Just because he is half african american does not mean he sees us as equals. He is certainly not like King Jr. and we must all accpet that fact. If Obama really believed in equality he would stop pussy footing around, get off his ass, and say he supports full marriage equality not "I honestly believe marriage should only be between one man and one women."

And your entitled to your opinion they are like assholes everybody's got one,Andwhat the hell doesbhim be half Black and White,have to do with all of this or did youput that in just to make yourself feel important?AndsinceI met Martin Luther King,Jr.during thecivil rights of the 60'swhen I was growing up and there is no doudt you did not what makes you think he does not think like King,he does not have to be like him to believe and think like him.And your entieled to your opinion about the union between a man and a woman since your not 'God" who will judge us all on that final day who really gives a damn what you believe I don't

I am sorry dude but rewrite your response i cant understand redneck that well. Its been so long since i studied the language of the uneducated i forgot how to read it. Mainly because its religiously indoctrinated and pathetic in monotone.

Well mr. gilmore jr...

Mr obama did state in an interview back when he was campagning that he does indeed believe that marriage is between a man and a woman...

I agree that his ethnicity has nothing to do with the rightness or the wrongness of his actions or rather the lack thereof.

We are all entitled to our opinions and thank you for pointing out the obvious BUT none of us is entitled to legislate our religious beliefs into secular law.

Just as you and every other bible thumper cares nothing for the beliefs of others if they are different from yours...So too do those of us who choose to live in reality feel the same about you.

For those of you who may be wondering how I understood mr. gilmore whereas mr. marshall couldnt despite his greater intelligence...

Ive lived so long among rednecks that Ive gotten used to their "language" for the most part...

"I'm a religious Social Conservative"

Yes but you are also a human being who supports marriage equality on the federal level. We need more people like you to demand that Obama realize that even religious conservatives can have pro gay affirming beliefs that equate us to being equal human beings, not deranged sick minded nythomanics.

Thank you! I am so glad someone sees, once again, that religion has no business being involved in government matters, for the very reason that separation of church and state exists--it crushes human rights if the lines are blurred.

I am sorry that you are so angry. I am, sincerely. Please keep in mind though, that our cause can be achieved best by keeping our heads on our shoulders and using our passions to get results rather than to use it to spray hate back at others. Hate is wrong. That is the message I want to send.

Good Lord that would be awesome. We can all hope so. But let's make some preparations just in case...

Indeed miss f...

Hope and pray for the best BUT be prepared for the worst.

He just did speak out on GLBT rights, very strongly. I know he needs to step up and take action on these words now, but he's only been in office a bit over 9 months and Bush did a lot of tearing down of the hard work that had been done for GLBT rights. Let's give the man a chance--he's not God.

We're all angry. We're all passionate about this. We should be, but it seems that much of the vibe on the board here is hate-filled. Isn't hate what we're fighting against?

Please direct your passions toward helping the cause, helping others and helping GLBT youth (possibly those that haven't come out yet) by setting an example, showing that this is a community of love and respect, not more hate.

Especially the young people need to see this. To feel love from somewhere definate.

Just to let you know I never disclosed my "sexual orientation" not preferences IDIOT, and after they found my chat logs to my fiance Ruben I was discharged. So stop the bullshitting and you my friend can go to the imaginary candy land you call hell.

I understand your ideas of your support, but you seem way out of touch with the current situation. If there is anyone that is holier than thou it is Obama. That is why he would rather see us segregated as people rather than seen as whole. He is nothing more than another politicians in this shit hole of a country and after reading yet another legal history text book, I cant even fathom what the hell was I thinking when I decided to join the national guard and protect this country.

Everyone in the US thinks they will annex Canada into the US. However looking at how wonderfully stupid and religious this country is becoming, the only thing I can see Canada, and Europe doing to the US is glassing it before our politicians decide to start the "rapture" they so desperately believe in.

As soon as Obama said he was going to make change I knew he was not going to do anything because he addressed it to the people, when it is the legislature and federal courts that need to have a clear house.

Lol, Canada would fight that tooth and nail, I don't think that will happen.  America already tried to invade and it didn't work.

Gilmore, you say that nobody really knows what is going on with other people.  This is true.  What you fail to point out, and its something you did, is that we can't help but assume things about the people we see.  Its our nature to always make up our own beliefs about everything we encounter.

A really good example of this is religion.  Its how religion got started in the first place, people trying to explain things they couldn't.  Also, everyone has a different interpretation of their religion, however slight it may be.

