In response to:

Same-Sex Marriage Thought Police?

bgmk Wrote: Aug 18, 2012 2:20 PM
The Thoughtful Student will ponder if Jamieboy extends the same logic to those "born" with an "orientation" toward, little girls, or their sister, or to polygamy, or sheep. His premise seems to be that being "born" with the "orientation" voids the use of "perverted" to discribe the ACT. One also wonders how "born" "orientation" extends to the self-described" "BI"?
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Activists would have us believe that the issue of marriage is about the “rights” and “equality” of homosexuals. But in reality, the push to redefine marriage is about demanding public approval and celebration of homosexuality. There is a difference. Slot machines are legal in some areas, but if the COO of Chick-fil-a had expressed a personal disapproval of gambling, would slot-machine supporters have demanded a boycott of his restaurants? What about smokers? Would they have lambasted Dan Cathy for expressing that he personally does not approve of smoking?

No. Because at the end...