"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:407448b7.27172664@netnews.mchsi.com...

If you in any way openly oppose same-sex marriage, you DO.
Same-sex marriage is totally harmless, and per this recent article in
the Los Angeles Times, there's nothing particularly anomalous about
it. The "definitions" of marriage have varied widely over time, and
were dramatically revised as recently as 1967, when all laws barring
interracial marriage in the USA were properly struck down ---

http://www.latimes.com/la-et-anton31mar31,1,721633.story

You are not the one who gets to decide Craig

If you in any way openly oppose same-sex marriage, you DO.

You are not the one who gets to decide

It is a sin, period Craig.

This has been pointed out several times with
scripture.

Any Christian or anyone for that matter that believes in the word of God
knows this, and doesn't go and
try to redefine it. God strictly forbids the act of homosexuality.

And any
support for homosexual marriage
is the same thing as condoning it.

It isn't my fault they chose that
lifestyle Craig. I truly believe
they can change if they truly wanted too.

Its cut and dry Craig...its wrong

So I will never vote for any candidate that supports homosexual
marriage.

That is your right. But fortunately, there are tens of millions
of us out here who WILL, and that will be one of the KEY reasons
that we DO.

I doubt it Craig. More than 50% of the population..as much as 70% maybe
higher
does NOT support gay marriage
And I doubt it will change.

And those numbers have been increasing steadily
over the last 30 years, from miniscule then, to perhaps even a
majority by now.

Not on this issue.
Most approve of a civil contract, but by far..the vast majority does NOT
support
gay marriage.

Why are you the only one who thinks you can say what is
valid or not?

**I** make no such determination.

Oh but you are Craig.
You are deciding if I care or not about a persons sex life
I could care less what they do behind closed doors. It is the issue of
marriage that I support remaining
between a man and a woman

"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:407448b7.27172664@netnews.mchsi.com...

It's happening FAR faster than most people realize! The
Wisconsin Primary was held AFTER thousands of gay couples
had been married in San Francisco, and exit polling by CNN
revealed that those who support same-sex marriage/civil unions
comprised *** 61% *** of the voters in that heartland (not "liberal
coastal") state! People who were **concerned** enough about
their civic duty to actually get out and physically VOTE. People
who were not just Democrats, but ALSO were Independents and
Republicans. Since Wisconsin is an OPEN-primary state, in which
people from ALL parties can vote. Thus, it was an excellent cross-
section of Wisconsin residents in general. And even MORE
importeantly -- of Wisconsin residents who actually get off their
duffs and VOTE! *** 61% *** !!!

Point being Craig, you asking others why they feel the way they do makes

just as much a busy body as
those you claim are busy bodies

It is a sin, period Craig. This has been pointed out several times
with scripture.

Any Christian or anyone for that matter that believes in the word of
God knows this, and doesn't go and try to redefine it.

God strictly forbids the act of homosexuality.

And any support for homosexual marriage is the same thing as
condoning it.

It isn't my fault they chose that lifestyle Craig. I truly believe
they can change if they truly wanted too.

Its cut and dry Craig...its wrong

Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:

Robert Heishman ("Osprey") wrote:

Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:

1. WHY are you a BUSYBODY?

Why are you asking?

Because I'm an egalitarian defender of personal liberties,
and when people's rights are unnecessarily and unconscionably
trampled by people, that makes it my business, as a fair-minded
human being, to try to learn WHY that's being done. And at the
same time, this question is designed to raise the consciousness
of the homophobe to the level at which -- just MAYBE -- he can
begin to realize that by being an active homophobe, he is butting
into people's PRIVATE affairs and lives, seeking to interfere with
things that are absolutely NONE of his business.

NOTE the word, "active," in the above paragraph. We have
no thought police in America yet (and let's hope that *that* level
of "Big Brotherism" NEVER is reached here. Thus, a person can
**mentally** be a homophobe, racist, or any other sort of hateful
person in his OWN mind... and as long as that intolerance never
manifests itself outwardly against other people, the only harm that
the person is doing is to *himself*. There are probably millions --
literally -- of closet segregationists/racists still out and about in
the South and elsewhere, who have never outgrown that mental
pathology. But as long as that self-inflicted poison remains *within*
them, internalized, and never is brought to bear upon others, they
are harmless to other people, and to society in general. About the
only way they're likely to do harm then, is in the privacy of the
voting booth. And fortunately or America, those having that sort of
mindset are vastly outnumbered by people who HAVE outgrown
racism, or who were lucky enough never to have been afflicted by
it in the first place. Thus, with any luck, their votes, if bigoted,
will never carry enough clout to bring about a repressive result in
any election.

