Michael is a biblical name and emphasizes tradition, consistency and a connection to the past while the female variation of Michael (Michelle) is not biblical and clearly emphasizes trendiness and stylish exoticism?

"if private people don't want to associate with,rent to,hire,or do business with homosexuals,they should not have to." I don't have a problem with this opinion as long as you take it to the next step and agree that we can also do the same with regard to race, religion, national origin, and sex. Personally, if I found out one of my employees was a member of the church in the anti-gay video I saw today I would want to fire him over it but I can't.

"With the PC police swarming around, you can't even say it's immoral or sinful anymore. " Patriot155, you can call me immoral and sinful or whatever else you want all you want. I couldn't care less. I do, however, care about being denied equal civil rights.

"A long time ago, I figured out, you aren't going to completely wipe out evil, racism or what you laughably call "homophobia"." I'm not talking about homophobia. I'm talking about legal discrimination based on sexual orientation. There are plenty of people that are not homophobic that still think it's fine to discriminate against gay people. There are also plenty of homophobic people that are not against gay people having equal rights, they just don't like gay people. As for wiping out evil? Of course you can't do that. Are you suggesting that our laws shouldn't try to eliminate or minimize discrimination where it exists?

Really? I haven't replied to your comments?

"If they were fired for being gay, I'm sure their is an abundance of attourneys that would take their case and win a pretty sizable lawsuite." How many cases do you suppose they'll win when it is LEGAL in those states to fire someone for being gay? "At best, I would find it hard to believe that this occurs nearly as much as the LBGT claims that it does because if it did, you would see it on every news channel." I agree that it probably doesn't happen often anymore. Does that make it any less discriminatory to those that do get fired for being gay?

"In no other country, with the exceptance of ours, have I ever seen a "civil rights movement" based off of someone's desire to marry the opposite sex or have an intimate relationship with them. I can honestly say that." Then it is clear that you are not well informed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory

"Are the hardships endured by gays and lesbians in any way comparable to the monstrous suffering endured by African Americans? " I am sure the hardships endured by some gays and lesbians are comparable to the suffering endured by some African Americans and not comparable to the suffering of others. Again, it's kind of irrelevant, however. We're talking about equal civil rights under the law. Before 1964 it was legal to deny housing to black people. In 2012 it is legal in some states to deny housing to gay people. Before 1964 it was legal to fire someone for being black. In 2012 it is legal in some states to fire someone for being gay. Do you see the similarities here?

You have a first amendment right to practice your religion. Until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, you didn't have a right to not be fired over your religion. You also didn't have the right to not be denied housing over your religion. I am not saying "gay" is my religion. I'm saying that sexual orientation is similar to religion, race, sex, national origin, etc in that it is used as a reason to discriminate against others. Some of those have been corrected by our government and some have not.

ConcealedCarry, please read the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and get back to me. Here's a link for you: http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=97&page=transcript