Homosexuals want special rights not equal rights. Why not have rights because you are a human being not because you have a certain preference for same sex relationships. I have homosexual friends and they are my friend because of their personalities not for choosing to date or have relationships with someone of the same sex or opposite sex. It is not whether I agree with their choices or not unless of course they hit on me. I don't get special treatment because I chose to date someone of the opposite sex. I should not get special rights either. Sexual preferemces should not come into play, It should not be anyone's business. Unless, for example, an organization is seeking a person out for a position that would contradict what the organization stands for. Don't be afraid to respond with your comments whether politically correct or not.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Double standards.
what does that statement mean?
What Special rights are you talking about? Your piece makes no sense since you don't mention ANYTHING About these "Special Rights" that you seem to have concocted within your own head.
They want their partners to be able to be insured when unmarried couples regardless of type of relationship cannot have insurance coverage. Tax breaks that married couples get. Since they can't be married then they shouldn't have the tax breaks of married status.
So this justifies the fact that they can't marry? This is the whole premise of the debate! You're missing the entire point on this one...
Unmarried persons don't get the privileges of married people. Non-heteros, in homosexual relationships, cannot marry each other, and can, thus, never qualify for these privileges. That's what's unfair. The unmarried gays aren't asking for the privileges. They're asking to marry.
~danimo
Another thing what's up with schools teaching homosexuality in school. That might not specifically be special rights, however the school is not the place to teach sexual lifestyles of any kind especially in elementary school. The home is where those values should be taught. Schools are imposing values upon children when they start teaching sexuality of any kind.
I really don't know what you mean by schools teaching sexuality. I know for damn sure that going to school didn't teach me who I would and wouldn't love.
If you're talking about promoting open dialogue or allowing queer clubs to exist, then that's a wonderful (and lawfully allowed) thing. Sexuality is not a "value," and I very highly doubt many schools are taking the homosexuality-is-a-good-thing stance as it is. Heteronormality runs rampant, and as being queer is NOT a choice (I'm willing to bet I know a lot more developmental neuropsychology than you do, and furthermore a hell of a lot more queers, so please don't argue this with me because I don't have the time). So why should non-heteros be forced to feel like a minority when they're growing up?
Let's say you were Buddhist and went to a Catholic high school where Buddhism was not only looked down upon and ridiculed, but stifled and considered abnormal as well. They're both religions. They're both about finding the good person within yourself and loving those around you. What the hell is the difference? Is it worth it to push another good religious person to the brink of suicide just to keep some precious social faction?
In America, many schools are predominantly heterosexual. Non-heteros, just as much as heteros, fall for partners based on attraction and chemistry. It's all about love. What the hell is the difference here?
~danimo
So you know every non-heterosexual/queer person in the world and you're sure that they all want these "special rights"? Honey, the good majority of my many friends are queer, and none of them want special rights. None of the big heads of the movement are asking for special rights. They do just want equal rights.
When a straight couple gets married, they receive over 1000 special married-persons benefits ~ no matter if they truly love each other, if they ever plan to have children, or anything else; it's a no-questions-asked allowance of rights. If a non-straight person's partner is dying in a hospital, they can't visit them, and they can't make certain medical decisions that a straight person's partner could. How is that fair? And the list of injustices continues.
Whether or not you believe that homosexuality is a sin is likely a matter of religion. This country's founding fathers specifically swore that religion and state shall never intermingle, which is what is happening now. It's a wad of spit in the direction of the authors of the Constitution as well as the Bill of Rights. And anyhow, what happened to "all men are created equal"?
~danimo
I never said all homosexuals want special rights. You cannot take any group and lump them into all. What does development neuropsychology have to do with the rights of someone? I am guessing that you believe everyone is born genetically with a certain "orientation" on that we willl never agree. I am sure you do know way more about this subject of neuropsychology than I do. I never claimed any such thing,so wht's the point?
If you read my comment carefully, you'll see that I'm not talking about dev. neuropsych. anywhere near my argument about equal rights; I'm saying that it has to do with non-heterosexuality not being a conscious choice.
"I am guessing that you believe everyone is born genetically with a certain 'orientation'..." --> That's exactly my point. Dev. neuropsych. will tell you that most traits arise from a combination of genetics, environmental interactions, subconscious psychological interactions, and sociology/culture. So no, I am not saying that humans are born with sexual orientation embedded in them at all, and in fact, that was exactly my point.
I probably won't be coming back to blog/comment for at least quite a while, so you can rehash this discussion with someone else at another time. However, a piece of advice: add some maturity to your responses. They sound more like comebacks. What are you, twelve? (<-- See, just like that.)
~danimo