I understand the first answer, but not the second. Are you saying that the state -- or any other group, doesn't have the right to dictate into the lives of homosexuals? But if I understand right, you do not feel people who "practice the homosexual lifestyle" deserve the same protections of any other minority?
I do not believe that people that choose to engage in a particular lifestyle are on the same level of people who have no choice in their identity.
For example, racial minorities have no choice in the matter. Homosexuals do. So, no I don't think that one's sexual preference is something that should be granted "minority" protections, whatever that is supposed to mean.
Wwe started this whole thing with you saying that your feelings against homosexuals isn't bigotry. At what level would your feelings against homosexuals (or the practice of homosexuality) spur you to action?
What kind of action would I allegedly be spurred to?
Would you hire somoeone who was homosexual?
That depends on what they are applying to be hired for.
Would you hire someone who was straight over someone who was homosexual, all other skills being equal?
Again, it depends on the job.
Also, I know you haven't seen proof of a "gay-gene". Have you seen concrete proof that being homosexual is purely a choice? Note that I haven't blasted you with all sorts of pseudo science links that say definitively once and for all that there is such thing as a gay gene -- I would hope you would do the same rigor in your search for the definitive "gay is choice" proof.
It is a zero sum game. Either it is genetic or it is not.
I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from on this gay thing.
If you want to be a gay person, I don't see any justification that I have as an American to stop you from it, nor do I see any reason why you can't have a civil union. However when you are trying to hijack institutions (marriage) that are important to me on a religious basis for your social agenda, then I have every right to stop you. I know you are going to hate this but: If being gay is not a choice but is genetic, well how do we know that any other sexual preference is not genetic? What about beastiality? Oh but you would say, IT'S NOT THE SAME! But I would say, well why not? Why can't we have sex between consenting carbon based life forms?
But I digress. I am not equating the things, I am just pointing out the argument that is most often made can be interchangeable with any other form of sexuality that the general populace is opposed to.
On a side note, I think anecdotal evidence is just that, and probably not very helpful. This probably serves as TMI, but I think most of us want who we want, and didn't feel there was a concrete decision point. At least I don't remember thinking to myself, "I think I'll be straight/gay"