Still, though, you raise some good points about the military service.  You're right, it doesn't really matter what the person thinks or does, as long as he gets the job done.

Gilmore: I'm the progeny of a pair of Marines, both who served in 'Nam. No, I've not been in their boots, but they each wore a set of their own.

They each thing that DOMA and DADT are BS.

My husband, former Special Forces, had this to say [granted: it's a bad joke, and in bad taste...], "...if I had a key sniper out there, I wouldn't give a damn if he found my ass cute - he'd be there to take out the enemy faster than a guy who didn't like my big blue eyes!"

Sidenote: my husband is not bi, he's full-on straight.

Point is: all three have, as it were, either worn your boots or boots much like 'em.

The, "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" policy has managed to get some fine men and women kicked from the military, specifically due to situationally being discovered, or "outed".

In other words: it done failed, and key people in the military are being kicked.

DOMA and the inability to insure domestic partners is also a fail.

Marshall: you've every right to be thirty degrees of furious at the apparent inactivity displayed, and I don't blame you for that, after having read your situation. Yours and other stories like yours are massive tactical blunders in keeping the U.S. military intact.

The U.S. military, and politricks, are each governed by a handful of things: what is thought/felt in private, what is displayed in public, and what is said at the water cooler.

Obama's in a sticky situation. Like McNamara is saying, although he's on the Democratic ticket, he's more Centrist than Liberal. He's spent these nine months trying to get the whole divide and conquer mentality out of politricks - which is causing the bleeding-heart liberals and the right wingnuts to begin showing the first stages of rabid, foaming-mouth frenzied theatrics [also known, in more polite terms, as "fillibusters"].

Much like teaching the blind to see or the deaf to hear, he's trying to teach those who have closed their minds to outside-resourced reason to actively participate in open discussion.

There's a phrase about flatulence in a place of worship that comes to mind, right about now.

So, he treads carefully, trying to ensure that neither side threatens to combust, but anticipating fallout, regardless of his next action.

To build a bridge, you set girders as markers for where it will go, then start laying in the framework, then setting the foundation and reinforcing the parts laid in.

He's giving the speeches, yet waves of acid foam are slapping against the girders. Undeterred, he's expanding on the framework.

Democrats [not just Obama] are also accustomed to their bridges getting stormed before they've had the chance to form.

There's no telling how long this will take, given all that he had inherited from Bush's terms, but it is heartening to see that, at least at this point, he's speaking of the elephant in the room, insofar as LGBT rights.

Like I've said on the other forums, as a Christian mom, married to a veteran husband, I, too, want to see things improve. Prejudices, in any color, form, frame or context, are still prejudices.

Well said miss mesko...

Very well said.

Barbara as much as I would like to share your ideas with Obama, I am going to just say one small thing and I have said it before.

"No one should have to explain or prove their lives to gives those lives meaning, to be treated with dignity and respect, and to have all the same basic freedoms and liberties as everyone else."

There should never be a consensus on our rights because there was never a consensus on anyone else's rights when the federal government stepped in and ceased discriminatory policies and measures that were once set in stone precedents.Yes lets ask the oppressors if we should liberate the gays.... I am sorry but that is where Obama is an absolute failure for change.

I'm ready for Obama to stop waiting for everybody in the House and Senate to agree on everything before a new law can be passed. We, as a country, have worked very hard to achieve a majority democratic House and a majority Democratic Senate so that we would not have to bow to the whims of the Republicans and their often repressive ways. I naturally assumed that when we elected a Democratic President who supported all the things that we had been fighting the Republican tide to achieve that the battle was almost over. I am frustrated by his need to make everyone in Congress happy (which is utterly impossible and a futile thing to attempt) rather than making the American people happy.

I do still beleive there is time for him to change his attitude about this. He is new at this.

WRITE him letters! CALL the white house! RAISE your voices! Not just on here, but where it counts. Not happy with how the president is handling things? Join me--Let's make some phone calls, start a petition directly to President Obama asking him to stop "reaching across the aisles" and instead reach out to his people. We need change! I will gladly start the petition if I can get at least 15 people to respond saying they will support me. No violence, no hate. Civil action. Anybody with me?

Miss webster...

You draw up that petition and if I like what I see...

I'll sign it.

I like that view. I never entered this effort because I felt it was an issu of Gay rights...to me it is an issue of human rights.

Insofar as CIVIL rights are concerned, I want all Americans to have the freedom to make decisions in their personal lives just as I do. I may make different decisions and hold different beliefs, but my right to do so is further strengthened by allowing others the same rights of self determination.

