Subscribe Now Mobile Site Place an Ad E-Edition Email Updates Obituaries Classifieds Find a Job Find a Car Real Estate Contact Us

Currently

45°

Clear

FREE ARCHIVE SEARCH

Opinion

CLASSIFIEDS

All Classifieds
Find a Home
Find a Car
Find a Job
Work Here
Find Merchandise
Today’s Print Ads

2 Weeks Free

Free Ad

Place an ad
in print and online, 24/7 for free, select the Clean Sweep option. Unable to submit Real Estate, Services, and Business Investements at this time.

Get a Subscription

Map the Valley

Restaurant Listing
School Listing
Open Houses
Garage Sales

Subscriber/
Reader Services

Subscribe Now
Contact Customer Service

Another View: Experience may trump hysteria over gay marriage

When high court of Massachusetts ruled in 2003 that the commonwealth's constitution gave same-sex couples the right to marry, detractors railed against "activist judges" who were "imposing" their will on the people. Only the people, through their elected representatives, should decide something so fundamental, they said. Thus began an effort to amend Massachusetts' constitution by referendum to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Four years and about 10,000 same-sex marriages later, here's what the people have said: never mind.

To get the referendum on the 2008 ballot, opponents of gay marriage needed only 50 of Massachusetts's 200 legislators to vote for the amendment during consecutive two-year sessions. Now the earliest the amendment could hit the ballot is 2012. By then, the response from the people very well might be "What's the big deal?"

Opponents of same-sex unions felt democracy was under attack by the courts, with judges dictating what people could and couldn't accept.

Despite dire predictions, the institution of marriage didn't crumble under the weight of homosexuals seeking the rights and responsibility that come with it.

The sky didn't fall in Massachusetts. Nor has it buckled in the District of Columbia and the five states that offer civil unions or domestic partnerships to gay couples. Washington state's domestic partnership law goes into effect next month. Oregon's domestic partnership law and New Hampshire's civil unions take effect in January 2008.

Acceptance of gay marriage is by no means widespread. Marriage is restricted to one man and one woman by constitutional amendment in 26 states and by state law in 19 others. But the tide is slowly changing. Opinion polls show growing acceptance of gay rights.

As hysteria gives way to real-life experience, more people will realize that the loving and committed relationships of homosexuals should be recognized.

(This editorial appeared in the Washington Post)

(July 6, 2007)

Email this story

Print this story

POST A COMMENT

Hanfordsentinel.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed, particularly if they are posted after normal office hours.

We reserve the right to remove comments in total that violate our code of conduct. If you want to report a violation, please e-mail editor@HanfordSentinel.com

For more information please read our Terms of use, and Rules of the Road.

Please log in to post comments

*Member ID:
*Password:
	Forgot Your Password?

If you don't have an account you can create one for free by clicking the link below.
CREATE ACCOUNT

The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the views of the Hanford Sentinel

Alan G. wrote on Jul 6, 2007 1:07 PM:

" Just give gay couples the right to marry already. It's just a civil union that guarantees certain rights of survivorship and gives a partner the right to visit a loved one in the hospital and make decisions on their behalf if they are ill. If a gay couple have children together, both parents would have equal rights under the law. It's ridiculous, but some states only recognize the biological parent and not the other partner when a couple separates. Face it, ten percent of the population is gay, why deny them their rights? Religion should have nothing to do with the decision to make marriage available since there is supposed to be a separation of church and state, right? Just a word of caution to gay couples; with marriage comes ALIMONY, so get those pre-nuptial agreements!!! "

what? wrote on Jul 6, 2007 2:49 PM:

" its not hysteria. it is called backlash caused by a couple of luatic judges that tried to push their agenda on a society that thinks same sex marriage iz immoral. the vast majority thinks it is wrong and that's why it won't happen. "

Surprised wrote on Jul 6, 2007 3:30 PM:

" Pretty Racey opinion for Hanford. "

whynot? wrote on Jul 6, 2007 7:03 PM:

" Every one knows that sex pretty much ends after marriage, right? Heck, if ya don't let them marry you're just encouraging them to have naughty sex that much more, as though it's more exciting knowing you're getting away with it, etc. "

Alan G. wrote on Jul 6, 2007 9:10 PM:

" It's pretty much common knowledge amongst the educated set that people are BORN gay, so why not let them live their lives? "

Confused wrote on Jul 9, 2007 9:18 AM:

" If 26 states DEFINE marriage as being between one man and one woman, the claim - "Despite dire predictions, the institution of marriage didn't crumble under the weight of homosexuals seeking the rights and responsibility that come with it." - proves the opposite, because these homosexual "marriages" go against the very DEFINITION of marriage. Now if you want to say that I've made a meaningless somantic argument based on a word that can mean anything we want it to, then why is there a problem with calling it a "civil union" if it provides the same legal entitlements? Secondly, the broad-reaching effects haven't been felt yet, which is the varying States being forced to recognize "marriages" from other States. "

Do the Math wrote on Jul 10, 2007 8:12 PM:

" 'Marriage' = man + woman (always has been); 'Domestic Partnership' = 2 people, either sex; 'Civil Union' = 2 people, 2 people, either sex; All have, or should have, equal protection under the law. Period. End of debate. No hizzy-fits, now! "

Democracy wrote on Jul 11, 2007 12:51 AM:

" Equal Protection Under Law is the heart of democracy. It prevents larger groups from denying smaller groups or individuals rights and liberties. 45 U.S. States do not meet the basic requirements of democracy, rendering the Rule of Law moot in these regions. "

NoNo wrote on Jul 11, 2007 4:26 AM:

" Alan G you are wrong that people are born gay. This type of thinking is brought on by the liberal media and people like Harry Ried and Barbara Boxer. To be gay is a choice. Maybe you should stop being brain washed by CNN and the ACLU. "

Alan G. wrote on Jul 11, 2007 10:35 AM:

" Au contraire, No No. I think you should put down the bible and pick a science or psychology text book. Let me dumb it down for you. It's kinda like if you ordered a computer from the factory and instead of having a Celeron processor, the technician put in a Pentium 4 instead. Now that's very simplified and it would take a much more detailed analogy, which wouldn't fit into the word limit, but that should give you the general gist of it. Please don't confuse logic and science with being a "liberal". You see, it is possible to be liberal on some things and conservative on others. So if a person is pro-gun, pro-environment, pro-death penalty, pro-choice, anti-big government, you'd probably have a hard time fitting them neatly into a "liberal" or "conservative"category. I watch CNN, FOX, and BBC and take it all in, weed through the liberal and conservative bias and then make sense of it all. I'm guessing you just stick with the one that supports your views. Too far right or too far left = too stupid. It's a big world, be a big thinker "

To NoNo wrote on Jul 11, 2007 10:43 AM:

" Alan is completely right that people are born gay. Many gay people have certain physical characteristics that we readily identify with being gay. Not that there's anything wrong with that!! But you can't argue that limp wrists, a certain manner of speech, a wobbly head, an affinity toward looking good, decorating, an affinity toward certain hairstyles, etc. are environmental or learned. I have gay people in my family and have several gay friends, and let me assure you, if they could choose a way of life, it wouldn't be one where they don't feel accepted by the masses, or one where they feel out of place in their own bodies. Consider their position and you will quickly accept that it's not a choice. And remember, they're PEOPLE like you and me and they deserve all the rights of anyone else. "

