claim.

This includes the spread and acceptance of Canada being a secular state by catering to a tiny percentage of perverts, (homosexuals) to accomplish this, in their quest to destroy the dominating English language and Christianity.

I think things started to go downhill once the Inquisition ended. Obviously the majority of Canadian's are accepting of homosexuality. I get sick of people using religion to disguise their bigotry, strangely enough the same people don't call for an end to poverty or a lenient justice system.

People we only have to follow the 0.1% of Christianity dealing with gays and the rest we can forget.

[Catchme]

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

Excuse me, but I have a life, not a "lifestyle". I work, I pay taxes, I shop at the grocery store, I support local charities, and volunteer my efforts on national political issues. I send my kids off to school each morning after making breakfast and picking out shirts and pants and jumpers. I fold laundry while I watch "Desperate Housewives". I've buried both a parent and a spouse. I worry about inflation and the economy, I wonder if I should get four yards of mulch delivered this summer or five yards. I have to fix one of the downspouts from my gutters. I arrange play dates and sleep overs and birthday parties for my kids. I worry about their future. I'm concerned about Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder if I'm saving enought for retirement. I have a dozen projects to finish at the office before my kids and I go on vacation next week. I have a car battery to jump this weekend and about four or five things to pick up at Home Depot tomorrow afternoon. I have to aerate and fertilize my lawn. I've soccer practice this weekend. And my kids have sewing lessons. I absolutely have to take my recyclables to the town dump this weekend. I make an effort every day to be a good role model for my kids. If you did half the things I do each day as a single parent, I would be impressed. But you probably have a wife at home who handles 70% of this stuff while you drink beer and slovenly moan against gays and how their "fag" agenda is demeaning your existence. Cripes. Have some honor. Gain some self respect. Develop a sense of self worth on your own time, I've got enough on my plate to do it for you.

Yes, I've got a fag agenda. It's called getting through each day. It's called just being seen as a person and being treated no different by the government I fund than someone who did nothing to earn a a place in life where he can call me "abnormal". Just who in the h*ll do you think you are? What have you done to earn your special status as "normal"? Being born straight? Spare me - there are more abnormal freaks who are straight than you'd ever find in a gay bar on sake and karoake night.

I think it's pretty clear that I'm the normal one. If anything, I think it's up to you to show you're even equal to someone like me.

Thrilling and heart tugging post, and I'm sure you're quite normal.

Sounds like Liam is quite normal, and it was an excellent post. Though he could've refrained from last bits, but I supsect there is a degree of anger, which is justified, mind you, too.

Your sexual appetites are not, however. Which is as it may be, and I really don't care as long as you don't show up in my kid's school preaching to them that your sexual appetites are just peachy and "normal". I'm sure you won't, so there is nothing more we need to discuss. I don't walk around all puffed out about being hetero, and if you choose to publicize your homosexuality, prepare to be challenged on it by me at least.

Other peoples sexual 'appetites are no one else's business, unless the said appetites are against the law. Such as: incest, rape, child molestation, or underage. And in fact you are running around all "puffed" up with your heterosexualness.

[BC_chick]

Wow. Conservative religious order opposses homosexuality. Also in the news: bear shits in the woods.

Russians oppose homosexuality also.

Are they a conservative religious order?

No. But in other news 170 rounded up for opposing Putin. Nice mentor country.

[sharkman]

Here's the deal: I pay the same tax rate as someone else with my same income level and, yes, I do get some things for my tax money (roads, defense, an inept government, etc.), but a partner and I (in the US) wouldn't get nearly the same tax breaks as a married (i.e., "straight married") couple. We can't file a joint federal income tax return, courts do not automatically honor each of us as the other's survivor, we cannot receive Social Security benefits should one of us die, even in a court of law I can be forced to testify against my partner (something a straight married couple never has to face because of spousal privilege)... there are thousands of benefits that a straight couple gets simply by saying "I do" in a Vegas wedding chapel, be it Britney Spears or a waitress at a local diner, than a gay couple will ever get. If anything, straight couples are given things on a silver platter. In order to get even some of the basics (inheritance of property, health care proxy, etc.) I can get them but only if I pay a lawyer to draw up the papers. Straight couples *never* have to do this if they're married. Talk about silver platter. Gay couples do not get the silver platter, we get the paper plate -- at least here in the US.

I don't think I deserve better protection than anyone. I just think that if I equally support a government with the same tax dollars as a straight person, I should get an equal amount out of it. You seem to have a problem with that -- I hope you're not representational of the straight agenda.