With respect to homophobia, we can look at the unfortunate
results of the referendum in California, in which a proposition was
passed that banned same-sex marriage. FORTUNATELY, that
appears to be at odds with California's constitution, and when
statutory law and constitutional law directly conflict with one
another, the constitution prevails. And even MORE fortunately,
there is absolutely NOTHING in the **U.S.** Constitution that
would stand in the way of same-sex marriage, so the ONLY two
ways that this could be stopped WOULD be via a Supreme Court
ruling to that effect. (NOT at all likely, given the current fair-
minded nature of the Court's current composition -- which just
very properly threw the government OUT of people's bedrooms
last summer.) OR by amending the Constitution. Which is the
next thing to impossible to accomplish, and will NEVER be done
unless Americans develop a Nazi-like mentality. Poisoning
America's foremost gaurantor of liberties with a repressive Bigotry
Amendment will never fly.

Excellent evidence of the rapidity with which Americans are
outgrowing homophobia at an accelerating pace is provided by
what we just saw a few weeks ago in Wisconsin.

It's happening FAR faster than most people realize! The
Wisconsin Primary was held AFTER thousands of gay couples
had been married in San Francisco, and exit polling by CNN
revealed that those who support same-sex marriage/civil unions
comprised *** 61% *** of the voters in that heartland (not "liberal
coastal") state! People who were **concerned** enough about
their civic duty to actually get out and physically VOTE. People
who were not just Democrats, but ALSO were Independents and
Republicans. Since Wisconsin is an OPEN-primary state, in which
people from ALL parties can vote. Thus, it was an excellent cross-
section of Wisconsin residents in general. And even MORE
importeantly -- of Wisconsin residents who actually get off their
duffs and VOTE! *** 61% *** !!!

Point being Craig, you asking others why they feel the way they
do makes you just as much a busybody as those you claim are
busybodies

2. WHY would you give a flying rat's ***** about ANY
person's *private* sex life?

I don't.

If you in any way openly oppose same-sex marriage, you DO.
Same-sex marriage is totally harmless, and per this recent article in
the Los Angeles Times, there's nothing particularly anomalous about
it. The "definitions" of marriage have varied widely over time, and
were dramatically revised as recently as 1967, when all laws barring
interracial marriage in the USA were properly struck down ---

http://www.latimes.com/la-et-anton31mar31,1,721633.story

You are not the one who gets to decide Craig.

3. WHY in the world would you seek to treat any
person or group of people with less respect based
solely on what they do in private, as consensual
adults? (How could that POSSIBLY be of ANY
importance to you?)

I don't.

If you in any way openly oppose same-sex marriage, you DO.

You are not the one who gets to decide.

4. IF you are opposed to same-sex marriage, WHY?

Because it is a sin.

So is fortune-telling, to an even GREATER extent, if you look
at the Biblical treatment of both. (And exponentially so, to the
infinite power, if you consider the fact that same-sex marriage isn't
addressed AT ALL in the Bible.) There are millions of fortune-tellers
out and about. I submit that you could turn your efforts against
*them*, and at least have more Biblical backing for your actions.

It is a sin, period Craig. This has been pointed out several times with
with scripture. Any Christian or anyone for that matter that believes in
the word of God knows this, and doesn't go and try to redefine it.

God strictly forbids the act of homosexuality.

And any support for homosexual marriage is the same thing
as condoning it.

It isn't my fault they chose that lifestyle Craig.

I truly believe they can change if they truly wanted too.

Its cut and dry Craig...its wrong.

And if I was to support same sex marriage it would be the
same as saying the act of homosexuality is o.k., which it
isn't.

Actually, even as an egalitarian, I couldn't care less whether or
not any person *supports* same-sex marriage. They can REGARD
it any way that they choose. My only problem is with those who
openly OPPOSE it, and thus are butting into other people's business
unjustifiably. And as far s the Bible is concerned, even if it DID
address same-sex marriage (which it doesn't), the Bible neither
appointed nor authorizes ANY person or group of people to act
as *enforcers* of its precepts agianst society in general. The Bible
appointed NO Gestapo.

So I will never vote for any candidate that supports homosexual
marriage.

That is your right. But fortunately, there are tens of millions
of us out here who WILL, and that will be one of the KEY reasons
that we DO.

I doubt it Craig. More than 50% of the population..as much as
70% maybe higher does NOT support gay marriage. And I doubt
it will change.

And those numbers have been increasing steadily over
the last 30 years, from miniscule then, to perhaps even a
majority by now.