Elizabeth J. wrote on Jul 11, 2007 1:49 PM:

" Assuming there are some people who are straight, some gay, and some bi-sexual, the only ones who "choose" their lifestyle choices are the bi-sexual ones, because they do have a choice! For the rest of us, its one or the other. Having taught school many years, I can tell you I have seen students as young as 2nd grade who I thought were probably going to grow up gay, and who, in fact, did. It was not their environment, their parents, or predatory influences. They truly were seemed to be born with that orientation. Even if I'm incorrect and being gay is, in fact, a choice, there's still the issue of "free will," and I can't force others to be something they don't want to be anyway. So can gays have civil unions, or domestic partnerships? Why not? As a straight, married woman, it's not going to hurt or impact me at all. I say live and let live. "

BISEXUAL ADVANTAGE wrote on Jul 11, 2007 3:21 PM:

" There is one telling advantage: being bisexual guarantees you a date on Friday night. And, qualifies you for a cruise on good ship 'Rosies' Family'... "

Confused wrote on Jul 11, 2007 5:36 PM:

" Alan G. - I'm not really sure why i should put down my Bible. Please see Romans Chapter 1. It seems to support the idea that the DESIRE for deviant sexual behavior is, in fact, in-grained. However, I would not say that a person is forced to follow what they may be naturally inclined to do. Most married heterosexual men can say that its possible to naturally find women, or even teenage girls, sexually attractive, even if he's not married to them. However, it is not until such a man ACTS on that attraction that he becomes an adulterer or pedophile, respectively. The simple (but not always easy) trick is fleeing the temptation and keeping sex in the confines of his marriage. It follows, then, that a person isn't BORN gay. He CHOOSES to be gay by giving into impulses he has naturally. And just as the married heterosexual man CHOOSES to not become an adulterer by embracing healthy sexual expression, another can choose not to become a homosexual in a similar manner. No one is a slave to their impulses. "

To Confused wrote on Jul 12, 2007 9:06 AM:

" You truly are confused if you think you need a guide to tell you how people 'should' be. How people 'are' is what they are born with. You don't get to choose your gender, and you don't get to choose how you are attracted to others. "

Confused wrote on Jul 12, 2007 9:39 AM:

" My name rings true again - I think I said people are born wanting to engage in deviant behavior. I also said a person might be attracted to anyone, so I'm not really sure where we disagreed. Unless you have a problem with the fact that: 1) I read the Bible, which isn't the point of this forum (btw, I DO need to use it as a guide for how I should behave, if I don't the hurt and destruction I leave in my wake is obvious to every that knows and cares about me, just ask 'em) ; or that 2) people do not have to act on their attractions - which is something that married people of both genders prove is possible all the time. It's one of the reasons people are considered thinking, free-willed creatures. "

GAY OR STRAIGHT wrote on Jul 12, 2007 2:33 PM:

" Now, lets see a show of hands/limp wrists: How many of you posters are gay? How many are straight? Inquiring minds want to know! "

HUH??? wrote on Jul 12, 2007 7:41 PM:

" LIVE AND LET LIVE! POLITICS HAS NO RIGHT TO INTERVENE NOR DO THE JACKASSES SAYING THAT MARRAIGE=MAN+WOMAN!! A MARRAIGE IS A STATE OF HEART ANYWAY SO WHY NOT LET THEM CELEBRATE IT WITH A RELIGIOUS UNION? I DONT CARE IF THE ARCHDIOCES DOES NOT LIKE THE IDEA, NOR DO I CARE IF THE POPE APPROVES. CHURCH HAS NO SAY IN STATE MATTERS, AND WHETHER JESUS OR GOD HIMSELF SAID THAT MARRAIGE IS BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN ONLY IS IRRELEVENT! I THINK THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO MARRY WHETHER IT BE MEN + MEN OR WOMEN + WOMEN!!! BESIDES YOU SHOW ME A MAN WHO DOES NOT LIKE THE IDEA OF A WOMAN ON WOMAN SCENE AND I'LL SHOW YOU A GAY MAN!!! "

Please wrote on Jul 12, 2007 8:26 PM:

" I am completely in agreement with Alan. I work in the medical field and have for many years. I find it ridiculous that people still believe that all brains are wired exactly the same and there is no probability of difference during development. If so, explain Autism, Downs Syndrome , differences in opinion, preferences in music.,etc, Again, this outdated opinion is nothing more than old biblical teachings when people had little to no education and limited knowledge. Come on, evolve. Let them be who they are, "Let those without sin, cast the first stone." Who are we to judge??? And who are you to determine what is right for others. No one choses a life that will be harder, filled with others hatred, abuse, anger and ignorance. Life is hard enough without all this. By birth this their destined path, how many stories do you hear of men who have married, had children, and done everything in their power to "try not to be gay," only to find themselves in the end divorced and with a same sex partner. "

Gay in Kings County wrote on Jul 13, 2007 12:09 AM:

" I'm a gay male. My partner and I have been registered with the State of California for the past thirteen (13) years. Gay, straight and bi is not going to go away but will continue way past the end of all of our lives. I do not see the big problem but again it's one sided on my part. My co-workers have known my partner and I for many years and I'm glad to say it's great and I have never-ever been discriminated against. We are both professionals working in Kings County and I wouldn't live anywhere else. I just want to thank the citizens of this county to treating us as equals and with respect. We don't ask for any special treatment, just the same fairness as other citizens. "

Choice? wrote on Jul 13, 2007 12:27 AM:

" Its funny how many people call being gay a choice. I am not gay and have never had to make a choice about it. I think that those who think it is a choice must in some way believe so from experience. What I am trying to say (and I am being genuine when I say this) is that so called straight people who call homosexuality a choice are probably saying so from experience. They think it is choice because they have homosexual inclinations and want to think that everyone else has the same feelings but do not act on them. Therefore, "gays" are people like them but without self control. It seems like alot of people that are so fervently anti-gay are closeted homosexuals themselves. Most straight people don't have such strong feelings againts gays. "

Confused wrote on Jul 13, 2007 8:30 AM:

" "HUH??" - please refrain from name-calling. "Please" - Two things: EVOLUTION is survival of the fittest. The Bible has survived for thousands of years and continues to flourish, opinions about the correctness of homosexual behavior change frequently - so which one is the survivor? Whether you believe the Bible is true or not, the fact is that is full of ancient, timeless wisdom that is all about humanity - as we are, not who we fancy ourselves to be in any given culture. Every society that has ever existed has had social or legal prohibitions against things like lying, stealing, & murder. That's because these ideas are more a part of who we are as humans than what we even conceive. Call it "written on our heart" or "encoded in our DNA", wisdom that has survived this long should not be so readily discarded by people that haven't made a thorough, objective-as-possible examination of it. SECONDLY, with respect to families destroyed by husbands that choose a homosexual lifestyle - the answer to your question is, "Much fewer than those taken out by adultery, incest, or pedophilia - should those be OK, too?" "

