[b said:
Quote[/b] ]However the definition of marriage is 1 man and 1 woman. Nowhere in the definition does it say 2 men or 2 women. Once again homosexuality is not equivalent to heterosexuality and never will be.
Which definiton? Yours? Why should we use yours?
Let's use the *REAL* american definition, which has a 40,000 year tradition of recognizing same sex marriages. After all, the Native Americans were here first.
Or maybe the traditions of any number of cultures, past and present, in which homosexuality has been widely accepted and given marriage rights?
*Your* definition is not the only one. Give me one good reason why I should be *forced* to live by it.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Actually this is controversial, the origins of homosexuality is not as clear cut as you'd like to make it sound. There is no concrete "genetic" answer.
The research on origins is absolutely clear it is not a choice. Find me one paper which claims it is: peer-reviewed scientific journal articles only.
The evidence so far indicates that there *is* a genetic component, as proven by twin studies and familial histories. However, there is also evidence for environmental causes, such as birth order. There is, however, no evidence of any kind that it is chosen.
I've read the scientific literature on this subject (meaning the origianl, peer-review publications in scientific journals). Have you?
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Have you read the studies on this? Apparently not. The best environment for a child that is growing up is to have 2 parents, 1 of each sex. If you truely believe in what you stated that homosexuality is caused by genetics, what is the child to do if he's not genetically homosexual? The problems the child would face are obvious.
Did you even read my post? Apparently not.
The issue is not which parenting system is optimal compared to the other. There are more kids in the foster system than are being adopted, way more. To compare two-parent versus one-parent versus gay-parents ignores the obvious and more important part: Some parents, *any* parents, are better than *no* parents.
Oh, and speaking of studies, studies have also conclusively shown that children raised by gay parents, both adopted and genetic children, have no more problems than normal kids, and have no abormal sexuality issues. Adopted ones even have no greater incidence of homosexuality than the population as a whole, effectively refuting the claim that gay parents will make the kids gay.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]As in socially, historically, and culturaly normal.
In numerous cultures and societies throughout history, homosexuality has been accepted and even endorsed in various forms and ways. As I noted, the Christian church even performed gay marriage ceremonies until the 11th century. And let's not forget such trivial societies as Athens, the source of all modern civilization, birthplace of democracy, and Rome, the most powerful and advanced civilization of its time. Or the Native Americans and Native Australians.
So, once again, why should we be force to live by your norms? Aren't we free?
Oh, and on top of it all: tradition doesn't make something right. Slavery has a long and great tradition, but we don't claim that as "normal".
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Excellent public education... It is apparent you have no idea what your talking about
More than you do. I've been through the pathetic excuse for the American public education system, and taught the end-results of it. I've also got a darn good idea of the UK system from my fiancee.
You want to compare, how's this: You know calculus, that "really hard" math course most US high school students never take, which is not required at all for graduation? In the UK, it's taught at age 16, is standard in *all* schools, and *is* required.
Let's not get into the fact that we're the only civilized country in the world whose schools ignore the unifying theory of an entire science just to appease the uneducated few who reject it.
Mokele