Welcome to Gaia! ::

just dont touch me and think thats wrong

I'm a lesbian... and have a VERY hott dyke girlfriend... and she drives a really fast motorcycle! heart

i think homosexuality is wrong. VERY few exceptions (like if someone would kill u otherwise) this opinion is affected by my religious beliefs, because other than my religious views on homosexuality, i would say its disgusting, but i would have no reason to say it was really bad

Okay. I have no clue what sextuality I am. I'll leave it at that. I think being gay is perfectly fine, and the only social disese is homophobia. I think gay marriage should be legalized, and that is is no one's business to argue with it.
As for my beliefs, I'm a Buddist, and nuff said. And I say this to my fellow class mates every time they try to diss homosextuals; "I don't care who you are, where you grew up, or what religion you practice. You will love someone of the same gender, no matter what. Be it you mother, father, sibling, grandparent, aunt, uncle, some people find it in another person, so they want to spend the rest of their life with them."

My views have come down to these simple beliefs: it occurs naturally, yet it is still abnormal. They deserve equal treatment, though with the issue of marriage, I wish it would be left to the Church rather than the People, as it should be a religious issue rather than a civil issue. I'd accept civil unions if the Church wouldn't allow gay marriage. I don't believe that a homosexual couple would make as effective parents as the typical heterosexual parents for the simple reason that there isn't a mother figure and a father figure.

The more I hear of all these ideas, the more I like the idea of married couples only getting benefits if they can produce children. Everyone could still get married, but the only couples who could get benefits would be those that can produce children i.e. fertile couples, not infertile or homosexual couples. Government should only reward a married couple if they can produce children. Many people probably don't like that, but it works for me.

I have taken a more neutral stance on the issue of gay marriage as of late. I used to be against it, as marriage is, in fact, supposed to be between a man and a woman. (Just look at a dictionary. At least mine defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.) However, as of late, I've seen it as a very unimportant topic. Though I'd prefer the issue of gay marriage to be left to the Church, since it is a civil issue it can be voted on. From what I've seen, where people have voted (including my state) people are opposed to it. You must respect the majority, even if it's unfair to the minority. The minority should not have a greater say over the majority. That's democracy for you. I don't really know how people will vote on gay marriage in the future, but I don't really care for it right now. There are more important issues we need to be concerned with.

I believe there is a distinct difference between a man and a woman raising a child rather than two people of the same sex. A man can't act like a mother and a woman can't act like a father. From what I've seen, single parents tend not to be able to raise their children as well as if they had a partner with them. Maybe a gay couple would be better at it than a single parent, but I still think that it just doesn't work as well as the standard mother-father configuration. Society has been raised for a long time to believe that the mother-father setup is the best and most socially-acceptable way to raise a child. I think that men are better for working and that women are better at taking care of children. If the father does more of the child raising, it's better than having the child at daycare all of the time. But I still think that the mother is better at raising children. Call me oldfashioned or (gasp) sexist, but I just think that's the way things should be.

Why should couples that choose not to reproduce get benefits simply because of the "problem" of overpopulation? They don't deserve any benefits for making that choice. It makes more sense to me to have the government tell people how many children they are allowed to produce rather than encouraging them not to. Tell people they are only allowed to have a maximum of two children; any child after the second will be aborted.

Or how about Eugenics? We could only have people with desirable traits be bred, and the undesirable qualities would be weeded out by sterilizing the people with the bad traits. Right now, China and India are highly overpopulated. They could stand to sterilize a few generations of people who are simply dead weight because they contribute nothing to society. The wrong people are having too many children. Prevent them from adding any more stupid, retarded people to society, and you'll not only cut down on the total population, but you'll bolster the people who have desirable traits within the population. Or do you consider that inhumane?

It's democracy. The minority has to put up with what the majority voted on. You can't please everyone, and it's better to please the majority rather than the minority. You can't let the minority run the majority in a democracy. If you don't like it you can just giiiit out.

Worried that I'm a member of your generation? What, am I too Authoritarian for our generation? Or is everyone, by your definition, supposed to become more and more progrssive and libertarian with each coming generation?