What? wrote on Jul 13, 2007 10:42 AM:

" Hasn't homosexuality been around as long as the bible? Right or wrong, homosexuality has been here since the beginning of man. It;s those who wrote the bible (man) that say what they want and it appears that at the time the bible was written it was thought to be wrong. Like I said, right or wrong, homosexuality has been here since man and will continue to exist so long as the world does. Wasn't alcohol thought to be wrong and illegal at one time? Maybe not a good comparison, but what I am trying to say is that People (human beings) decide what's right and wrong in a society. In the end only one being will decide, remember the bible also says not to judge so lets leave it the one above and in the mean time give these people the same rights we are given. "

Alan G. wrote on Jul 13, 2007 10:50 AM:

" Hey confused, you might as well quote chapter 1 of "Alice In Wonderland" because it holds about as much weight as the bible in my opinion. Yes, we all practice impulse control in our daily lives and that's what prevents a majority of people from shooting a person who cuts us off in traffic, but gender identity is organic in nature according to those in the medical field. Therefore, a proclivity to be unfaithful in a married relationship or committing incest does not fall into the same category. The article states that gay couples would like to enjoy the same rights of marriage as the rest of the population and that as time passes, those with the hang-up of letting them enjoy those same rights, will probably see that their efforts are misplaced and the world won't end because of it. If you were to wake up tomorrow and men mated with men and women mated with women and it was normal, would you change your attraction to your mate to practice "impulse control" because a book told you so? I'm straight, but I'd continue to be attracted to my wife. "

Apalled! wrote on Jul 13, 2007 11:28 AM:

" I would like to begin by saying that I am a gay person. It is in no way a choice. I am only 18 years old and I would hope that any one on their right mind would understand this... People are vicious in this day and age and relentless with their mean and snide comments... Going through four years of high school with looks laughs and rude comments was not easy... I would never have chose this because I know how hard life can be without the added biases and racism of homophobic people. So for the people who argue that it is a choice especially "Confused" who continuously states that a hetro sexual man who is married has temptations to engage in sexual acts with teen girls or even other women, the point your argument is missing is that not only is that disgusting and adultery, but the man is attracted to women!! Not by choice is that his sexual preference but the way he was born. He IS however making the choice not to commit a disgusting crime. BIG DIFFERENCE. I stay strong, I was born this way I made no choice to be gay! "

Alan G. wrote on Jul 13, 2007 11:44 AM:

" I was born left-handed (AKA the "Devil's Hand") and despite a few well-meaning grandparents and teachers, I still write with my left hand. Oh yes, I could fight the temptation to use the "Devil's Hand", but a certain percentage of us were born this way and you wouldn't be able to read my handwriting very well. ;0) Funny thing is that I still play guitar right-handed and throw a frisbee right-handed, but alas, I do bowl left-handed. Does this make me "Bi-handed"? Now I just feel dirty. "

Confused wrote on Jul 13, 2007 11:47 AM:

" OK, Alan G., keeping the Bible out of it. I have more evidence that people have a proclivity toward unfaithfulness or pedophilia than you have of a proclivity toward homosexual behavior - my evidence is statistical, there is a greater percentage of people that practice those behaviors thoughout the whole of humanity, so it must be genetic/organic/medical. Of course there are also people that have more obvious, readily-proven organic disfunctions that we don't change society for either: folks with chemical-driven bi-polar disorders, schizophrenia, double-Y chromosome disorders. We tell these people to take medication because we don't care for their mood swings, erratic behavior, or sex-obsession/violent tendencies, don't we? As for what the article is addressing: In Mass., more than 3000 same-sex marriages were performed the first year, there have been fewer than 100 performed this year, ie its something only a small minority of practicing homosexuals actually want to do. The push toward legalizing same-sex marriage was not about a desire for marriage, but more an effort to "normalize" deviant behavior by providing special privileges. Yes, privilege, because EVERYONE currently enjoys the right to marry someone of the opposite sex of legal age. "

Confused wrote on Jul 13, 2007 12:06 PM:

" Dear Apalled!, I would like to apologize to you if I have said anything that makes you feel denigrated as a person - my intention is not to hurt your feelings. Agreeing with Alan G. that most of the discussion so far was about impulses/proclivities vs actions/impulse control, it appears that you and I differ on what constitutes a "homosexual". Some say its having the desire, some say its acting on the desire. Whatever. I am Confused again why you choose to differentiate between different types of sexual behavior. Its a "disgusting" crime to you, but obviously some people doing the crime don't think so. I could also have expanded the example: should it be wrong for a 40 yr old teacher to have consensual sex with a 13 yr old boy? Or what about the 30 yr old having homosexual sex with a sibling? Is age or genetic relation disgusting but gender not? Is it because you are drawing a line based on what YOU think is ok? Can't I do the same? Why can't they? Just something to think about. "

Matt wrote on Jul 13, 2007 3:12 PM:

" Confused, You are missing the point. You are exactly right in pointing that individuals are able to exert self control in limiting themselves to one partner. Gay men and women are able to do that just as well as straight people. That, does not mean that gay people can control themselves to be attracted to the opposite sex or happy in a marriage with a person of the opposite sex. For one, I can not stand the thought of sexual contact or relations with a female. I assume that most straight people are similarly grossed out by the thought of sexual contact and relations with a person of the same sex. The Bible, while a moral compass for some, has no bearing on secular law. Marriage (an institution whose only legitimacy is found in secular law) provides countless benefits that civil unions and domestic partnerships are unable to under state and federal laws. There is no legitimate reason why Gay people shouldn't enjoy marriages recognized by state laws. Your unwillingness to recognize the need for gay marriages is astounding and hurtful. Most hurtful are your allusions that homosexuality is related to marital infidelity, pedophilia, and incest. "

To Confused wrote on Jul 14, 2007 1:23 PM:

" Hang it up. Nobody wants to hear more of your drivel. "

Confused wrote on Jul 14, 2007 2:42 PM:

" Matt, despite the hurtfulness of the comparisons, I haven't seen anything posted about WHY they should be considered any differently. So my question for you is: HOW, exactly, do your homosexual desires, which 90% of the population don't have, differ from the pedophilial desires, incestuous desires, adulterous desires, bestial desires, or polygamous desires that OTHER people claim are every bit as real and powerful as yours. They share the similarity that most folks also "can not stand the thought of sexual contact or relations with" these classes and "most straight people are similarly grossed out by the thought of sexual contact and relations with" most of these catagories. So my second question for you: Should the legal definition of marriage be expanded to include these as well? Why or why not? Just make sure that the standard you use isn't hypocritical - it needs to apply across the board to hetero- and homo- contact as well. I REALLY want to know. "

humm wrote on Jul 14, 2007 4:06 PM:

" Why dont dont we all just live and at let live we only have one life people so get on with it!! "

Alan G. wrote on Jul 14, 2007 4:10 PM:

" Hey Confused, I'm seriously starting to think you're one of those "born again's", in which case it's hopeless to explain the difference between homosexuality and such deviant sexual behaviors as bestiality and pedophilia. "

I BEG TO DIFFER wrote on Jul 14, 2007 4:14 PM:

" Matt says "The Bible, while a moral compass for some, has no bearing on secular law." Not so: what about some of those 10 Commandments? Thou shalt not kill; Thou shalt not steal, and so on . . . Sounds pretty secular to me! "

Why wrote on Jul 15, 2007 1:58 AM:

" If you are concerned about other people's sexuality then you have to much time on your hands....Live your life and let others worry about thiers. During the daily course of my life to include my responsibilites and sleep I barely have enough time to accomplish all my "desired" intentions, let alone CARE enough to worry about others. Get a life....and let other's live theirs....If two people want to be considered married, but are the same sex who cares? Sure, it's not for me, but who am I to Judge others? "

Heidi Wippel wrote on Jul 15, 2007 9:26 AM:

" I have read most of the discussion between the readers and I myself find it very healthy to communicate about this issue openly and honestly. Because of the freedoms we share, we are allowed our opinions. I am a mother of three, a teacher, a wife, a productive community member, and I am a lesbian. My partner and I are very active in the community and it hurts me to hear that there are still people like this in our community that have so much hate in their heart. Mainly because these are the people that make my children feel in fear even though they live in a loving and caring home with responsible parents. We must remember that this is not our first social change movement. In 1908 , the vote went to the people for interracial marriage and 98.9 percent of the United Stated States voted "NO". Our country has evolved from racism, prejudice, and inequalities and SOCIAL CHANGE will carry this issue because equality is a core value for all Americans. God Bless this beautiful country we live in ! "

Humble opinion wrote on Jul 15, 2007 12:03 PM:

" I am a heterosexual and I consider myself to be a Christian and I have worked with gays and lesbians as well as lived next to them. I can honestly say that I believe people are born the way they are. I have also found that their sexual orientation does not determine wether they are a bad person or not. The only difference is they are attracted to the same sex, which does not automatically make them a pedophile, bad parent or partner. I've seen some that are great parents and or partners. I've also met some that I did not like, but that goes with anyone, white, black, hispanic. There are just people some better and or worse than others. Some are sick and twisted wether they are white, black, pink, purple, gay or straight. The bottom line is God's #1 Rule is to love one another and treat each other with dignity and respect. As far as I'm concerned, if you are a good person and your not hurting anyone and treat others with respect and dignity, thats all that counts. "

LOVE vs SEX wrote on Jul 15, 2007 1:26 PM:

" To better understand, you must separate the two, as NATURE and HUMAN BIOLOGY did. One can clearly see that certain physical body parts were made to fit together, either by evolution OR by intelligent design - your choice, take your pick. This is called the ability to reproduce the species. It is done, in humans, with male AND female genetic material. Not male and male, not female and female. LOVE is an emotion: a psychosocial construct that can be experienced by a biologic entity capable of feeling it. SEX is a purely physical expression of one or more of the following: love, lust, desire, personal impulses, or the biologic imperative of reproducing the species. Love is almost always a positive life factor, while sex can be positive(satisfying) or negative(risky) depending on how it is physically expressed and experienced. The point is this: LOVE is an emotion that we feel, SEX is a biological thing that we do. We do not have the right to condemn someone's personal feelings, but we do have the right, as a society, to put limits on the things we physically do. "

Heidi Wippel wrote on Jul 15, 2007 5:32 PM:

" If you think society has a right to tell people how to have sex then you are one of the minority in this country who believe the governent should involve theirselves more in our personal lives. Republicans and Democrats usually agree on this matter. How would you suggest they monitor these behaviors ? Security Camera's ? Consider ing Hanford is down 10 police officers , I am sure they would be thrilled to be breaking down doors for how people conduct their own sexual feelings and pleasures. Maybe banning the missionary position would be next? This gay marriage issue is about equality not whether or not you understand being gay. Or how gay people have sex. How you feel about gay people that is called prejudiced, If you choose to be prejudiced that is your choice and your right. However, the majority believe that how we have sex is our right not the governments. "

NoNo wrote on Jul 15, 2007 7:34 PM:

" Leviticus 18:22: "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." Leviticus 20:13 "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them." "

NoNo wrote on Jul 15, 2007 7:39 PM:

" God tells us that He is unchanging. He is the same, "I the LORD do not change". A question we must ask is, "If God finds something to be detestable and an abomination in past times, would an unchanging God find them to be good and normal today?" Of course He wouldn't. He's unchanging! "

NoNo wrote on Jul 15, 2007 7:47 PM:

" The homosexual activist would also like for everyone to believe that not only is homosexuality a good thing, wholesome and true, but that it's a genetic trait. Let me dispel this urban legend right now. To date, no evidence of a "homosexual gene" has been found. All evidence supports the fact that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, not a predetermined genetic trait such as being right handed or left handed, or having a specific skin color. As a matter of fact, according to information provided by Ben Rast at Contender Ministries, "A British psychologist has had enormous success in providing 'reorientation' therapy to homosexuals who want to change. This is not a surgery or a medical treatment, but it is effective. How could it be effective if the cause of homosexuality is physical? Well, it couldn't be. Homosexuality is a choice, not a genetic predisposition."4 What a stretch it is for the logical mind to even come close to believing that someone accepting the homosexual lifestyle choice becomes part of a different race! "

Dear NoNo wrote on Jul 15, 2007 8:19 PM:

" You quote Leviticus 18:22 as a rule which you personally still believe should be followed, so do you also follow Lev. 19:27, " you shall not round the corners of your hair nor trim the corners of your beards? Are you certain you are eating no fruit from trees less than five years old (Lev. 19:25)? And in the Year of Jubille, do you return to your ancestral lands (Lev. 24:10) Do you keep Kosher/Levitical Law as far as forbidden food goes? Do you, in fact, follow Levitical law at all or do you just like quoting it to point out how others are violating it? "

Heidi Wippel wrote on Jul 15, 2007 8:44 PM:

" Again this is not a religious issue. This is a civil right for all American's not just the fundamental Christian's which is most obvious you are. The bible was written in a time when the average life span for a man was 26 years old. During that time Women were considered property. Which if you haven't noticed, is not the majority of California relationships. Of course they wrote that men and women should lie together. they needed procreation which if you haven't noticed the population is doing fine without procreation. In fact there are many American's who get married without procreation in mind. If I must give you example I will, but you would probably be too busy looking up bible verses that you might not notice that all American's are not Christian's. Which I would assume you believe is a sin as well. In fact, our population is very diverse. There are Jewish, Buddhist, Methodist's, Muslim, Hindu all in California. In fact there may even be some atheist. Which is also a civil right. I teach my children acceptance of all religions, races, orientation, genders, BECAUSE I AM NOT PREJUDICED ! "

NoNo wrote on Jul 15, 2007 10:02 PM:

" Marriage is not an American invention. It has existed as an institution since the beginning of civilization, and thus supersedes our modern laws. Every society at all times has viewed the social norm of marriage as a union of male and female. Studies of previous civilizations reveal that when a society weakens the sexual ethic of marriage, it deteriorates and eventually disintegrates. In 1970, the Kinsey Institute reported that 84 percent of the homosexuals they studied had shifted their sexual orientation at least once; 32 percent of them reported a second shift, and 13 percent reported five changes, during their lifetime, in their sexual orientation. The five major world religions, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism recognize and uphold the natural, heterosexual understanding of marriage. By contrast, these religions teach that homosexual behavior is sinful or wrong. "

