To: yard_man who wrote (37942 ) 2/21/2005 11:01:37 PM From: Orcastraiter Read Replies (1) | Respond to I think you oversimplify the issue. I view homosexuality as loathsome, just from what I know about nature and because I know it is displeasing to God. I don't loathe homosexuals. I also don't loathe liars or thieves. The issue boils down to 1) whether or not the state should promote or discourage certain behavior and 2) whether or not special rights that have been afforded others -- whether such special rights should be afforded homosexuals. re 1) For years homosexuality, the practice of sodomy, was believe to be abhorent and laws precluded it. So the idea that the behavior is OK -- whether you base it on statistics or whatever you base it on -- is a relatively new. Statistically speaking there are a number of people who commit incest or engage in other forms of deviant behavior. Such behaviors are thought to be abhorrent, even is the people involved are old enough to be engaging in something that is consensual. So the idea that a certain number participate in an activity or that it is consensual does not make it right. re 2) From a strictly libertarian POV I would make a number of observations. First, married people (I mean heterosexuals or what I call those who choose normal sexual functions based on the ability to procreate) shouldn't be treated as a special class of people. Why should the state favor a married person over a single person in any matter as relates to the law -- especially tax law or rules concerning inheritance!! The state, in its legitimate capacity, has no interest in preferring someone being single over someone being married. Homosexuals are seeking 2 things it appears to me. Someone to give them a stamp of "legitimacy" for the lifestyle that they have chosen and someone who will advocate or promulgate their lifestyle. Again, the state has no legitimate interest in this or preferring that a person marry or not marry. The other thing that homosexuals are seeking is expansion of regulations that already exist concerning normal marriage partners, that favor these over single persons. I would contend that folks should have the right to bequeath property and not be subject to taxation on it period. As to whether or not companies provide insurance or other perks to those who have chosen any free assocation with -- or a relation to an employee -- this should be strictly up to the employer. I am not a homophobe. I just regard it as wrong. Doesn't mean I haven't done wrong or that I hate them as a class of people.
