Here's a little hint to bigotted dumbasses.

[demiurgent]

When you make a statement like "if we allow homosexuals to marry -- what's to stop the broadening of marriage laws further? What's to prevent people from marrying their animals?" You're equating homosexuals to subhuman status.

You are saying that their happiness, their relationships and their lives are bestial.

You're not just being offensive when you do that. You're taking human beings and reducing them to chattel.

If there is a Heaven and there is a Hell? Doing that shit should be what sends you to Hell.

If you're right and you get to go to Heaven? I would rather go to Hell.

Comments

[blackbyrd2.livejournal.com]

I agree with Eric when he says your position is a tough one, and I'm not happy that what I'm going to say might add to the pressure. However, I can't ignore the fallacious position. What's been said here by others, in various ways, is that procreation is not the purpose of marriage. Not for a long time now. If it were, then women over forty wouldn't be allowed to marry, sterile people wouldn't be allowed to marry, and once you quit shooting out babies, you'd have to get divorced.

Marriage is about people who (hopefully) love each other wanting to spend the rest of their lives together. The legal aspect allows them to be there for each other in health AND in sickness, to share their lives, and the products of those lives, and to have the same legal rights that any married couple takes for granted.

The methods those people choose to share/show their love is no more anyone's business than it is when the couple are heterosexual. Whatever their particular kink, or lack thereof might be, that's nobody's business, so long as they are consenting, and no one is hurt. (Even that last is up for grabs, if they choose to be hurt.) To interfere in the bedroom is to start down the road which takes all pleasure out of sex, and makes it strictly for procreation, and frankly, you don't need marriage or sex for that.

Having said that, there is nothing wrong with multiple people entering into a marriage contract. Contracts do not have to be between two people, although it makes the legal niceties much easier to untangle. I've known several people involved in polyamory, and all seemed very well adjusted to me.

In the end, all arguments against gay marriage boil down to a religious issue, and religion has no place dictating what we can and can't do, especially in the bedroom. Not in the USA, anyway.

On a personal note, why is it your responsibility to keep your mother placated, and what right could she possibly have to 'take it out on you' because your father has discovered his sexual orientation and come to grips with it?
As for coming to grips with your father's orientation, have you tried talking with him about it? Alternately, have you looked into speaking either with a counselor or finding a group which provides support for people in your position? I assure you they exist.
Your father's orientation is not your responsibility, nor is your mother's issues with it. You need help and time to come to grips with what's happened, so that you can be at peace with this.