NoNo wrote on Jul 15, 2007 10:06 PM:

" It should also be noted that I am not prejudice. I have several friends that are homosexuals. I do not approve of their livestyle however I still love them as fellow human beings. How would I ever be able to show them God's love if I was prejudice toward them. Just because I do not approve ot their lifestyle does not make me prejudice. "

NoNo wrote on Jul 15, 2007 10:31 PM:

" Studies indicate that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime. The median number of partners for homosexuals is four times higher than for heterosexuals. A study on the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals, published in the Journal of Sex Research, found that only 2.7% claimed to have had sex with one partner only. Research has found that few homosexual relationships last longer than two years. Many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners. The following was published in Lambada: 24 percent of gay men had more than 100 partners. 43 percent of gay men had more than 500 partners. 28 percent of gay men had more than 1,000 partners Irrefutable evidence proves that there are lethal consequences to engaging in the defining features of male homosexuality. Homosexuals are vulnerable to dozens of STD's. According to one report, the risk of anal cancer rises by an astounding 4,000 percent for those engaging in homosexual intercourse and doubles for those who are HIV positive. AIDS remains the fifth leading cause of death among ages 26 to 44, and 60 percent of new cases contracted by men who have sex with men. "

NoNo wrote on Jul 15, 2007 10:56 PM:

" There are several areas where the average homosexual differs from the average, normal, "everyday” heterosexual. Research has shown that men and women living homosexually are at substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder and nicotine dependence. For instance, one twin-study found that men with same-sex partners are 6.5 times as likely as their co-twins to attempt suicide. Another study found that a substantial percentage of gay males and lesbians report some participation in illegal drug use. "

2cents wrote on Jul 15, 2007 11:52 PM:

" Alright let me get this straight. Most people on here are claiming that sexual orientation is in our genes. That we have no choice in the type of sexual behavior we participate in. If this is true then it goes behond homosexuality. People who are Asexual, Autosexual, Pansexual, zoosexuality/bestiality, Pedophilia, Bisexualality, Transsexualality are all ok. How can we send people to prison for having sex with children and animals because according to you it is a gene with in us and they cannot help it. I beg to differ. These types of behavior along with homosexualality is a choice and it has nothing to do with prejudice. In order for it to be prejudice then homosexualality would have to be a race and it is not. It is a lifestyle choice that you are not born with. There is no medical facts to back up anyone's claim that this lifestyle is what you are born with. Now I am not bashing any one person. I am only bashing the lifestyle choice. "

myzer wrote on Jul 16, 2007 7:32 AM:

" 1. Ok I choose to be straight which means I can just as well be Gay. 2. Methodists are christians. 3. More than half of marriages end in devorce. 4. China has over 200 million citizens and they are 99 % buddhaists...hell better be a HUGE place.5. PAY ATTENTION NOW This whole thing is about MONEY..double the taxes,double the car insurance rates etc. IF this (gay Marriage) wasn't linked to MONEY the Government WOULDN"T CARE!!!!!!!!! "

Heidi Wippel wrote on Jul 16, 2007 8:55 AM:

" As far as the shifting behaviors of homosexuals that you stated in the Kinsey report, of course they have shifted, when you are not treated as an equal American why should you conform to rules that society has set. That is exactly why we need gay marriage. Gay marriage will actually generate a more stable environment where all people will benefit from the stability of a true monogomaous relationship. When people are stable in their relationships they will tend to sway less in their behaviors. Did you know that the average gay couple is more educated and makes more money than the average heterosexual couple? We are not talking about religion, we are talking about civil rights and what is good for all Americans. Prejudiced does not just cover race, it also means narrow, intolerant, partiality. When you love someone, you should love them unconditionally. And if you have friends that are homosexual they want to be loved unconditionally just as you do. They want to have the same rights as you do. There has never been a civil rights movement in this country that has failed. It just takes alot of money to make justice happen. "

For you bible quoters ! wrote on Jul 16, 2007 9:21 AM:

" The use of Leviticus to condemn and reject homosexuals is obviously a hypocritical selective use of the Bible against gays and lesbians. Nobody today tries to keep the laws in Leviticus. Look at Leviticus 11:1-12, where all unclean animals are forbidden as food, including rabbits, pigs, and shellfish, such as oysters, shrimp, lobsters, crabs, clams, and others that are called an "abomination." Leviticus 20:25 demands that "you are to make a distinction between the clean and unclean animal and between the unclean and clean bird; and you shall not make yourself an abomination by animal or by bird or by anything that creeps on the ground, which I have separated for you as unclean." You can eat some insects like locusts (grasshoppers), but not others. Leviticus 12:1-8 declares that a woman is unclean for 33 days after giving birth to a boy and for 66 days after giving birth to a girl and goes on to demand that certain animals must be offered as a burnt offering and a sin offering for cleansing. Nobody today who claims to be a Christian tries to keep these laws, and few people even know about them! Why do you think "

For you bible quoters ! wrote on Jul 16, 2007 9:22 AM:

" Read Leviticus 23 to see the detailed regulations concerning "complete rest" on the Sabbath day and demands of animal sacrifices to be carried out according to exact instructions. Leviticus 18:19 forbids a husband from having sex with his wife during her menstrual period. Leviticus 19:19 forbids mixed breeding of various kinds of cattle, sowing various kinds of seeds in your field or wearing "a garment made from two kinds of material mixed together." Leviticus 19:27 demands that "you shall not round off the side-growth of your heads, nor harm the edges of your beard." The next verse forbids "tattoo marks on yourself." Most people do not even know that these laws are in the Bible and are demanded equally with all the others. Why don't fundamentalists organize protests and picket seafood restaurants, oyster bars, church barbecue suppers, all grocery stores, barber shops, tattoo parlors, and stores that sell suits and dresses made of mixed wool, cotton, polyester, and other materials? All of these products and services are "abominations" in Leviticus. When have you heard a preacher condemn the demonic abomination of garments that are made of mixed fabrics? "

More bible quoters ! wrote on Jul 16, 2007 9:44 AM:

" "Accept one another, just as Christ also accepted you to the glory of God." Romans 15:7 Children are born into an environment filled with fears of God's condemnation and judgment, social disapproval and rejection, internal doubts and fears of their own sexuality, and the ultimate horror of burning for all eternity in hell. Children are taught early to fear failure, strangers, anybody who is different, other races, other religions, and a threatening landscape of life full of phobias and destructive people, including the face that they see in a mirror. Children are taught to be afraid of certain foods, dangerous water, animals, places, people and just about everything that their parents also were taught to fear.One of the greatest fears fed by religion is the fear of being left out, the fear of rejection and abandonment. Religion teaches people to be afraid of their own freedom to think and to fear their own ideas when they conflict with the religious "group think" that dominates them.Freedom from fear was the persistent offer of Jesus in the Gospels. "Don't be afraid" is a constant greeting from Jesus to his friends "

Alan G. wrote on Jul 16, 2007 9:47 AM:

" The answer to "For you bible quoters'" question is simple; the majority of Christians in this world are what I refer to as "Convenient Christians." They treat the bible like it's a buffet where they choose a little of this and a little of that and ignore the things they don't like or disagree with. That's why some of the hypocrites on this board can quote passages all day about homosexuality because it suits them, but they ignore many of the other parts because it's inconvenient. They're not Christians, they're "Chistian-like." Kinda like when you buy cookies at the store and they say they are "Chocolaty chip flavor." They have that chocolate flavor, but aren't made with real chocolate. Or when car manufacturers put a rear spoiler on an economy car and call it "Sporty" because it's not a true sports car. "

Ruth and Naomi wrote on Jul 16, 2007 9:56 AM:

" Ruth forsook all others and committed herself to Naomi:Do not urge me to leave you or turn back from following you; for where you go, I will go, and where you live, I will live. Your people be my people and your God will be my God. Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. May God's worst punishment come upon me if anything but death alone shall part us." (1:16-17) Many modern marriage ceremonies contain ideas from this speech. Most people, however, choose to ignore the fact that these promises were made first not by a woman to a man but by a woman to another woman!Ruth and Naomi were brought together in loving commitment to each other by the death of their husbands, which left them alone and vulnerable as widows. The Hebrew word for widow is "mute" and is a heavy reminder of the weak and defenseless condition of unmarried women in Old Testament times. The name Naomi means "pleasant," but after she became a widow, Naomi said, "Call me Mara (meaning bitter), for the Almighty has dealt very bitterly with me...and has afflicted me." (1:20-21). "

Confused wrote on Jul 16, 2007 10:23 AM:

" Alan G. - nice way to avoid the question (I thought we agreed to leave religion out of it) If you won't tell me how, will I ever understand? I'm really trying to understand, even if I don't agree. Believe it or not, I frequently take the time to try to understand what drives people that think or believe differently than I do. Heidi - nothing prevents people from choosing monogamy OUTSIDE of marriage, either. They just don't seem to want to BE monogamous (see NoNo's info above). Also, as I said earlier, only a tiny percentage of the "homosexual" population are still choosing to get married (less that 100 in Mass. so far this year). It was a fad that was more about pushing the normalzation of homosexual behavior than about people actually wanting to get married (I'm not saying there aren't some). "

Confused wrote on Jul 16, 2007 11:20 AM:

" Isn't democracy fun sometimes? Folks with thier own interests get to make up laws based on anything, really. All you need is a motivation, noble or otherwise. I guess the question we need to be asking ourselves is how much we're willing to force our own beliefs on someone else. Unfortunately, this issue is a difficult for Christians. Believing that people should be able to follow their own consciences, at what point does promoting freedom also promote Biblically-defined evil? Knowing that people are going to engage in sexual sin, do you try to ban it? Probably no. But what if someone it trying to say that sexual sin is not evil? Don't I sin by calling evil good? Aren't I called to show that God has absolute standards, despite our unwillingness to live up to them? Do I say, "These things are evil, but you have to decide that for yourself." knowing that somewhere another person is saying, "You must say gay sex if ok, and you're a bigot if you think otherwise". Difficult situation. For my own conscience, I will not promote evil. "

Confused wrote on Jul 16, 2007 11:27 AM:

" Ruth and Naomi - You Confused me. Didn't Naomi take Ruth home and arrange to have her married her off to another man? You're not suggesting some type of same-sex marriage between them, are you? Or are you suggesting that there should be some way for women to bind themselves together legally, like Naomi and Ruth's adult-adoption? "

I BEG TO DIFFER wrote on Jul 16, 2007 12:16 PM:

" The Old Testament is describing JEWISH law. There were no Christians then as Christ was NOT born. JEWISH laws and traditions. Some might ask now 'what would Jesus do?' He loves everyone but would He endorse and approve the concept of purely recreational sex - which is what homosexual sex really is???? "

Scott Tucker wrote on Jul 16, 2007 1:33 PM:

" Sex between consulting adults, be it between a man and a woman, two men, two women, or any other combination thereof, is nobody's business except for the consenting adults involved. The Good Book might mean everything to some, but like Alan G. has stated, to many it has about as much worth as the National Enquirer at the check-out stand. Keep your religious/moral judgements to yourselves and let people do what they please in the bedroom. Homosexuality is not a lifestyle choice, it is not a desease, it is not deviant. As Billy Bragg sings: "Sexuality - Strong and warm and wild and free. Sexuality - Your laws do not apply to me. Sexuality - Don't threaten me with bigotry. Sexuality - I demand equality." "

Dear Confused wrote on Jul 16, 2007 1:53 PM:

" Love and truth come together in Jesus in the Gospels and in your life. Jesus had compassion and felt the pain of others. Jesus told the truth and had no fear of truth. Keeping love and truth in balance is one sign of true spiritual maturity. The first piece of our spiritual armor in Ephesians 6 is truth. God is true, "for it is impossible for God to lie". God's presence within you leads you in the path of truth. Jesus said: "I give you a new commandment, that you should love one another just as I have loved you." That includes loving yourself as well as feeling and responding to the pain of other people. The spirituality that Jesus demonstrated and taught has nothing to do with religion. Religious people and institutions, indeed, were the primary forces that Jesus fought against and won. You should search the bible for how Jesus dealt with anger because it appears you have some. "

A fellow Bible person. wrote on Jul 16, 2007 1:56 PM:

" There are two verses in my opinion that are God's one-two punch answer on this issue. He says in the Old Testament that it is an abomination and He then says in the New Testament that it is a sin that will keep you from being able to enter into heaven. I do not think God could give any more of a stricter warning on this issue than with the way that He has worded these two Scripture verses. When the Lord uses the word "abomination" to describe a specific activity He doesn't want us engaging in, He is letting all of us know that the issue being spoken about is of maximum seriousness. It is the strongest and most intense word that God can use to let us know that none of His people can engage in this type of activity, absolutely no exceptions! To have God Himself state, without any other possible interpretation, that this activity is an abomination in His eyes and that it will keep you from being able to enter into heaven once you die and cross over is the strictest warning that He could possibly give us on this. "

Scott Tucker wrote on Jul 16, 2007 2:06 PM:

" Edit to my previous post: Sex between CONSENTING adults, be it between a man and a woman, two men, two women, or any other combination thereof, is nobody's business except for the consenting adults involved. "

Confused wrote on Jul 16, 2007 3:57 PM:

" Dear "Dear Confused" - what do you mean? I'm feeling particularly correctable and teachable at the moment, so i went back and reread - again - everything I've written so far. I've done my darndest to states facts (as I understand them) in concise ways, trying to avoid inflammatory speech queues as much as possible. Where are you are you getting that I appear angry? "

Confused wrote on Jul 16, 2007 4:07 PM:

" Dear "Dear Confused" - BTW, I'd have to research it further, but I believe its implied that Jesus got irritated with Peter for contradicting His purpose - so Peter got called Satan. Jesus also got angry with the pharisees and teachers of the law regularly - he loudly denounced them by calling them such things as hypocrites, vipers, and blind guides. He also REALLY got ticked off in the temple at the moneychangers and offering-merchants; he came at them with a quickly fashioned whip of cords. Please tell me you not suggesting I should be combating blasphemy in this forum by launching similar attacks - I think it would violate the Terms of Use. :) "

