@@Bohtty,

Woah. Not cool, dude. This changes my whole perspective of you.

But if you're being sarcastic:

Holy hell, Hollowshield... I read this and realized, "Holy crap, I'm not the only person with the balls to have an opinion on something!".

Really, it's more "I finally have the balls to say an unpopular opinion". We all have opinions.

I watch it for the experience, I don't really consider it escaping reality. I might consider it escaping reality if I watched it over and over again without any real reason

Experience of and for what? And I'm assuming you do absolutely nothing for the pure enjoyment of it.

No ones forcing you to click and read them lol

That's true.

Believe what you want, no one has to listen to you blow wind anyway, just like you don't have to listen to me. The beauty of opinions.

I'm just going to throw my two cents in, since it seems like everyone else is. I love a man, and it isn't about the sex, I am not even physically with him right now (probably won't be for a couple of years). Yet we really love each other, it isn't because I decided "oh, now imma go be bisexual now so I can haz the secks with da mens becuz girls won never luvs me"

That did not happen, I wasn't desperate, I was good friends with this man, and I found myself liking him more and more, like in any normal relationship I started flirting, and he started doing it back, and eventually a bond beyond simple friendship formed. We just want to be able to be together, and be recognized as legitimate. We don't want to flaunt it, or make a big deal out of it, we just want to live our lives, adopt kids, buy a house, be a family like any other. We don't want to be denied the rights of other couples, yes, we could just live together without marrying, but that adds a whole slew of financial and legal issues. If he gets hurt, I couldn't visit him, and no life insurance if the unspeakable happens. Many other issues arise, too many to bring up. The kids too would know their parents aren't even recognized the same as other parents, that might not seem like a lot, but it wears down on both the parents and the children.

I don't see why people are so worried by this, or feel we are trying to shove it down your throats. We just want to be able to live happily like any other family. The argument that we are trying to shove it down your throats, and that we are socialists freaks is very flawed. So, if that is your belief, do you think african americans should not have equal rights, should a black man and a white woman be unable to marry like it used to be? We prefer socialists and liberals because those are the people that actually fight for change, and equality, and being kind to people, not the conservative idea that its better to keep "them" out (and had "liberals" not furthered equality, quite a few of you out there probably would not be so well off right now, considering how women used to be treated, and those of non-white races).

Kudos on having an opinion like everyone else, good job, as long as you don't actively try to keep me and my lover apart, I don't have a problem with just an opinion, but remember, we're just people who want to be able to live our lives like you want to live your's.

*Insert origin of 'bundle of sticks' term here*

Gays are so aptly called 'figs' because they were tied together like a bundle of sticks and set ablaze in ye olde times.

Not-so-fun fact.

Still -- you're not burning them, so applause follows, right?

Sure, why not?

After all, over 20 species have experienced homosexuality; though, only one has experienced homophobia.

Chik'n N'aggits.

Believe what you want, no one has to listen to you blow wind anyway, just like you don't have to listen to me. The beauty of opinions.

 

I'm just going to throw my two cents in, since it seems like everyone else is. I love a man, and it isn't about the sex, I am not even physically with him right now (probably won't be for a couple of years). Yet we really love each other, it isn't because I decided "oh, now imma go be bisexual now so I can haz the secks with da mens becuz girls won never luvs me"

 

That did not happen, I wasn't desperate, I was good friends with this man, and I found myself liking him more and more, like in any normal relationship I started flirting, and he started doing it back, and eventually a bond beyond simple friendship formed. We just want to be able to be together, and be recognized as legitimate. We don't want to flaunt it, or make a big deal out of it, we just want to live our lives, adopt kids, buy a house, be a family like any other. We don't want to be denied the rights of other couples, yes, we could just live together without marrying, but that adds a whole slew of financial and legal issues. If he gets hurt, I couldn't visit him, and no life insurance if the unspeakable happens. Many other issues arise, too many to bring up. The kids too would know their parents aren't even recognized the same as other parents, that might not seem like a lot, but it wears down on both the parents and the children.

