It amazes me that people are so upset about some things that affect others, but don't give a rat's whatever about things like health consequences of homosexual sex & about the consequences for children of gay marriage. Do you realize there are health risks involved, not just statisically (STDs & AIDS) but also anal fissures, bacterial infection, anal cancer & colon rupture? If 2 people understand these real risks & want to do it anyway - fine - but when kids get involved (as in legalizing gay marriage) I have a problem with it. Why would you want children to be adopted by couples practicing unhealthy practices when children imitate their parents?
1) There are health risks involved with having sex regardless of gender and sexual orientation.
2) Your argument would only be an argument for banning homosexuality altogether. Not legalizing same-sex marriage is not going to make homosexual couples or homosexual couples with kids go away.
3) Are you heterosexual because of your parents? Did you and your parents ever talk about their sexual practices? Children of homosexual parents are no more likely to be homosexual than children of heterosexual parents.
Children have a RIGHT to be raised by the 2 opposite sexes that created them.
No, they don't.
Gay marriage denies them either a mother or father, devaluing both parents, saying mothers or fathers are not really important. 2 dads or 2 moms are fine - when studies & common sense show that children need BOTH a mother & father...
No studies show that. In fact, studies show just the opposite. The important factor is to have two loving parents (or one loving parent, really). What gender they are is not important. Besides, your argument would be an argument in favor of banning single-parent households. If a child has a right to a mother and father, then we shouldn't allow them to be in a house that lacks either of those things.
Gay couples already have rights under laws like common law marriage and cohabitation agreements...
Common-law marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cohabitation agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Even if no contract is written up, they have rights.
Yet even more rights are extended if a couple creates a contract when they begin living together.
"Some of the same rights" is not equal treatment. "All of the same rights" would be equal treatment.
There is no need to redefine marriage to include sexual deviations.
That's true. There is no need to redefine marriage. Yet many states feel the need to...so that it will only be between a man and a woman. If they stopped redefining it to that, we'd be OK.
In fact, doing so will harm many - including homosexuals (& others who are persuaded to be homosexual) by condoning statistically harmful behavior and by not giving children what they need most: BOTH a mother and father.
It will harm no one, and no one is "persuaded" to be homosexual. You either are or you aren't. Do you feel like you could be persuaded to be homosexual? What children need most is a loving parent or two. It doesn't matter what gender they are.
Children have the right to not be taught homosexuality in school. Yet, in places where gay marriage has been enacted, these rights have been infringed upon...
No, they haven't. No one is teaching anyone homosexuality in school any more than they're teaching heterosexuality. They may teach a sex ed course, and now include references to homosexuality as well as heterosexuality, but that's because they're both part of human sexuality. They're not advocating any particular thing.
Normalizing & even encouraging children to explore homosexuality obviously causes more to experiment with homosexuality.
And even if it does, it doesn't matter. There is nothing wrong with homosexuality.
Also, others' rights have been infringed upon in favor of supporting gay rights.
*In April 2008, an Albuquerque photographer was fined over $6,000 for refusing to be hired to photograph a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony.
Assuming this is true, it's probably because that's discrimination based on sexual orientation. If you're going to offer your services to the public, you can't refuse some people because of their race, religion or sexual orientation. That has nothing to do with same-sex marriage.
*In May, 2008, a black administrator was fired from the U of Toledo, Ohio, for writing an editorial objecting to the comparison of black discrimination to same-sex marriage.
All I see is that she was suspended, and places of business have the right to suspend an employee for conduct they don't like. If I said something publicly that my employer didn't like, they'd be within their rights to suspend me.
*An intolerant opponent of Proposition 8 even violently attacked & injured a Proposition supporter in Oct. 2008.
Wow, a random person attacked another random person!? What are the odds?
*On November 19, 2008, eHarmony, a Christian-based matching service was forced by New Jersey's Division on Civil Rights to provide website matching services for homosexuals.
Not from what I see. All I see is that they agreed to a deal that involved them starting a new website for homosexuals.