NOT OF THIS COUNTRY wrote on Jul 16, 2007 5:40 PM:

" GREAT SCOTT! Billy Bragg, and Englishman, is not even an American. Claim to fame: a band called 'Riff Raff', who has some non-hit singles such as ' I Wanna Be a Cosmonaut.' Wonderful!! At least quote Americans, please! "

WHY? wrote on Jul 16, 2007 5:48 PM:

" Someone with intelligence please explain why they think same sex-sex is NOT deviant...PLEASE. The plumbing was designed to fit in one way for reproduction purposes whether you believe in evolution or intelligent design - dosen't matter. Anything else DEVIATES from the norm. If the pluming was normal for both sex-sex, we all would have BOTH sex organs. What's normal IS normal! "

lets see... wrote on Jul 16, 2007 6:44 PM:

" I am tired of each side having all this evidence created by other people. The bottom line is information is just that and it can be used to the need of the person needing it. Don't tell me that all you smart people would bet your life on a study or report. You know full well that no matter how much money or time you spend on a subject it is still left up to interpretation of the one using the information. I like to cut to the chase and say that conveniently most gays and lesbians first go out and have normal relationships and have numerous kids before they realize they are indeed gay or lesbian. Give me a break. The fact of the matter is if you were born gay then you would be born to not procreate since you would not be able to have sex with the opposite sex. So I would say that if it were true that you were born gay then why are you all having and screwing up so many kids. I know some lesbians here in the area who in high school were very happy to be with the boys. "

Not Gay wrote on Jul 16, 2007 10:53 PM:

" What I don't understand about a gay man is sometimes very puzzling to me. Take the most beautiful woman in the world or one like Angelina Joleen. What I don't seem to accept is that a gay man would rather make out with Michael Moore instead of a beautiful woman. I think gay people are born that way. However they are born with a disability, like they are sick. Mentally sick. Most gay people have a very disturbed past either with thier parents or they were victims of child molestation or abuse. Good luck "

Scott Tucker wrote on Jul 17, 2007 8:51 AM:

" Dear Not Of This Country, Most of the quotes presented in the debate here were taken from the bible. As far as I know, none of those old guys had US citizenship when they wrote their words. I don't see you jumping on other people for quoting other non-Americans. "At least quote Americans, please!" As if ONLY Americans have good things to say. Sheesh. "

WRONG AGAIN wrote on Jul 17, 2007 6:07 PM:

" No Scott Tucker, we ARE talking about AMERICA and its views on homosexual marriage. The BIBLE is used in AMERICA. YOU defend gay marriage by quoting a counterculture never-has-been successful BRITISH singer and his tired lyrics. Time for another chill pill? "

Bob wrote on Jul 17, 2007 7:37 PM:

" Gay marriage? Eww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

Dear closet cases: wrote on Jul 17, 2007 8:02 PM:

" If anti-gay people only knew how gay THEY look when they rant about this issue. Think about it; they are all worked up about gay people. Thinking about how much they both despise them and are drawn to them. There are so many issues that Christians and moralists could choose to write about but they are intoxicated by this issue. For people so repelled by gay sex they can't stop talking about it. They will probably all dismiss my opinion outright but on some level they are probably terrified that they are actually gay themselves. I suspect they are, but they will never be in any parade. "

Alan G. wrote on Jul 17, 2007 10:24 PM:

" I don't see how quoting a best-selling fiction novel carries any weight in a debate. "

Scott Tucker wrote on Jul 18, 2007 11:16 AM:

" Dear WRONG AGAIN, You live up to your online pseudonym: Wrong Again. The bible is, thankfully, not the law of the United States. The law of the United States is based on secular law created by men of reason. I see that you are the type of person who judges success by quantity, rather than by quality. Perhaps next time I will quote Britney Spears for you, she is American, and has had her share of American success. All patriotic, Ameri-centric chest-thumpin' aside, I offer you these AMERICAN words: "Come gather 'round people. Wherever you roam. And admit that the waters Around you have grown. And accept it that soon You'll be drenched to the bone. If your time to you Is worth savin' Then you better start swimmin' Or you'll sink like a stone. For the times they are a-changin'." We can quote scripture and prose all day long, but what it comes down to is respecting the rights of our fellow humans beings. I defend homosexuality and homosexual marriage, because I know that it poses absolutely no threat to our society. "

NOT Alan G. wrote on Jul 18, 2007 12:58 PM:

" How do we know it's NOT fiction? You too need a chill pill, I fear. What most normal people object to is the 'push it in your face' flaunting and intrusive attitude of the gay activistists. REQUIRING other people to both recognize AND accept the gay lifestyle is FORCING other peoples' beliefs on society. We always hear of GAY PRIDE parades and special days at baseball games and other events. What would be said of a Christian Respect parade or Jewish Pride Day at the races or a Moslem Recognition Night at the Thursday Farmers market? Don't these groups have the RIGHT to express themselves too? Or maybe they prefer to respect the rights of others or have a different approach . . . "

Humble Opinion wrote on Jul 18, 2007 6:10 PM:

" I was merely trying to point out to the people that are looking at this from a religous viewpoint that isn't it up to God to judge people and not us. As long as someones sexual orientation does not harm another person, such as an innocent child and is mutual it shouldn't be such a big issue. As far as the animals and that other bull, well come on, why not just talk about aliens. That's no comparison. Also, there are plenty of gay men who have been in long term monogamus relationships. They stay together and break up just like heterosexuals do. "

EAT HUMBLE PIE wrote on Jul 18, 2007 8:25 PM:

" According to SCOTT TUCKER we HAVE to accept homosexual marriage. "Civil union" is not good enough I take it? And quoting Bob Dylan as a popular counterculture balladeer cuts both ways; he writes more about straight relationships than gay rights. Example: He says 'If you're a real hot momma, come take away Daddy's weeping spell." and "You're gonna need You're gonna need my help someday . . . Well, if you can't quit your sinnin' . . . Please quit your low down ways." Civil unions are OK; marriage is between a man and a woman. Its normal and cultural-specific. Get used to it. Most of us are! "

to Alan wrote on Jul 22, 2007 4:28 PM:

" So you think that everyone is born gay. SPEAK FOR YOURSELF!! You have no right to speak for me and my life!!!!! "

Dear Not Alan G wrote on Jul 23, 2007 8:57 AM:

" In regards to gay people pushing their agenda in people's face. You have got to be kidding me. There is a church on every corner in Hanford. To be NON-christian in Hanford, can you imagine how those people feel. If it's not the WWJD bracelets, it's the people knocking on your door with literature . Every day is Christian day here. How many Christian organizations are there in hanford, how many gay and lesbian organizations are there ? I know of one that had to be put the Hanford Joint Union School District with battles from who ... the christian fundamentalist. Why do the fundamentalists think they are the only one who exists. Pride is not just about gay rights it's about everybodies rights including yours. Maybe you should go to a pride parade before you pass judgement from your recliner watching channel 26. I have been to 3 prides and they are about celebration for all people. San Francisco pride brings in over 1 million people every year and I would say maybe half are gay. That's 500,000 other people who just want to express their individuality. "