As long as we each have those rights protected, then we can go about agreeing or disagreeing with each other as FREE people as we each see fit so long as we don't interfere in the civil rights of others.

Indeed and agreed, still the drive for equal rights under the law is only going to be helped if folks who are pushing for them are making the argument in terminology that the average person is going to easily understand (almost like "sound bite" terminology). 

It is so easy for gay-ignorant folks to make a casual discrimination and say, "what's so special about gay individuals that they need special rights?" 

Obviously the point is that these rights are not gay specific but indeed are simply basic civil rights that should be accorded equally to all folks regardless of their sexual orientations.

Sincerely,

Gay CIVIL rights supporter

It IS about civil rights, HUMAN rights!

I've been calling all matters of ending prejudices, "Human" rights - many American-born Latinos deserve human rights, as do blacks, autistics, women, bi-gendered, LGBT, hearing-impaired, bi-racial, transgendered, religious, atheist, pagan, wiccan [ok I think I can end all the listing].

The point is, we've all a primary focus here, which is basic, *human* rights; civil rights, to be sure: the U.S. has shown itself to be delayed, at best, in defending human rights [just ask any First Nation/Native American/Indian] - and it takes bringing an inclusive nature of human rights to the table for these matters to be discussed.

As I write every time I post in these forums, this entry is written by a Christian wife, mother, and voter.

Notice how no one has really replied to you yet because your comment is just so... well, ridiculous at this point. We've heard it all before, we don't get stung by the petty comments, we're tired of replying to the same bullshit over and over again.

I could take the next half hour or so and pick apart your argument (you still think being gay is a "lifestyle"?) and point out how bad your grammar is. But really, all of us on here are used to mini speeches like this and are tired of dealing with your ignorance. Me, personally, I'm tired. I'm off to bed. Maybe if I wasn't I'd take the time to engage you and enjoy educating you about the separation of church and state, for one.

If anyone else feels like undertaking the task of educating him, go for it. I just can't bring myself to get all upset about this one.

Thank for showing his epic fail Kate. I am too tired to pick apart is idiocy, plus he is too simpleminded and glazed eyed that anything with a hint of intellectual in it will just bounce off his impenetrable barrier of ass backwardness.

1.) Are you effing serious? Gay have more rights? Really? Please share with us all as to how you come to the conclusion that we have more rights than our heterosexual counterparts?

2.) Um, you do realize that hate crimes laws ONLY go into effect when someone's actions are motivated by their hate. Meaning that if you attack someone simply for being gay then yes, you will be prosecuted under hate crimes. But simply saying that you hate gay people, which you CLEARLY do, then no, it is NOT a crime.

3.) This country is NOT a Christian nation. Just because we have a lot of Xtians in this country doesn't mean that it is a Christian nation. We do NOT live in a theocracy, but if that is what you would like, I hear it is real nice in Iran this time of year, MOVE! "In God We Trust" was NOT put onto any of our currency until 1864, almost a CENTURY after the founding of this nation, and that was on a two-cent piece. It wasn't until 1909 that it started to appear on our other pieces of currency. It wasn't until the 1950's that "under god" was added to the pledge of allegiance. It was also during the 1950's that in god we trust was added to paper currency.

4.) Gays are NOT "re-writing" the Bible. Gays have NEVER re-written the Bible. Conservative bigots such as yourself; however, ARE, AGAIN!

5.) I agree with you on the "public sex" issue. However, I have NEVER in my 20 years of being openly gay seen public sex take place by gays or lesbians. I do however seem to see public groping by heterosexuals nearly EVERY place I go. This is not to say that I've never seen inappropriate behavior within the LGBT community, because I have. I have seen it take place during and at PRIVATE events and establishments, but NEVER in public.

6.) This whole "bandwaggoning lifestyle" bullshit, ya, tell that to the 11 year old who is having the shit beat out of them simply for being too feminine and assumed by his classmates to be gay and to then hang themselves in their parents house. Tell that to the 13 year old who came out at school because they KNOW they are gay and is taunted and beaten up and are HATED by their classmates, simply because they are gay.

7.) Lastly, I feel sorry for your offspring. To have a parent teach their kids that it is okay to hate someone (despite not even knowing that other person) simply because they are gay is, well......SHAMEFUL! Hopefully at this point you have taken yourself out of the gene pool. And on this same point, I truly hope that your kid doesn't turn out to be gay, because you may end up being like the parents of the two 11 year olds who hung themselves earlier this year for that exact reason.