 

I don't see why people are so worried by this, or feel we are trying to shove it down your throats. We just want to be able to live happily like any other family. The argument that we are trying to shove it down your throats, and that we are socialists freaks is very flawed. So, if that is your belief, do you think african americans should not have equal rights, should a black man and a white woman be unable to marry like it used to be? We prefer socialists and liberals because those are the people that actually fight for change, and equality, and being kind to people, not the conservative idea that its better to keep "them" out (and had "liberals" not furthered equality, quite a few of you out there probably would not be so well off right now, considering how women used to be treated, and those of non-white races).

 

Kudos on having an opinion like everyone else, good job, as long as you don't actively try to keep me and my lover apart, I don't have a problem with just an opinion, but remember, we're just people who want to be able to live our lives like you want to live your's.

dude you rock!

reading at your post it's like reading my current reality!

hmmmm no ...why would I waste my time trying to write a really well-thought long ass post, when you said that you don't care of our beliefs.

And basically the majority of the ponies who posted disagreed with you greatly, and I am one of them, but it's always good to know what is on people heads every now and then.

I never said I don't care about your beliefs and it's not true. I actually care a lot, probably more than most people. Like I said before, I wrote this out to express my thoughts not to put anyone down. I don't blame anyone for being human.

I only try to pursue what I think is right. I want to hear people's thoughts be them negative or positive because they will help shape my own beliefs, and I would hope people would give my thoughts the same courtesy.

If you don't want to type anything of value out then fine, but I would ask for you not to be disappointed in anyone else in the future for finding out they're human.

Experience of and for what? And I'm assuming you do absolutely nothing for the pure enjoyment of it.

Well I try not to, I'd be lying if I said that was the case. What I try to do is do things for the experience and be grateful for whatever solace, enjoyment, and happiness may come of it.

In the case of watching MLP it's the experience of simply watching something new

Believe what you want, no one has to listen to you blow wind anyway, just like you don't have to listen to me. The beauty of opinions.

 

I'm just going to throw my two cents in, since it seems like everyone else is. I love a man, and it isn't about the sex, I am not even physically with him right now (probably won't be for a couple of years). Yet we really love each other, it isn't because I decided "oh, now imma go be bisexual now so I can haz the secks with da mens becuz girls won never luvs me"

So... I'm supposing you simply being best friends with the guy and having a relationship like that is out of the question. This blog wasn't really meant to be about marriage or your "equal rights" based on who you want to have sex with either.

Things like marriage and the relationships that this society deems "normal" I care absolutely nothing for.

And to be honest, I would be all for two guys that called themselves best friends and not homosexuals living together and adopting kids. Why? Because the label of "best friends" doesn't show that sex is on the forefront of their mind.

And no, nobody has to listen to my opinion, I just think of giving me that courtesy as a showing of the smallest amount of respect. In fact, if everyone just ignored me I would probably just leave this site because there would be no point. So if you really don't like my opinion then thats just one thing to consider I guess

So... I'm supposing you simply being best friends with the guy and having a relationship like that is out of the question. This blog wasn't really meant to be about marriage or your "equal rights" based on who you want to have sex with either.

 

Things like marriage and the relationships that this society deems "normal" I care absolutely nothing for.

 

And to be honest, I would be all for two guys that called themselves best friends and not homosexuals living together and adopting kids. Why? Because the label of "best friends" doesn't show that sex is on the forefront of their mind.

 

And no, nobody has to listen to my opinion, I just think of giving me that courtesy as a showing of the smallest amount of respect. In fact, if everyone just ignored me I would probably just leave this site because there would be no point. So if you really don't like my opinion then thats just one thing to consider I guess

Why should we be limited to just being friends if we want to treat it more seriously? Not only are there legal and financial perks to being a recognized couple, but its about requesting the same level of respect that others receive.

Why are you so obsessed about if sex is on people's minds or not, does that really make a difference? Do you want all couples to be celibate besides when they want to have kids or something?