NOT Alan G. AGAIN wrote on Jul 23, 2007 1:32 PM:

" Don't have a hizzy-fit now! Read my post and try to answer it, please. A church building is not "in your face" and, besides, churches have been socially acceptable for millennia! Gay pride parades are optional social aberrations that attract malcontented individuals who flaunt their own special lifestyle. How can you tell who is straight and who is gay in a parade-watching crowd? Do you have some special homosexual detection skills? I most certainly don't need a gay pride event to celebrate my own individuality, and will not foist my lifestyle down anyone's throat. If I want to demonstrate those feelings, then I would march in the street, drinking, dancing, and singing during Hanford's Thursday Night Marketplace! "

The REAL Alan G. wrote on Jul 23, 2007 4:57 PM:

" There's a little confusion among folks as to which posts are mine and which are posted by people who co-opt my name in their subject lines because they are too weak to choose their own monikers. So in some cases, someone will post as "To Alan G." or "Not Alan G" and then their comments are confused as being from me by others. So for the nincompoop who yelled at me for saying all people are born gay, you truly are an idiot! I may have said waaaay back at the beginning of this string that I believed gay people are born gay, not all people as you state. For instance, I'm straight and was born that way. Use your own names people. "

NEVER WAS ALAN G. wrote on Jul 24, 2007 4:33 AM:

" Oh my goodness...someone is having an identity crisis! "

Hanford Resident wrote on Jul 24, 2007 7:43 PM:

" I can't believe how the citizens of hanford are filled with so much hate. Come on people, 'Love thy neighbor". Also, it's the churches, all 150 of them and their brain washed minds whom are the real problems! Ok, let's hear it! "

ADULTS ONLY, PLEASE wrote on Jul 25, 2007 5:04 PM:

" Look, everyone, I don't know exactly why taking a contrary stand has to be labeled 'hate.' Lets just look at the facts, OK? LOVE is an emotion, not a physical act, and is always a positive feeling not to be denied to anyone. Period. SEX is purely a physical act with or without the presence of love. SEX can be physically or emotionally harmful or germ-ridden or illegal or wonderful depending how it is carried out. Unfortunately, for those who embrace same sex-sex, men have one specific set of well-designed sex organs designed to biologically fit a complementary female set of sex organs in one traditional and healthful way. I challenge those who say homosexual physical acts are NOT aberrant or disgusting to visualize what contact actually goes on and then make your decision truthfully. What is so bad with a ‘civil union' anyway? Please explain . . . "

ANOTHER CAN OF WORMS wrote on Jul 26, 2007 12:10 AM:

" Wikipedia says: "A fault divorce is a divorce that takes place on the grounds that one party can be considered at fault. Many reasons can be given for one party to receive a fault divorce, such as adultery by the other party, an inability by the other party to engage in sexual intercourse, or infertility of the other party that was not discussed beforehand, or one party being imprisoned for a certain length of time." If homosexual marriage is approved, the laws which divorce, annulment, and dissolution, must be thoroughly revised or rewritten to be homosexual-correct. 50 states, Puerto Rico, and Guam must do this if we want to be fair and just to the gay marriage movement in the United States.Which raises some difficult, if not impossible, questions. For example, just how can an annulment be granted to a gay male or female couple if the marriage was never ‘consummated'. How do gays, under existing law, determine whether a marriage is physically consummated or not? Physical or mental alienation of affection, anyone? What would that be? Incompatibility? Be careful what you wish for, folks; you just might just get it! "

myzer wrote on Jul 26, 2007 6:16 PM:

" I would like someone that is against gay marriage to tell me EXACTLY how it would harm then PERSONALY...I don't care about religion or biology or if it's a life style or choice.....how would two people minding there own buisness going through life harms someone else?....I don't wanna hear any statistics or ANYTHING like that....just the basic answer of how it harms them PERSONALY??? and if this is not posted i will investigate if my civil right to free speach has been violated and take action against the sentinel "

JUDE wrote on Jul 26, 2007 8:47 PM:

" As a former Hanford resident now living in Southern Nevada, it's hearting too see a people a being a bit more understanding about homosexuality. When I lived there in the mid 80's the letters too the editers were filled gay bashing writers, Sadly bigotry seems too rule the central valley. "

To: Adults Only Please wrote on Jul 27, 2007 1:19 AM:

" Hum. I'm kinda taken by your blog. When you visit or look at your best friend and his or her husband or wife, do you look through them as friends and think about what they do in the privacy of their bedroom? I happen to know a couple of gay folks and did you know it's not always about SEX! That's the problem, people look into the bedroom of this group and do not look at them as human beings. We all wish to be loved, does it make a difference whom by? Get out of the gutter and look at the whole picture, not just what happens or what you think might happen pe the bedrooms of consenting adults. "

Interesting Development wrote on Jul 27, 2007 1:28 AM:

" I heard on the news the other day that this man, dispite circumstances will have to pay his ex-wife alimony until she re-marries another man or dies. The kicker is that she is a lesbian and is now in a "Registered Domestic Partnership" with her partner. The courts have said because she hasn't re-married a male she alimony payments will continue because lesbians cannot enter into a marriage. Wow, this is gonna create a bucket of worms! I say why not allow them to get married then they have to follow all the rules of marriage & divorce and everything else that goes along with it. I'm sure this isn't gonna be the last case like this..Stand by for more like this in the future. "

Alan G wrote on Jul 27, 2007 11:04 AM:

" Hey "Interesting" I read that same article and was appalled. This is just another reason why gay marriage needs to be worked out because obviously civil unions don't carry the same legal weight, depite what the lawmakers tell us. Just another instance where men get shafted by the court system when it comes to the dissolution of marriages. I hope that woman's children look at her with contempt every day of her life for cheating their father out of money that he couuld be putting towards their college or supporting his new family. "

THE LAST STRAW wrote on Jul 27, 2007 1:48 PM:

" OK, OK, I get it. I will have to redefine myself to be both socially acceptable AND politically correct . . . here goes: I NOW HAVE COME OUT AS A MALE LESBIAN - I LOVE WOMEN! Case closed. Thank you very much! "

A SOLUTION wrote on Jul 31, 2007 3:03 AM:

" Do not wait: REORIENTATE! "

HOT TOPICS

MORE LOCAL NEWS

Lemoore:

Selma:

Kingsburg:

PHOTO GALLERIES

More Photos

Sentinel Photos (120) Albums

: Hanford High vs. Lemoore High Water Polo; Friday, November, 6 2009; (14) Photos

: Tigers vs. Bullpups Volleyball; Friday, November, 6 2009; (22) Photos

: Hanford West vs. Redwood High Football; Friday, November, 6 2009; (13) Photos

Reader Submitted (7) Albums

: Vintage Hanford; Monday, December, 15 2008; (1) Photos

: Vacation Photos; Thursday, November, 20 2008; (35) Photos

: Events; Thursday, November, 20 2008; (38) Photos

EMAIL UPDATES

Sign up today to get all your local headlines delivered to your home or work e-mail address, so you don't miss the latest in breaking and local news.

E-Mail:
Daily News Updates
Breaking News Alerts