Mr. rivera...

In what way do homosexuals have more rights than us heterosexuals ?

And for the record...Theyre just as normal as heterosexuals.

This country was NOT based on christianity or any other religion.

The struggles of being straight ?

Speaking as a heterosexual (straight) male...I would wonder what struggles you speak of.

Nobody wants to re-write the bible...Other than the bible thumpers who still think its too nicey nicey and not fire and brimstone filled enough.

Some folks actually do have sex in public although they manage to hide in cars, behind bushes and such...And theyre heterosexual couples too so go figure.

Homosexuality is a lifestyle ?

Well then, so is heterosexuality...(Sarcasm fully intended)

Your very pathetic in your arguments mr. rivera...Im not all that eduhmuhcated and even I know your full of shit.

Actually, having the 'in god we trust' and 'under god' is breaking the constitution, which says that there is a separation of Church and State.

I forget which one, but one of the presidents actually tried to have the constitution changed to remove the separation of church and stat part.

How do we have more rights?  We may have that extra layer of legal protection, but be real, 90% of all LGBT related hate crimes are never persecuted.  Being gay is no more of a lifestyle than is being an asshole *cough*

You say that we have more rights than a "normal" human being.  I notice that you didn't say straight people.  Seriously, what the fuck man?  You're saying we aren't "normal" people?

I thought that type of thinking went out the window a long time ago.

Where do you live man?  I still haven't really seen the LGBT community, except online.

Do you have ANY concept of how hard it is to not be heterosexual?  I doubt that you do.

The struggles of being straight? If you are truly struggling with being straight, then perhaps you need to do some reflection about who you really are? Just a thought.

The true struggle is knowing you are gay LGBT and there is NOTHING you can do to make your life an easy one with that knowledge, it will always be a struggle.

It isn't a lifestyle choice anymore than being straight is a lifestyle choice. It also isn't a sickness to be cured. It is how you are created by God. God teaches love and love is NEVER wrong!

Actually, Mr. Rivera - and all readers, too - the Bible has been rewritten from its original Hebrew scrolls, to begin with; however, as a Christian, I would like to point out a site that may illuminate any misgivings you have on your fellow Americans:

http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/index.html

There are, contained within that site, specific texts which pertain to matters in relation to acknowledgement of cohabitative gays, cohabitative lesbians, etc. - directly derived from the Bible, and within exacting, historically accurate assesment of the given verse, quote, and chapter.

I've a strong suspicion, though, that Rivera has long gone, having entered just long enough to post a flame, then vanish into an alchoholic vapor.

Still, to others reading this, I would recommend picking up a Bible, and learning from the texts.

Yes, I'm a Christian. I'm not one of "those" Christians, but I'm a Christian, nonetheless.

I am also involved in electronics, with a healthy knowledge of sciences.

Carry on.

 Ramon, por que? This conversation was actually getting somewhere.

Miss mesko...

Not only are you a christian...Your a true christian...Unlike the fundementals A.K.A. bible thumpers that come on here trying to stir up a hornets nest with their lies and foolishness.

Thank you for being you.

Thank you. It's just about being human, which, believe it or not, is the fundamental base of Christianity.

William,

I would normally be with you on this idea. However, there's been many indicators that the opposite is true. Take for example, there continues to be two servicemembers discharged from the armed services daily under DADT, when he could in fact sign a stop-loss order to prevent those discharges from taking place. This is true, despite the fact that there is huge public support of the repeal of DADT (75%+.)

The vile DOMA brief that came from Obama's DoJ not only compared releationships of same-gendered couples to incest and pedophilia, but also argue that it is Constitutional to continue to deny our First (freedom of expression and religion), Fifth (due process) and Fourteenth (Equal Protection) Amendments.

In the case of DADT, as stated above, he could have signed a stop-loss order to discontinue discharges until Congress has had a chance to repeal the policy. And in the case of the DOMA brief, there is nothing stating that the DoJ has to act upon the challenges of laws, especially when the administration believes that the laws they are "defending" are unconstitutional. And Obama has stated multiple times that he believed DOMA to be unconstitutional.

So the actions of the current administration speak louder than his words. This is not to say that I think things would be better under a McCain/Palin administration (I shudder at the thought,) but I would rather be going up against someone that tells me to my face that they hate me, than someone who says they are "in this fight" with me (as Obama did last night) and then stab me when I'm not looking.