Why should we be limited to just being friends if we want to treat it more seriously? Not only are there legal and financial perks to being a recognized couple, but its about requesting the same level of respect that others receive.

 

Why are you so obsessed about if sex is on people's minds or not, does that really make a difference? Do you want all couples to be celibate besides when they want to have kids or something?

Honestly, to say a relationship can be "more serious" on the premise that you're having sex is a first world problems thing... You think that two guys that have been best friends their whole lives is a less serious relationship than two gay guys who've been married and had sex for 5 years?

And yes it makes a difference to me because I think it's wrong. So I voice my opinion in hopes that people will listen. Maybe I'll be proven wrong or something I say will rub off on someone. Rest assured I don't plan to force you to do anything

 

Honestly, to say a relationship can be "more serious" on the premise that you're having sex is a first world problems thing... You think that two guys that have been best friends their whole lives is a less serious relationship than two gay guys who've been married and had sex for 5 years?

 

And yes it makes a difference to me because I think it's wrong. So I voice my opinion in hopes that people will listen. Maybe I'll be proven wrong or something I say will rub off on someone. Rest assured I don't plan to force you to do anything

So you are assuming that the only thing that could make a homosexual relationship "more serious" is sex then? Why is that, what makes a heterosexual couple "more serious" then? Like I said before, it doesn't have to be about sex, and my guess is that for most homosexual couples it isn't. Its about taking the next step, just like most heterosexual couples do. Whether there is sex or not is irrelevant.

Why should homosexual couples have to keep it to a friend level when heterosexual couples can step it up? Don't consider sex a the determining factor this time, and then give me an answer.

So you are assuming that the only thing that could make a homosexual relationship "more serious" is sex then? Why is that, what makes a heterosexual couple "more serious" then? Like I said before, it doesn't have to be about sex, and my guess is that for most homosexual couples it isn't. Its about taking the next step, just like most heterosexual couples do. Whether there is sex or not is irrelevant.

 

Why should homosexual couples have to keep it to a friend level when heterosexual couples can step it up? Don't consider sex a the determining factor this time, and then give me an answer.

I'm sorry I don't understand... What is the qualifier for a "more serious" relationship in your view if it is not sex? If sex is not the reason a homosexual couple calls themselves a homosexual couple than what is it? What is "the next step"? Is it a step closer to having sex...? Because that's the same thing the way I see it

I personally don't consider there to be anything really beyond the level of best friends so this is something you're going to have to help me with

 

I'm sorry I don't understand... What is the qualifier for a "more serious" relationship in your view if it is not sex? If sex is not the reason a homosexual couple calls themselves a homosexual couple than what is it? What is "the next step"? Is it a step closer to having sex...?

 

I personally don't consider there to be anything really beyond the level of best friends so this is something you're going to have to help me with

Ok, then answer me, what makes a heterosexual couple more than "just friends then." Do not answer with kids, since homosexual couples can adopt. Why don't all heterosexual couples just remain friends?

If you believe sex is the only reason couples want to see themselves as more than "just friends" you have a pretty limited view on relationships.

Don't know if these points have already made in the comments so I'll just respond to the blog entry itself.

The homosexual lifestyle and gay pride message is centered around the belief that sex should be used for pleasure - not necessarily for the sake of reproduction.

There's quite a lot more to reproduction than just sex and pleasure. There are various health benefits to it; physical and psychological, and it may even help to maintain cohesion within a group. Kinda why homosexuality is also seen a lot in social birds and mammals. For most social creatures, their ability to survive rest on keeping together since being isolated would simply be a death sentence. Notice how predators of herd creatures like zebra and wildebeest tend to try and separate out one individual from the herd and chase that one? If homosexuality can help a herd stick together instead of going into a brawl, then it helps them survive. Hence why I believe that sex is more about just making more individuals.

Eh. The way I see it, if a gay kid was made fun of at school for being gay, it's a big deal. But when some speaker calls all Christians/Young Earth Biblical Creationists "panzies" or "simple minded losers", he's applauded.

