(Im)mutability of cross-gender attraction?

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by creekster

You tell me, as that cuts both ways, doesn't it?

I feel that it is misleading to suggest that this whole issue is NOT about civil unions, rights, etc.....when the very ammunition that is being used to promote Prop 8 decries the evils of allowing all of these rights for homosexuals.

Also, as mikewaters pointed out, the Church has already come out in opposition to civil unions, as well, so our involvement in Prop 8 goes way beyond a simple definition.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by creekster

What is a specious argument?

the one you implied.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I feel that it is misleading to suggest that this whole issue is NOT about civil unions, rights, etc.....when the very ammunition that is being used to promote Prop 8 decries the evils of allowing all of these rights for homosexuals.

Also, as mikewaters pointed out, the Church has already come out in opposition to civil unions, as well, so our involvement in Prop 8 goes way beyond a simple definition.

But the proposition doesn't, is my point.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

the one you implied.

SO tell me, O omniscient one, which argument is that?

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by creekster

But the proposition doesn't, is my point.

Yes, you are correct. The langauge of the Prop is pretty straightforward...defines marriage.

Again, I just find it misleading when supporters say that this ISNT about homosexuals. Some of the material being distributed in support of Prop 8:

1. If gays can marry, we have to teach our kids that their relationships are normal (gross!)
2. If gays can marry, our freedom and democracy are threatened (what does this have to do with the definition of marriage?)
3. If gays can marry, we may be forced to allow gays to adopt through LDSSS (no support provided for that contention)
4. If gays can marry, heterosexuals will be less inclined to get married, as evidenced by Norway

So I would say that, practically speaking, Prop 8, and the underlying battle, goes WAY beyond how to define marriage. It allegedly will affect almost every aspect of our lives.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Yes, you are correct. The langauge of the Prop is pretty straightforward...defines marriage.

Again, I just find it misleading when supporters say that this ISNT about homosexuals. Some of the material being distributed in support of Prop 8:

1. If gays can marry, we have to teach our kids that their relationships are normal (gross!)
2. If gays can marry, our freedom and democracy are threatened (what does this have to do with the definition of marriage?)
3. If gays can marry, we may be forced to allow gays to adopt through LDSSS (no support provided for that contention)
4. If gays can marry, heterosexuals will be less inclined to get married, as evidenced by Norway


So I would say that, practically speaking, Prop 8, and the underlying battle, goes WAY beyond how to define marriage. It allegedly will affect almost every aspect of our lives.

I know this might surprise you, but sometimes people in political campaigns tend to exaggerate. No one says you have to, however, nor does anyone say you have to base your decision on those exaggerations.

The bases for the relative equality of gays in CA is pretty well-establoished and I don't see how prop 8 is likely to change that. I think it
will obviously mean gays cannot be married, and it will make it easier for traditional family groups to assert influence over school curriculum. Otherwsie, I think it is unlikely to change much, at least not in CA. I suspect that the spillover to other states might be more important.

[BYUHoopster]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

This formulation is convenient for a heterosexual because it is a cop out. We are talking about fairly high stakes here. We are talking about not only the chance to be fulfilled in romantic love, but formaion of families or not. You are acting like this is a comparable issue to whether a city should add lanes for bcycles and provide financial incentives for people to bike to work. It's not the same.

Do you honestly think you could live a life of celibacy, live as a bachelor and have no children? How would you respond to coersion from authorities that you had to take a gay lover?

I don't understand how it is a cop out. Are homosexuals the only ones that can't do things that they want to do or things that it is in their nature to do?

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by creekster

I know this might surprise you, but sometimes people in political campaigns tend to exaggerate. No one says you have to, however, nor does anyone say you have to base your decision on those exaggerations.

The bases for the relative equality of gays in CA is pretty well-establoished and I don't see how prop 8 is likely to change that. I think it
will obviously mean gays cannot be married, and it will make it easier for traditional family groups to assert influence over school curriculum. Otherwsie, I think it is unlikely to change much, at least not in CA. I suspect that the spillover to other states might be more important.

sassy primate!

Yes, I know that campaigns blow a lot of smoke. I only pay attention when the Prophet is telling me to get involved. If it is that important, I want to analyze all the reasons and understand for myself.

I agree with your other point and now I will back off before you give me another helping of roasted sassiness.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

sassy primate!

Yes, I know that campaigns blow a lot of smoke. I only pay attention when the Prophet is telling me to get involved. If it is that important, I want to analyze all the reasons and understand for myself.

I agree with your other point and now I will back off before you give me another helping of roasted sassiness.

Sassy is one of my daughter's group of friends favorite terms. She complains with disgust whenever she hears me use it. I thank you for giving me an anecdote in which I can not only use the word sassy but apply it to myself. OF course she will then ask me if this happened on my "little facebook for old guys", but it iwll be worth it.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by BYUHoopster

I don't understand how it is a cop out. Are homosexuals the only ones that can't do things that they want to do or things that it is in their nature to do?

We'll have to agree to disagree. You think they should be made to suffer and live a life unfilled and unhappy because homosexual sex is a sin. I don't agree it is, in fact, I think it's a good thing if it gives them joy and they are responsible about it, which gay marriage would facilitate. In fact, I think suffering and the causes of suffering are roughly if not exactly eqiuvalent to or synonymous with evil. So we have no place to reach common ground. We're done.