A beginning opinion... Yesterday I overheard a fractitious opinion about same-sex marriages, and frankly, I was shocked. This came from someone who scored fairly liberal on the AP Government idealogy test. Then again, he's the only LDS member I know personally. So it's not surprising that he resorted to talking about the fabric of society, and how homosexuals would one day outnumber heterosexuals, and how the Bible says it's naughty, and stuff like that. So now I'm going to air out my own opinion on the issue, which is going to be pretty freaking shocking to you right-wing conservatives. Sorry in advance. You may now stop reading. How should I begin arguing what will probably be the big issue in the presidential election? I really don't know. I have no real reason why I believe that marriage between homosexuals should be allowed, but I can certainly disprove/refute many others. I'll start with the religious standpoint. Yes, the Bible says it's not nice to have homosexual relations. But not everyone follows the Bible. America was founded on the principle of freedom for all. The idea that nobody should have to live with another person's opinion being forced upon them, unless that person's name has a W in the middle. Not everyone is Christian! Not everybody believes in the Bible! So why should they have rules forced upon them in which they do not believe? Next, I'll discuss the so-called "fabric of society." What, dear sirs, is the "fabric" of which you speak? The fabric that contains prostitutes, theives, murders, terrorism, Columbine, Michigan's Harmful to Minors law (see www.cbldf.org/pr/archives/000171.shtml), the "Passion of Mel," the KKK, gambling, legal poison, orthodontics, Catholic child-molesting priests, commercialism, and "Will & Grace"? Is that the fabric? 'Cause you know, I don't see how adding same-sex marriages to the list will make it any worse. In fact, it might make it better. The ruler of Cambodia supports it. That bit about how accepting homosexuality as part of life will kill off American ideals and somehow damage society? Okay, say it will damage society. How, pray, do you intend to stop it? Ban SSM if you want. You think that will stop people being homosexual? You think they will defy their nature to please you? In your realm of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," explain to me your plan. It ain't an inherited condition; if it were, it wouldn't pass on to future generations. And if you think SSM will cause more children to become homosexual in the future, I ask: So what? Unless you really want grandchildren, what problem does it pose to you? Why did a guy in Kansas who CSC(Criminal Sexual Conduct)ed a minor in a homosexual manner barely evade life in prison, while another Kansan who CSCed a minor in a heterosexual manner got off with less than a year? If you approve of this, get off your couch and go buy a plane ticket to San Francisco. Better yet, get on the internet and look around the NYTimes and San Francisco Gate websites. I'm not gonna argue with ya any more. But conservatives created affirmative action, a policy designed to increase diversity. Yet they also denounce homosexual marriages, which also increase diversity. So I say this. Whatever you think, think again. Get your priorities straight. Because God, W, Newsom, and I can't do it for you.