This article can best be read with Alexis's article in a separate window so that either can be viewed rapidly. Each of my numbered paragraphs is a response to one of her's. I will also respond to some of the comments.
1. Alexis, if you doubt that gay people think being gay is all right, surf around the following web pages:
-National Gay and Lesbian task force
-GenderPac
-Dignity USA
-Soulforce
By the way, I'm a protestant. I don't believe that procreation is the only right reason to have sex. Thank God.
2. No, I don't believe that everything must be for the good of society. However I do believe that any evolutionist with a bit of sense must believe that good means good for the species.
3. I apologize. Using the word "credible" only confused you. The difference between these two groups of religions is this: The member religions of the first group believe as a unit. The members of the second group believe that truth is individual.
4. Your comment is worthless. Attacking smoking and skydiving (and etc) has nothing to do with proving that homosexuality does society more good than harm. Why must you prove this? You used the word "we," so I assume that you fit into category three. Proving this would disprove my belief that homosexuality is not all right according with your belief. Of course, you don't really need to, but if you don't you lose your intellectual right to criticize my belief, which is what started this debate in the first place.
5. Hard as I try, I can't find any place where you proved that homosexuality makes positive genetic change or helps society. The point of the family.org article is contained in this sentence: "There is no research indicating such homes will be good for children." Researchers Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz claim they are bad for children. Plus, last I checked, spreading a deadly and thus far incurable disease doesn't help society.
6. My point is this: Almost everyone in this category believes that humans were created. Homosexuals in this category believe that homosexuals were created gay. They argue that this shows their god's support for homosexuality. I maintain that homicidal maniacs seem to have been created that way, but no one in this category argues that this shows their god's support for homicide.
7. I don't care if the kid was complaining on his blog. Actually, that's exactly my point, I don't care. That's what's making me angry, the news media is covering one kid for doing the same thing everyone else does: complaining.
8. Yes, Alexis, gay people do that. I see it everywhere I go. Restaurants, stores, movies, concerts, it doesn't matter where or when; they're there, and they have annoying lisps.
Now, I want to clarify some things about myself, especially to Will, who made some incorrect (and fair) assumptions about me. I do go to church (Evangelical Free), however I disagree with my fellow churchgoers in many regards. First of all, I'm not a Republican. I would be a libertarian except for two things: I disagree with them in national defense, and they can't win elections.
Like libertarians, I do not support a Constitutional Amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman. In fact, I believe that marriage should not be Federally regulated. As far as I am concerned, marriage and all consensual "bedroom issues" should left entirely up to the States.
As a Christian, I believe homosexuality is wrong. I also believe that heterosexual sex is wrong, unless between consenting married partners. However, I know that my beliefs are personal. Given an opportunity, I will never hesitate to evangelize, but I realize that evangelization cannot be forced.
The article Simertamai mentioned was interesting in all its inauthoritative glory. However, it's based on the assumption that there is such a thing as a "gay gene." According to the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality and BBC News (and every other source I found), there is none.
