Political Crossfire Forums

[student08]

a romantic relationship is thought of by many as being between a man and a woman, by those raised by heterosexual parents. I find this is true by many homosexuals also.
Don't get me twisted, i'm not homosexual, and i don't beleive in homosexuality, but by the US constitution, homosexuals should be allowed all the rights that heterosexuals have, and i'm DEFINITELY for that. If ur an athiest, you should be allowed to pratice w/e you want, cuz it's ur right as an american, no matter what my beleifs are.
When i see a lesbian walk down the street, it is much more common for me to see a woman dressed in men's garb, or a man with a purse, for me to notice that this person is gay. I'm not sayin that this is a requirement to be gay, to act like the opposite sex, but it is very common for this image to be used when talkin about a gay/lesbian.
This is one of the reasons that i feel that Karamo was a big step for homosexuality on the Real World, his presence on the show showed the world that gay/lesbians don't necessarily have to be butch/femnine to prove the point that they are gay.

[Enoch]

student08 wrote: i don't beleive in homosexuality

It isn't the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus. Belief isn't necessary.

But, to the point, I think you are correct in that people need to understand that not all lesbians are butch, not all gay men are feminine. Gay men and women, just like heterosexual men and women, run the gamut of masculinity and femininity.

[Æ]

UrielsFyre wrote: But, to the point, I think you are correct in that people need to understand that not all lesbians are butch, not all gay men are feminine. Gay men and women, just like heterosexual men and women, run the gamut of masculinity and femininity.
:clap:

[Luigidel]

student08 wrote: Don't get me twisted, i'm not homosexual, and i don't beleive in homosexuality, but by the US constitution, homosexuals should be allowed all the rights that heterosexuals have, and i'm DEFINITELY for that. If ur an athiest, you should be allowed to pratice w/e you want, cuz it's ur right as an american, no matter what my beleifs are.



So by your logic, i should be able to have 50 wives if i choose, shouldn't I? I think the issue goes deeper than what youre portraying it as.

[Demonic Spoon]

Quote: So by your logic, i should be able to have 50 wives if i choose, shouldn't I? I think the issue goes deeper than what youre portraying it as.

Marriage is a private contract. If all parties are in agreement then why the hell not?[/quote]

[TheGirlNextDoor]

Luigidel wrote: student08 wrote: Don't get me twisted, i'm not homosexual, and i don't beleive in homosexuality, but by the US constitution, homosexuals should be allowed all the rights that heterosexuals have, and i'm DEFINITELY for that. If ur an athiest, you should be allowed to pratice w/e you want, cuz it's ur right as an american, no matter what my beleifs are.



So by your logic, i should be able to have 50 wives if i choose, shouldn't I? I think the issue goes deeper than what youre portraying it as.

If all involved are consenting adults and can enter into a contract legally, then why not?

How is this infringing upon your rights?

[StrangerWitCandy]

I think polygamists should be able to get married if they want. But the government should not be obligated to hand out benefits to an unlimited number of people in a marriage. Thats my only real problem with legalizing polygamy, the fact that it could become just an easy way to take advantage of the system making marriage just the means to an end. Personally I think relationships involving more than two people are difficult to make work, and i would never be in one, but i wouldn't stop others from doing so if they wanted. But the government should only have to provide benefits to two people in a marriage IMO.