Not on this issue. Most approve of a civil contract, but
by far..the vast majority does NOT support gay marriage.

Only a VALID, **factual** reason... such as a *way*
that any heterosexual couple's marriage would in
ANY way be threatened, and thus need "protection"
from this impending expansion of liberty... is appro-
priate as a response. (Mindless emotionalism
counts for *nothing*, and is NO excuse for
discrimination.)

Why are you the only one who thinks you can say what is
valid or not?

**I** make no such determination.

Oh but you are Craig. You are deciding if I care or not about a
persons sex life.

I could care less what they do behind closed doors.

It is the issue of marriage that I support remaining between a
man and a woman.

**I** make no such determination. The FACTS do that. If NO
relevant FACTS can be brought to bear to argue against same-sex
marriage, then there is NO valid reason to deny it to people.

Here's an example. If same-sex marriage could be shown to have
the likely result of increasing the spread of HIV and other STDs,
*that* would be a valid argument for not permitting same-sex marriage.
However, the exact OPPOSITE is true. It would be a strong incentive
to be monogamous, and thus it would likely SLOW the rate of
transmission of STDs to some degree. Thus, **this** solid fact is
**supportive** of making same-sex marriage legally and universally
available.

The role that I have established for myself in Usenet is that of
an egalitarian who MARSHALLS the relevant facts dealing
with these social issues, and then bringing them to bear, publicly, in
this open forum, to enable people to see how they pertain to the
issues at hand. That would be a **difficult** task if any solid facts
existed that could argue against -- for example -- safe & legal
abortion-upon-request, or same-sex marriage. However, in the
ABSENCE of such facts, my job as a defender of those personal
liberties is incredibly EASY to accomplish. It's like fighting a duel
at 60 paces, in which I've been provided with a howitzer and my
opponents have nothing to use but than cream puffs. They are
totally outgunned. NOT by ME. But by the available **weaponry**
of the debates. The relevant FACTS are the **weapons** of ALL
debates.

That is a awful lot of power you are giving yourself. Ever occur
to you that some will disagree?

See above. They don't have to worry about disagreeing with
*me*. They need to worry about the FACTS rendering their
arguments specious and impotent. And those facts will be there,
whether I'm in here debating them or not. My chosen role is to shine
a spotlight on those facts, and then employ them against intolerance.

5. ENDA -- the totally-harmless "Employment Non-
Discrimination Act" -- which would have done
nothing more than ensure that people could NOT
be unfairly discriminated against in the workplace,
due to their sexual orientation -- failed by only ONE
(RRR cult-induced) vote in the U.S. Senate last
time, and will almost surely *pass* THIS time. Would
YOU be opposed to this very FAIR measure? If
so -- WHY?

I have no problem with laws that prohibit discrimination. A person
is there to do a job, and only that job. Not bring in their personal
lives. When they bring in their personal lives, they set themselves up.

Precisely. And a heterosexual person could do the same thing to
himself. But a gay should NOT be "set up" merely by the fact that
others may happen to *know* that he is gay. And that's what ENDA
protects against. Or will, once it's been passed.

[[[ READERS -- if *any* person provides sensible and
intelligent answers to ANY the five above questions,
you'd better be sitting down. I've never seen ANY
person YET provide an intelligent and factual reason
for doing ANY of the above.

I believe my answers are sensible and intelligent.

They are. I believe my responses are, too.

We all have our opinions. I respect a person who is willing to
stand by his or her opinion, even if I don't agree.

Your first question about being a busybody, you kind of contradict
yourself by even asking people these questions. Makes you the
busybody. IMHO.

Not really, as I think you may agree when reading the opening
paragraphs of *this* post.

4. IF you are opposed to same-sex marriage, WHY?

Because it is a sin.

So is fortune-telling, to an even GREATER extent, if you look
at the Biblical treatment of both. (And exponentially so, to the
infinite power, if you consider the fact that same-sex marriage isn't
addressed AT ALL in the Bible.) There are millions of fortune-tellers
out and about. I submit that you could turn your efforts against
*them*, and at least have more Biblical backing for your actions.

It is a sin, period Craig. This has been pointed out several times with
scripture.
Any Christian or anyone for that matter that believes in the word of God
knows this, and doesn't go and
try to redefine it.

God strictly forbids the act of homosexuality. And any
support for homosexual marriage
is the same thing as condoning it. It isn't my fault they chose that
lifestyle Craig. I truly believe
they can change if they truly wanted too.

Its cut and dry Craig...its wrong