I honestly hope that you are correct in your assessment, but his actions (and those of his administration) are speaking much louder than the flowery lip service he provides in his speeches.

Yes, I'm cynical! At least I admit it, dammit! LOL!!!! I have every right to be after the crap that Bill Clinton did for us - and then Bill Clinton had the nerve to give a speech at the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) dinner in 1997 after signing that god-awful anti-federalist policy, DOMA, into law. It is for that reason I don't trust HRC anymore either.

Tell it like it is Dave. What the sad part of the problem is, of all the amazing well organized and pro gay presidential candidates we had during the primaries (that list does not include clinton or obama) we had to vote between the lesser of two evils. Obama made many statements that he does not and will not support marriage for gays, but separate and unequal civil unions. And McCain who wanted the Federal Marriage Amendment sent through the house and senate and on his desk to sign to strip all currently married LGBT of their marriage rights.

That is why i voted for Ralph Nator. If the libertarians get a better candidate on the ballot next election I will vote for her or him only if they have good plans for our current situations and not only support full marriage equality bu feel it is absolutely nessisary to remove DOMA and DADT ASAP.

Well, I hope I'm right on this one...

Not trying to put any pressure: God knows, I attended a Methodist church, a Catholic school, and I had Jehovah's Witness family members.

I also noted that it was the same books these people derived contrasting information from.

I highly recommend picking up the books, but reading them with your own eyes, rather than listening from what the Preist was reciting.

Starting here:

http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/index.html

Then pick it up from your own book, and looking at the matter, anew.

Side note: re-read the lesson to be learned from the Last Supper; note, there were two who would betray Jesus. Note, too, that Jesus knew it, yet still chose not to exclude them, but to include them at his table; to openly break bread with them, confide as friendly company, and carry on.

To be a Christian is to be one who would open their world, regardless of who walked in, to any who would ask. It was not an exclusionary exercise, but an inclusionary effort, and it was asked, by him, that we, "...do this in memory of me..."

I'm a married, Christian, straight, biological mother of two kids. I put my efforts here and elsewhere to human rights. This includes, but is not limited, to civil rights.

I just hope that those who currently call themselves "Christian" someday actually sit down and consider what Christian actually means...

Mr. freehling...

While I agree with your message overall, there are two points I take issue with.

1 : When you refer to the catholic church, please specify that your talking about the roman catholic church as there are actually two seperate kinds of catholic churches...

The roman catholic church and the old catholic church. 

While the roman catholic church is more well known and indeed known for being full of shit...The old catholic church is one that believes in equality for all.

Heres the link to the old catholic church if you'd like to learn more.

 http://www.st-lukes-peoria.org/ 

2 : The united states of america WASNT founded on any religion let alone christianity.

Mr. McHugh,

Indeed I do mean the Roman Catholic Church.  Thank you for helping to clarify that ambiguity.

However, with regards to our Christian roots, I strongly disagree with you.  Most of the colonists who settle in the New World practiced some form of Christianity be it Roman Catholicism or one of the many Protestant denominations. 

Demographically speaking, as reported in the 2008 ARIS ( American Religious Identification Survey, by Barry A. Kosmin, Egon Mayer, and Ariela Keysar at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.), 76% of all Americans identify themselves as Christians.  Despite its failing numbers, Christianity has been the prominent religious monopoly of our nation. 

The historical roots of Christianity cultivated and nurtured in this nation by radical conservative Christians have blossomed into a jungle of weeds that have seriously choked, if not murdered, many Americans since the beginning of our nation. 

Many colonists came here seeking religious tolerance.  They were oppressed by state-supported churches in Europe.  However, as soon as they arrived, they began to practice their version of Christianity, and soon they crystallized their brand of intolerance for others who did not share their religious vision.  This is the classical example of the oppressed becoming the oppressors.  

Despite the desire of our founding fathers to separate church and state,  these religious beliefs of the colonists became entrenched in state and federal laws which have created, maintained and perpetuated a certain form of ‘accepted morality’,  a morality that has been non-inclusive and very narrow-minded.  Even though there are revisionists and deniers among us, it truly is hard, if not totally impossible, to deny our historical footprints. 
Our social progress has always been limited to the degree to which we can shed these radical and antiquated misinterpretations of Christian scriptures.

Bryan, now that's a mouthful! Very, very well written.

Mr. freehling...

Just because one or more religions were in the majority at any given time doesnt in and of itself mean that the nation in which those majorities exist constitute a theocracy.