Separation of Church and State wasn't about keeping Church out of State, but State out of Church. I guess the fence's purpose is lost after a few generations :1

 

Ok, then answer me, what makes a heterosexual couple more than "just friends then." Do not answer with kids, since homosexual couples can adopt. Why don't all heterosexual couples just remain friends?

 

If you believe sex is the only reason couples want to see themselves as more than "just friends" you have a pretty limited view on relationships.

Well that would be my answer to be honest I think.. To each other they would still be best friends, but when a child is born into the world of their accord I believe they have a responsibility to devote themselves entirely to that child. And for the sake of that child they should devote themselves entirely to each other. That I would say is a level beyond friendship.

Even for a person adopting a child I feel as though this bond can't be shared. I think in the case of adoption it's more like the kind of bond between student and teacher... Well like the kind of bond between mr miyagi and daniel-son lol as in they're family, but i dunno... It's just not the same thing. It lacks the total responsibility for creating life

 

Well that would be my answer to be honest I think.. To each other they would still be best friends, but when a child is born into the world of their accord I believe they have a responsibility to devote themselves entirely to that child. And for the sake of that child they should devote themselves entirely to each other. That I would say is a level beyond friendship.

 

Even for a person adopting a child I feel as though this bond can't be shared. I think in the case of adoption it's more like the kind of bond between student and teacher... Well like the kind of bond between mr miyagi and daniel-son lol as in they're family, but i dunno... It's just not the same thing. It lacks the total responsibility for creating life

I have to disagree with you wholeheartedly, I know multiple heterosexual couples that decided not to have kids because they felt the world didn't need more mouths to feed, and they love their children the same as if they were biologically their own. Your entire argument is based around your assumption that homosexuals (or anyone who adopts children) are incapable of loving the child in the same manner as parents who have birthed them. Theoretically if you continued your argument, the father would not feel as connected as the mother as well, so why not have all fathers leave the family behind? Are you saying the only reason a father should feel connected then is that he is partly responsible for the child and must provide for them (since you said the heterosexual bond forms when the couple feels the need due to the child to stay together).

Research shows that not only is that false, but that there are no side effects to children who are adopted. The main reason adopted children would not be just like any other is that they are mistreated before adoption (as is the case in many 3rd world country's where care for them is not very good).

Your idea is that the only reason anyone should truly be together is that they have sexually reproduced a child, and that adopted children can't possibly be loved enough so they don't count. Research and real-life experience has told me that this is incorrect.

Your entire argument is based around your assumption that homosexuals (or anyone who adopts children) are incapable of loving the child in the same manner as parents who have birthed them

I'll try to put this as simple as I can because you have my opinion very messed up for some reason. I dont think people who adopt are incapable of loving the child as much as a woman who has given birth. The difference is that parents who've brought life into the world have a great debt to pay to it - they are responsible for giving it consciousness. Those who have adopted a child do not bare this responsibility.

I really don't know how that theory with the father leaving the family behind is related to this at all. Its exactly the opposite

And I don't know what you mean by "truly be together" either..

Hollowshield, you're wrong like 1000000000000% out of the charts, and you won't listen, and open up to other opinions like you said you would. Nevermore 100% with you bro!

Hollowshield, you're wrong like 1000000000000% out of the charts, and you won't listen, and open up to other opinions like you said you would. Nevermore 100% with you bro!

Seriously guy... If arguing my opinion is not listening then please just leave. I'm becoming impatient with you now...

I dont think people who adopt are incapable of loving the child as much as a woman who has given birth

The key word here is "think". Studies have been done (google is your friend) and they show that parents being gay or not does not factor into how a child is raised. Really, I would say those who adopt children would be better as they have to actually go through the painstaking process of actually adopting a child and they always want the child. It's not supported by any study, but then again, neither is yours.

Hollowshield, you're wrong like 1000000000000% out of the charts, and you won't listen, and open up to other opinions like you said you would. Nevermore 100% with you bro!

