That is an interesting thought Stephanie. Are you implying that in order to avoid suicide, frustrated repression etc, that someone with SSA has to act on their impulses?

I guess it depends on what is meant by “who they really are”, because that is really the question. Is homosexuality an identity? or one of many natural and human flaws we must each overcome in order to “be” our real best selves and find fulfillment and joy.

An interesting thought.

Ah, no Ruby, I really need to tend to my family. Not use them, not take advantage of them, not abuse them, but take care of them and spend time with them.

Instead of throwing out more assumptions and accusations, please think about what I wrote about consequences.

Ok, I’m really leaving now. Peace.

New CDC Report Warns Syphilis is Still Ravaging the Homosexual Community

Syphilis, a disease close to being eliminated as a public health threat less than a decade ago, has increased each year since 2000 and remains a serious threat to the health of homosexual and bisexual men, says the latest statistical report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In 2007, men who have sex with men (MSM) continued to account for the majority of primary and secondary (P&S) syphilis cases, representing 65 percent of the 11,466 P&S syphilis cases reported. Increased transmission among MSM is believed to be the primary driver of increased rates of syphilis overall in the United States.

Syphilis among MSM is of particular concern because it can facilitate HIV transmission and lead to irreversible complications such as strokes, especially in those who already have HIV. The CDC recommends that all MSM be tested for syphilis at least annually.

See the full CDC report:
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats07/syphilis.htm

Many people are so eager to talk about the consequences of homosexuality but do we honestly think about the consequences of NOT allowing one to grow up to be who they really are. What are the different things that could happen to that individual?

I don’t care if people are gay, but I will question people who use sexual orientation as an excuse/justification/rationalization for stripping children (with no choice in the matter) of their right to have a mom and a dad living with them, in the same house.

Again, you brought your children (or your partner’s children) into this discussion. You used them as justification for your choices. You used them as models for the norm (knowing there is no scientific evidence to support). You used children. You continue to use them even in your parting comment.

“p.s. i’d like to know what your children really think, inside their souls, when they aren’t trying to make you happy because they love you. If their father is not in their house. On purpose. because you chose to be a lesbian and live with your partner…that is selfishly denying them their father.”

I can’t imagine saying “I’d like to know what your kids really think.” to you about your kids, if you have them. Your insinuating comment was very unnecessary. Ruby, I’m under the impression there is not much desire on your part to understand or believe, only a desire to defend.

For the record, my partner did not leave her husband to be with me or any other woman. Assumptions are bad, really bad.

You Ruby have not walked a moment in someone’s shoes when they come to accept the fact that they are gay.

Many people are so eager to talk about the consequences of homosexuality but do we honestly think about the consequences of NOT allowing one to grow up to be who they really are. What are the different things that could happen to that individual?

It’s worth thinking about, but only if we wanted to be open and honest about this subject. Perhaps one day you may be able to put the shoe on the other foot and see what you cannot see now.

I’ve enjoyed the conversation and I thank you. I am exiting the conversation now to tend to my family.

Be blessed.

my keyboard is sort of having spatial difficulties today

Thanks for you comment.

All things perfect, a man and a woman can create a child. If a kidney isn’t working, do we stop calling it a kidney?

Also, could you be specific about “mis-phrased” statements. Maybe we can clarify them for you.

We all hope GnS comes back. I’m still interested in his rationalization of gay marriage but not incest-marriage. Especially considering the evidence Pearl and Ray have presented her.

I’m proud of a lot of the other posters, too, especially the author, for keeping the arguments rational and even (mostly) scientifically based!

Healthy debate is a good thing, but you’ll all see that you’ve scared off GnS, who probably won’t post for a while now, or at least not in this forum.

As for me, my dear favorite is post #124:
“I think we should reserve a special name for a legally committed relationship capable of creating a child. I think it’s okay if we call this kind of relationship marriage.”

That’s gorgeous. Should we deny rights to non-procreating couples? I don’t think that’s fair. But to deny that there’s a difference between a committed, procreative relationship and all the other types is sort of silly. The right to a legal designation is always held to an eligible group. I think gays can be as happy with domestic partnerships as they ever would be with marriage–maybe more so. Elton John is. And is trios and sibs want to cohabitate (whether they have sex or not is NOT our business) then perhaps they should be allowed to have domestic partnerships, too.