Nowhere in either the declaration of independance or the united states constitution is it stated or implied that this nation of ours was founded on christianity...

Furthermore, the first amendment was created in part so that no religion would gain greater power over other religions or for that matter, have controll over the secular goverment...

By the same token, the same first amendment also keeps the goverment from setting up any one religion to be dominant and also keeps it from interfering with the right of the people to believe as they will, as long as no one is being harmed by those beliefs.

Then you have the treaty of tripoly where it is clearly stated in article 11 that the united states of america wasnt founded on christianity. 

The laws that govern our secular society were actually taken from earlier societys most notably the roman society.

Other than that, your spot on about the abuses of religious freedom that have occured over the years.

Aside from wickepedia not always having their facts straight...What do the sexual practices of either heterosexuals or homosexuals have to do with whether or not theyre entitled to the same rights we have ?

Precisely spoken miss webster.

Well, Wikipedia is certainly an organization; a new type, yes.  It is "open source" and that mens that it is interactive and that if you see any mistakes there is a process to challenge and correct the mistakes and also to add information.  The open source process is much akin to 'peer review' process with scientific papers and is quite credible, although does not go beyond what it is intended to be, an encyclopedia; necessarily brief.  It far surpasses Encyclopedia in usefulness as it has all the free power of all its contributors.  You and everyone are invited into the process.

Another model open source creation is Linux soft ware that promises to render Microsoft obsolete.

So, please people, render the ideas and not the source, therefore by reason and logic.

The DCD website adds that masturbation, phone sex and abstenance are safe.

I passed no judgement on kind of sex except that which is a public health issue.

Here is where the rubber hits the road, excuse the pun.  All the bleeding heart sentiments pale before a frank dscussion of sex that is appropriate to personal and public health.  It is brought to a scientific and verifiable forum and leaves the hypocrisy and moral posturing behind.

What are the facts of human sexualty?  If one is not willing or able, to have the heart to discuss the specifics of sexuality, then what are you talking about?

Anal sex is fraught with danger, under reported and empirically verifiable.  Faith is not empirical, although a fact of life.

Mr. ball...

As I stated above...

Homosexuals aint the only folks to engage in anal sex...

Heterosexuals do it too...

So again...What does any of that have to do with the subject of equality ?

Well i render your point discredited Mr. Balls. Because there is no organization called the DCD. The "empirical" reports you refer to are not on the CDCs site. So can you send a link?

As for human sexuality, you, who pride yourself on understanding the science side should know that sexual orientation is not a choice, cannot be changed, and that homosexuality is just as normal as heterosexuality, although not as common.

http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31

Any person who understands the ethical principles of science should know that when people use the idea "normalcy" they show they are expressing their opinions rather than scientific fact.

You seem to be bias against one sex act over another. With your prior post you are more concerned with spreading failing abstinence only education and completely cutting out LGBT youth from much needed sexual education. Doing that will only cause more STDs to fester since many LGBT do not have education about safe sex practices. The CDC makes it very clear that while abstinence is a good strategy very few follow it, and since it is implies chastity until marriage many LGBT cannot follow it because we cannot marry in this country. What works, and the CDC sticks by this, is revamping sex ed to what some call abstinence plus or simply plus sex education which teaches proper condom use, as well as a positive, tolerant and understanding side for those of a bisexual and homosexual orientation. By showing LGBT people can live healthy, safe, committed lives, have children and raise a family with their same sex spouse, it imparts into young teens a stronger sense of self and positively reinforces that they are healthy human beings and nothing is wrong, sick, sinful, or broken about them.

When we make sure that homophobia lessens, and we start teaching our teens safer sex practices for all teens both gay and straight we will cut down the STD rates prodigiously. Telling teens not to have sex is as useful as telling them not to drink. Some may follow the orders of their parents, but many will not. It is better to teach teens how to have safe sex so that when they do have sex they do it safely with the knowledge of what their choice of action can implies.

Mr. ball...

ROTFLMFAO...

I didnt misread anything and you still havent said what anal sex or for that matter, any kind of sex has to do with equality. 

Thanks for redirecting this discussion. This is too important to be thrown repeatedly off topic by a hater who refuses to see that we DO support safe sex education for EVERYONE. Throwing out false education and erroneous reports do nothing to serve this purpose. I still intend to draw up that petition, for those of you that are still looking for it. My family has been going through a crisis and my attention has been directed toward that matter. I have not forgotten.

Miss webster...

I hope things get better for you soon.