Well, that may be exaggeration. Only slightly though.

fine then, I'm leaving

I'll try to put this as simple as I can because you have my opinion very messed up for some reason. I dont think people who adopt are incapable of loving the child as much as a woman who has given birth. The difference is that parents who've brought life into the world have a great debt to pay to it - they are responsible for giving it consciousness. Those who have adopted a child do not bare this responsibility.

 

I really don't know how that theory with the father leaving the family behind is related to this at all. Its exactly the opposite

 

And I don't know what you mean by "truly be together" either..

Why cant an adoptee parent still feel just as responsible? A child is a child regardless of if you personally brought them into the world or not. I would hope all people would want to help any child, and feel beholden to making their life better, not because they are their own child, but because they are another human being. Love and responsibility for one another's well being transcends blood relations and direct family ties. Humanity is one big family, those who adopt children, and those children adopted are just as much a part of that human family as anyone else and should feel just as responsible.

What I mean by truly being together is accepting that you and this other person (or multiple people if you happen to be polygamous), are almost as one person. You start to share goals, dreams, more about yourself with them. You go past just being friends, you base your life around this other person. Not because you feel beholden to them out of responsibility, but because you feel beholden to them out of love and a desire to be with them.

The father reference was me going off of your idea that only the "birther' feels truly connected, so obviously since the mother is closer, by your logic, the father must not feel as attached to the child. Thus, the only reason the father feels the need to stay from what you seem to be saying, is that he feels responsible for bringing a child into the world.

You are basing relationships entirely off of this idea that the child is the only reason to feel a tight bond with the other person, that without the child there is no reason to feel wholly connected to the other person.

Parents of adopted children are and should be just as responsible for the life they cradle in their hands, you look upon that child and see a human being, a lovely creature you should protect regardless.

The key word here is "think". Studies have been done (google is your friend) and they show that parents being gay or not does not factor into how a child is raised.

When did this become a question of the quality of how children are raised?

Seriously guy... If arguing my opinion is not listening then please just leave. I'm becoming impatient with you now...

Why are you getting impatient if your only goal is to learn from us? You should be honestly considering what we are saying if you are trying to learn from and incorporate our ideas into your own philosophy. If you really came into this ready to absorb new ideology, and alter your own (rather than just defend your own), you would be altering your stance slightly be now.

 

When did this become a question of the quality of how children are raised?

You are implying that the parents don't feel as beholden to their child if the child is adopted, this implies that the child is worse off than any other child, and then you go on to say that this is also grounds for homosexual couples not needing to get married and why they should remain "just friends."

Your argument is covering many bases here, even if you aren't considering them, when you bring up one, you imply another.

You are basing relationships entirely off of this idea that the child is the only reason to feel a tight bond with the other person, that without the child there is no reason to feel wholly connected to the other person.

I believe "best friend" is already as tight as a bond with another person can get. The only reason I would escalate parents higher is because the child is something of a physical link they both owe a debt to, of course some people (well a lot of people...) don't take that very seriously.

Why are you getting impatient if your only goal is to learn from us? You should be honestly considering what we are saying if you are trying to learn from and incorporate our ideas into your own philosophy. If you really came into this ready to absorb new ideology, and alter your own (rather than just defend your own), you would be altering your stance slightly be now.

Yes, defending my ideology. When I find inconsistencies in my ideology or a weakness in it's premise as a result of your thoughts and arguments, then I will see what I can do to alter it to make sense. I did not write this post to absorb all your reactions; I find that to be an absolutely ridiculous thing for anyone to do lol....

You are implying that the parents don't feel as beholden to their child if the child is adopted, this implies that the child is worse off than any other child, and then you go on to say that this is also grounds for homosexual couples not needing to get married and why they should remain "just friends."

 

Your argument is covering many bases here, even if you aren't considering them, when you bring up one, you imply another.

No it does not... The responsibility I claim parents bare for bringing them into the world has nothing to do with their quality of upbringing... I am in no way implying that a child will be better off simply because parents have this debt to pay.

Im not even going to comment on the marriage thing. This has nothing to do with gay marriage