Gay unions should not benefit from the same tax breaks as male female unions. This is because a gay union does not have the possibility of adding to the population. Children are the basis of any country, and governments giving tax breaks and such is only right.

I live in Canada, and our birthrate has been so low we do not even come close to maintaining our population. My wife is a school teacher, and schools are closing at an alarming rate. Schools are growing empty, and the only way the government can fight this is to have massive levels of immigration. The implications of these conditions are not encouraging. Couple this with a baby boomer generation getting set to begin retiring in few years, and the results on our work force and tax base will change Canada like nothing before. Encouraging gay unions by giving them the exact same benefits as straight couples only shrinks an already dwindling birth rate.

Do whatever you want in your bedroom, but don't expect your government to treat you the same as a couple that has the possibility of contributing to the life blood of the nation.

[obsidian]

sharkman:

Don't all gay's either adopt or use a surrogate?(if they have kids). How is using a surrogate not " contributing to the life blood of the nation."? Because in my world that appears to be the exact same thing . Now onto the second issue of adopting. Is it not the government or non-profit organizations who supports our orphanages? How is a gay couple who takes part of the "burden"(for lack of a better word) off of the government or charities a bad thing?

And people, the BOTTOM LINE is that gay citizens are guaranteed the same rights as any other citizen. People who oppose this religously(christian, muslim) actually should read the story of Sodom, which is what is cited as religous proof that god dissaproves of homosexuality. In short, angels come and ask for all the men, the king says no then offers his daughters instead of his men, the angels then destroy the city. Um WTF does that make sense too you...? And for those who oppose it morally, grow up. Homosexuality has happened throughout all of human and animal history on this planet. I don't discriminate because someone likes something different than I do. I only discriminate if what they're doing interferes with my bussiness, and then such hate and prejudicous as gays experience throughout the year are acceptable.

"Encouraging gay unions by giving them the exact same benefits as straight couples only shrinks an already dwindling birth rate."-Sharkman

ORLY...Yes I'm sure thats how it happens...

Man: hi doctor im a bit confused

therapist: go on..

Man: Well I don't know if I'm gay, straight, or assexual :S

therapist: Well have you considered being gay? They've got this new Union, it's great. They used to get no benefits at all but now they're nearly up to the heterosexual standard. You can't tell anyone one this, but word on the street is that next quarter the Gay Union will surpass the Womens and "Regular" Unions!

Man: Well that's that, I'm gay.

Do you still really not understand people who are gay, do not chose to be,their development as a child OR genetics is responsible. You're honestly worried about the gay union getting more members because it will "encourage" such behaviour...That's ReTaRdEd

[ScottSA]

sharkman:

Don't all gay's either adopt or use a surrogate?(if they have kids). How is using a surrogate not " contributing to the life blood of the nation."? Because in my world that appears to be the exact same thing . Now onto the second issue of adopting. Is it not the government or non-profit organizations who supports our orphanages? How is a gay couple who takes part of the "burden"(for lack of a better word) off of the government or charities a bad thing?

And people, the BOTTOM LINE is that gay citizens are guaranteed the same rights as any other citizen. People who oppose this religously(christian, muslim) actually should read the story of Sodom, which is what is cited as religous proof that god dissaproves of homosexuality. In short, angels come and ask for all the men, the king says no then offers his daughters instead of his men, the angels then destroy the city. Um WTF does that make sense too you...? And for those who oppose it morally, grow up. Homosexuality has happened throughout all of human and animal history on this planet. I don't discriminate because someone likes something different than I do. I only discriminate if what they're doing interferes with my bussiness, and then such hate and prejudicous as gays experience throughout the year are acceptable.

"Encouraging gay unions by giving them the exact same benefits as straight couples only shrinks an already dwindling birth rate."-Sharkman

ORLY...Yes I'm sure thats how it happens...

Man: hi doctor im a bit confused

therapist: go on..

Man: Well I don't know if I'm gay, straight, or assexual :S

therapist: Well have you considered being gay? They've got this new Union, it's great. They used to get no benefits at all but now they're nearly up to the heterosexual standard. You can't tell anyone one this, but word on the street is that next quarter the Gay Union will surpass the Womens and "Regular" Unions!

Man: Well that's that, I'm gay.

Do you still really not understand people who are gay, do not chose to be,their development as a child OR genetics is responsible. You're honestly worried about the gay union getting more members because it will "encourage" such behaviour...That's ReTaRdEd

So in other words, everyone who agrees with you is right, and everyone who disagrees needs to grow up. With an attitude like that, it appears you're the one who needs to grow up.